Att #17 Public Comments (for PC Meeting of Nov. 16) — City Council/Public Financing Authority, November 29, 2022

November \0,2022
Subiect 2OZL-2O29 Draft Housing Element - SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNTNG COMMTSSTON SPECIAL MEETTNG OF Lt/L6/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the Lt/L/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors' (inclusive of two members of our HOA boardJ were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 1,7/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to CiW Council.
opliq! 3: ltllixed dsnsity within $Fs ptu$ Frnntier siteto AHO-70 Overlav t Sp I Nlnf Garfield: Reduce$ densitv to
fifty's nxisting nH rone tgg dulac rriax)
' (apacfty ;rssunnptinns based nn B0 du/ac* Sevslopment standards; fity',s existing RH zoning standards
' Max, bldg" height: 3b feet
n SP S S/nf fiarfield; remains AHO-20. Development standards: pl'oposed Chapt*lr 22fi
* f\rlax. bldg" h,eightl d stnriss
, M.ay be cornp{ete.d within existing
schedule and budget
rY
' Removes SP 7 Overlav when
combined with Optioir 2
Generally, I support Option 3, specifically the reduction in density from 70 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area between Ernest Drive and Garfield Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard in walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does not however, incorporate these vital requests of myself and the SEAGATE community:
1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six- foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the SEAGATE community that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP densitv of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

Obiective Design Standards: I further firmly request tha! as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive, I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of anlr new housing. a
a
a
Thank you for your consideration
for development of housing while
community.

Sincerely,
of these reasonable requests which would allow
minimLzrngpotential impacts to the SEAGATE
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach I
Name: Anqelt S. Llren
f0robo r0 L*,i, /4re- dws@su*lo 4.*.cpvl
J%
Street Name O nly /Email:

Signature f Initials:

November 10,2022
Subiect 2O2L-2O29 Draft Housing Element - SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNTNG COMMTSSTON SPECTAL MEETTNG OF LUr6/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the LL/l/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021,-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors' (inclusive of two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the LL/1,6/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to Citv Council,
opliq! 3: Mixed.dsn*ity within $p$ prus Frontier siteto AHO-70 Overlav r 5p I N/of Garfield: fteduce$ densitv to
City"s nxisting nH rsne {gF dulac n[ax]
" flapaclty assunnptinns basnd nn B0 du/ac. Developrnent standards: City's existing RH roning standards
r Max, bfdg" height: $F f*et
r 5p g Slof fiarfield; rernains AHO-70* Devefmpment stnndards: proposrd Chapter 229
n Mfrx, bldg. height: 4 stnri*s
r M.ry be. cornp[ete.d within existing
schedule and budget v
. Removes SP 7 Overlay when
nffimhinnd wlth sptinh l ,
Generally, I support Option 3, specifically the reduction in density from 70 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area between Ernest Drive and Garfield Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard in walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does no! however, incorporate these vital requests of myself and the SEAGATE community:
1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six- foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the SEAGATE community that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at7 du/ac, and the Citv should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

Obiective Design Standards: I further firmly request that, as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

Limit develooment to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing. a
a
a
Thank you for your consideration
for development of housing while
community.

Sincerely,
of these reasonable requests which would allow
minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name: Rr C^ RuD w, LI{E N
streetNameonlv/Email:

Fo vB vF.o cr ncua // *ht- ubens ello'i-*r;i,
Lcin;
Signature/rnirials:
ffi , U.-,
November 12, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

We are the Sherwood Neighborhood Association Board Members and represent the 234 homeowners in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP). Many of our members are original homeowners that have lived in Huntington Beach for over 20 years.

Some Sherwood Neighborhood Association Board Members attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints most of Sherwood residents, including Board Members, were not able to address the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to the Sherwood Neighborhood Association in their direction to staff. As such, we would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

Generally, we support Option 3, specifically the reduction in density from 70 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area between Ernest Drive and Garfield Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard in walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does not,

however, incorporate these vital requests of the Sherwood Neighborhood Association:

Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and
the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels. Why would you allow for the HSSP to be overturned from 7 Du/ac to 35 du/ac? This will have a dramatic and irreparable harm to the value of the resident's homes that would have a shared backyard wall with a complex of 35 du/ac. Please reconsider as we are aware that some of the residents are considering litigation. We do not want it to come to that

Objective Design Standards: We further firmly request that, as indicated in the Sherwood Neighborhood Association written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

•
Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for many Sherwood Neighborhood Association residents when they moved into their home. As such, residents collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. We are concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive.

We request that the
prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the Sherwood Neighborhood Association residents.

Sincerely,

Steve Schultz, President
Diane Fullerton, Vice-President
Scott Kien, Treasurer
Matt Braun, Secretary
Brian Knorr – Director

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Eliminate SP7 and SP9.

Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 12:35:44 PM
Attachments: HDHLetter - Seagate Housing Element Nov 10.pdf I have lived in Seagate neighborhood for 22 years and the traffic and pollution has increased tremendously over the years. I am concerned adding so many residents to our area will bring down our quality of life. I have environmental concerns such as: the shortage of water for residents and the toxic impact of building near active oil pumps, and the increase in noise and air pollution. I am also concerned about overcrowding in our schools and the increased traffic around SeaCliff Elementary school. SeaCliff is not set back in a neighborhood as the other elementary schools are and the children are not protected on Garfield Ave.

Please spread this out more throughout our beautiful city.

The current plan I saw at the City Council Meeting had 21,000 new residents while the state has only required approximately 13,000. Please add more affordable housing but bring down the new residences to 13,000, especially lowering the new units in the same area. I request you eliminate SP7 and SP9.

I have attached a letter prepared by our Seagate Board of Directors. Please consider our requests as a neighborhood and as concerned citizens thoughtfully.

Julie Katayama
7115 Ashely Dr.

Huntington Beach 92648
November 10, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

Members of our Seagate HOA attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors’ (inclusive of two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate

northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six- foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the SEAGATE community that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,

Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach

Name:

Street Name Only/Email:

Signature/Initials:

From: De Coite, Kim
To: Villasenor, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Huntington Beach Housing Element
Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 3:55:58 PM
Attachments: Letter - Seagate Housing Element Nov 10.pdf

For PC

Tania Moore, CMC
Senior Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk’s Office
714-536-5209
[email protected]

From: Fikes, Cathy <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 11:26 AM
To: Agenda Alerts <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Huntington Beach Housing Element

From: Matt Braun <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 3:43 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <[email protected]>
Subject: Huntington Beach Housing Element

In advance of next week's 11/16 meeting on this topic, I am submitting the attached letter that is generally supporting option 3, but also requests some additional considerations as it relates to a portion of SP 9 that would still negatively affect residents of the Seagate neighborhood as it's currently presented.

Thank you,
Matt Braun
November 10, 2022

Subject: 2021‐2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate

 Limit development to 2‐stories on Sites 393 and 394
 Limit development to 3‐stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive  Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was previously an issue for the neighborhood. As such, signatures were collected and the City was petitioned to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,

Undersigned homeowner of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach

Name: Matt Braun

Street Name Only/Email: Ashford Lane / [email protected]

Signature/Initials:

October 28, 2022 TO: Huntington Beach City Council ([email protected]) SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 22-906 Housing Element (November 1, 2022 City Council Meeting) Dear Honorable Mayor Delgleize and members of the City Council, As homeowners of Seagate Community Association in Huntington Beach, we are OUTRAGED and AGAINST any plans to adopt the proposed “Housing Element” and the proposed high density housing in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) with a 70 du/ac density:

We are dismayed to see that the draft proposal currently would allow for 70 du/ac. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) calls for the development of residences at a maximum density of no more than 25 dwelling units/acre (du/ac) anywhere in the plan and for the specific area on the northeast corner of Goldenwest & Ernest (lots 393 & 394) a maximum density of no more than 7 du/ac. The current “Housing Element” shows a 70 du/ac, which would irreparably change the character of our community. At that density, projects would likely be four to five stories in height (or at least include five story elements such as stairwells and elevator shafts), which would be entirely out of scale with surrounding developments. The selected sites are not geographically dispersed within the City of Huntington Beach. Holly Seacliff and Ernest/Goldenwest specific plans are being impacted unfairly compared to other predominantly single-family neighborhood tracts. Why were no parcels identified in the entire North West or South East quadrants of Huntington Beach identified?

We believe the stated number one housing goal per the Huntington Beach Housing Element “maintain and enhance the quality and affordability of existing housing in Huntington Beach” cannot be achieved if the city council votes to increase the allowable density to 70 du/ac in the HSSP. We are alarmed that such a high density would be considered in this area.

As homeowners, we want the following 6 measures in the Housing Element.

1. No greater density than 7 du/ac in lots 393 & 394 (northeast corner of Goldenwest & Ernest)

2. No more than 2 story buildings in lots 393 & 394 (northeast corner of Goldenwest & Ernest)

3. No greater density than the 25 du/ac HSSP area.

4. No more than 3 story buildings HSSP area.

5. No roof decks or balconies that face Ernest Drive and within 100 feet of Ernest Drive.

6. Continue to not allow overnight parking on Ernest Drive.

We urge City Council to vote for an option that lowers allowable densities in this part of the city.

We urge the City Council to incorporate these 6 measures into the Housing Element to achieve that number one housing goal for Huntington Beach.

Sincerely,
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name:

Street Name Only/Email:

Signature/Initials: Bob Walsh
November 10, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate

• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,

Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach

Name:

Street Name Only/Email:

Signature/Initials:

November 10, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate

• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,

Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach

Name:

Street Name Only/Email:

Signature/Initials:

November 10, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate

• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,

Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach

Name:

Street Name Only/Email:

Signature/Initials:

DiBernardoPatrick
Calera Ln/ [email protected]

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 5:40 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element - SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors’ (including two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate it if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to the City Council.

Generally, I support Option 3, specifically the reduction in density from 70 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area between Ernest Drive and Garfield Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard in walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does not, however, incorporate these vital requests of myself and the SEAGATE community:
1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of 2 Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the SEAGATE community that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.
2) Objective Design Standards: I further firmly request that, as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:
• Limit development to 2‐stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3‐stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive 3) Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name: Gary Wolfe
Street Name: Sherwood Drive

Gary Wolfe
[email protected]

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: VanDyke, Karen <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2022 3:46 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

We are the Seagate Community Association Board Members and represent the 810 homeowners in the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP). Many of our members are original homeowners that have lived in Huntington Beach for over 20 years.

Some Seagate Community Association Board Members attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021‐2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints most of Seagate residents, including two Board Members, were not able to address the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to the Seagate Community Association in their direction to staff. As such, we would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels. We ask, why would you allow for the HSSP to be overturned from 7 2 du/ac to 35 du/ac? This will have a dramatic and irreparable harm to the value of the resident's homes that would have a shared backyard wall with a complex of 35 du/ac. We ask you to factor this in and reconsider changing what is already deemed as 7 du/ac. Additionally, we are aware that some of the residents who back up to these parcels are considering litigation and we do not want it to come to that.

Objective Design Standards: We further firmly request that, as indicated in the Seagate Community Association written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

 Limit development to 2‐stories on Sites 393 and 394
 Limit development to 3‐stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive  Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for many Seagate Community Association residents when they moved into their home. As such, residents collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. We are concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. We request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the Seagate Community Association residents.

Sincerely,

Karen Van Dyke, President
Jennifer Kanowsky, Vice President
Bernie Torbik, Secretary
Jeff Hubbard, Treasurer
Allen Passaquindici, Director
Edward Branam, Director

Thank you,

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: PETER MACIVER <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 1:04 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft housing element - support for option 3 Special Meeting 11/16/22

2 Sent from my iPhone
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Lynne Crisafi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 1:33 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element - SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 Attachments: Opt3PlngCommHB.pdf
Importance: High
As a 25 year resident of Huntington Beach, I am concerned with the recent Planning Commission Draft Housing Element for 2021‐2029. Please see my attached areas of concern. When I purchased my home in Sea Country, I was assured the surrounding empty areas would never be developed more than 7 units/ acre and the recent proposal shows 70 units/acre.

Now I understand we have a housing issue but not to be heard, not to be notified, is unacceptable. I think if you work with the neighborhoods you would get more understanding, for example, had you brought SEA Country together explained the situation and suggested we collective need to do better than 7 units/ acre, we may have been willing to accept 14 to 21 units/acre. As long as the plan showed an evenly disburse build throughout HB, your current draft show a heavy concentration in my neighborhood alone, nowhere else is there a plan for 70 units/acre.

Please read my attached specifics of my concern.

Lynne M. Crisafi
7314 Sherwood Drive
HB, CA 92648
714.841.8308
[email protected]
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Amanda Gall <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 6:18 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Affordable Housing

My children were born and raised in Huntington Beach. My daughter and her husband are fortunate enough with their combined incomes to be able to move back here. However my son who is a Journeyman Electrician lives in Texas. He understands the basic mathematics that he cannot afford to live here.

My point is that not everyone can afford to live here and they need to understand that.

The proposed affordable housing is ridiculous and needs to be stopped.

I also do not agree that the infrastructure of HB is capable of the amount of proposed additional housing. On top of that I look at all the schools that have been closed and sold off and another alarm goes off in my head.

If this planning commission cannot see these basic realities they need to step down and find people who have the skills to fill their places.

Thank you,
Amanda Gall
Sent from my iPad

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: jjreed85 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 12:40 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL; Planning Commission; [email protected] Subject: CANCEL Housing Plan Meetings!! - Don't Let Your Legacy Be Destroying HB Dear "City Council" - Yes that is in quotes because you should no longer be deciding ANYTHING for us at this point, the people have spoken. All of this of course except Mr. Peterson who none of this applies to, as I assume he 100% disagrees with even holding these meetings.

I truly cannot fathom why the rest of you would choose to make YOUR LEGACY the DESTRUCTION OF HUNTINGTON BEACH. Because that is exactly what you will be doing if you approve this plan. JUST STOP. Let the next council deal with the housing plan because you clearly do not represent what the citizens of Huntington Beach actually want and need... as proven by the recent election that voted against all of your policies and ideals.

The vast majority of this city is opposed to any more building in this city, and I would guess an even larger percentage if they actually knew what you were doing and took 'party preference' out of this all. I'd even go as far as to say the people who live in the already built high density developments are apposed to more!

I don't even know how you can show your face in Huntington Beach for even considering this plan. You will truly be hated by the citizens of this city for the rest of your life. The construction nightmare that will ensue will be a constant reminder of what YOU did to all of us. I know I will never ever forget. I've lived in this city my entire 35+ years of life.

The past 10 years have gone MASSIVELY DOWNHILL. Those of you staying on the council, you will never get re- elected, let alone move to a higher office. Those of you terming out (aside from Erik) will also never get re-elected after your 'term break', or find a higher office... as Carr proved. That is because you don't represent the best interests of this city or the people you are SUPPOSED to represent.

20,000 units will increase our city's population by roughly 1/3! Do you understand how INSANE that is? This state isn't even requiring that number, so why on earth would you willingly make it WORSE?!? Seriously are you and the planning commission absolutely nuts? Why do you hate this city so much? Not to mention the original numbers were based off of now PROVEN flawed data, and we should as a city be doing everything in our power to FIGHT AGAINST these ridiculous numbers. And you can lie to yourselves all you want about you being 'forced' to do this because 'Sacramento says so' but we all know that is a complete lie. We have a VERY good chance of fighting this, and even if it only saves us having to build 10,000 units instead of the 13,000, that is money well spent in my opinion!

You are looking at taking away stores and places that are the only ones I even shop at. The entire Edinger corridor is where I spend 90% of my money in this city. So you are just going to take that away. I guess I won't be spending my tax dollars here then.

You want to put 3,000 units next to people's houses and a horse stables? Against the property owners own wishes apparently. How is that even legal? Sure, there is nothing disastrous waiting to happen when you add 6,000 cars going in and out of a building next to horses... Not to mention I'm sure it will be an absolutely hideous structure like the ones at Bella Terra and Elon. We are not Santa Monica... here's an idea. Why don't YOU MOVE there and save us all from this nightmare.

We cannot even fix our streets or infrastructure that we do have now. There is no humanly possible way we can handle even 5,000 more units at this point. Have you driven down Saybrook, Springdale, Edinger or the many other streets that are literally destroyed. You need to fix what we have before you make this mess WAY worse. Downtown is an embarrassment, the place I used to love and frequent... it's a dirty mess that I don't even feel safe going to.

Bella Terra is an absolute nightmare. What used to take 2 minutes to drive down Edinger from Goldenwest to Beach Boulevard now takes 10 minutes and you nearly die 20 times due to near accidents.

Not to mention the disaster that is going to happen to HB thanks to the Westminster Mall debacle. 2 Just stop. Go away. Let the new council and planning commission determine our future, as it should be (since they obviously speak for a much larger percentage of us). If it all fails miserably at that point, it will be on their shoulders, not yours.

You clearly do not care about this city if you go ahead with this... honestly you will just prove how much you despise the city and the people that live in it. It will FOREVER ruin Huntington Beach.

Cancel the meetings.

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Carrie Lines <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 1:49 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Comment on housing element

TO
< [email protected]>
November 10, 2022
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIALMEETING OF 11/16/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021- 2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors’ (inclusive of two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.
2 Generally, I support Option 3, specifically the reduction in density from 70 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area between Ernest Drive and Garfield Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard in walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does not, however, incorporate these vital requests of myself and the SEAGATE community:
1) Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six-foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the 3 SEAGATE community that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

Objective Design Standards: I further firmly request that, as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:
Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name: Carrie Lines
Street Name Only/Email: 7216 Rockridge Dr. HB, CA 92648

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Lawrence Yang <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 3:20 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Concerned about the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan Attachments: Letter regarding Holly Seacliff Specific Plan.pdf To whom it may concern,

I live in the Seagate community and through our association, I was made aware of some potential plans to build high density buildings near our neighborhood.

I have lived in Huntington Beach for over 32 years (in Seacliff / Edwards Hill / Seagate) and very proud of how the city has grown and has developed all these years. The city council and planning teams have done an excellent job in planning the communities in Huntington Beach.

With this particular project (on Garfield and Ernest), there were a few questions/concerns that I have :

1) I don't believe that myself, nor the neighborhoods around me were properly notified about this project in a timely manner. I am fortunate that some informed neighbors and also our homeowners association have informed me about this project right about the time where some important decisions will be made regarding the project. I feel that a project of this magnitude and impact should be delivered in a transparent and timely manner, which it hasn't.

2) If this project were to go as planned, I would like to hear the results of the environmental studies that have been done on this project. What impact would building this project up have on various aspects such as traffic, adequate parking within the project, would school class sizes at our local schools be impacted (as we already have quite a large class size), property value impacts for neighborhoods surrounding the project, etc. Has this study been completed and if so, could you provide a copy of that study/report?

3) Are there other alternative sites for this project that the planning team is looking at? Or has the city already decided that something will be built?

4) For the 11/16 Special Meeting : Other than the 3 options, do we, as citizens in the surrounding neighborhoods, have a say to offer other alternatives?

To summarize : As a long time resident of Huntington Beach, I have been generally quite happy with how the city council has handled the growth of our city, up until now. I'm a bit disappointed that the city council didn't provide to us some direct and clear information regarding this project during the earlier planning stages.

I understand that there is a need for affordable housing, as mandated by the State. But I think that the responsibility of finding an appropriate place to place this housing that makes sense for the surrounding neighborhoods is something that you, the planning commission, should not take lightly.

In hindsight, we should have had access to transparent and timely information so we can have an honest and open dialogue before the planning ball started to roll on this. Again, I'm fortunate to have my homeowner's association and active and concerned neighbors providing me the information the city should've provided to us when this proposal was first being brought up.
2 Thank you for your time and attention and hope that you can respond back to my concerns on this letter. I'll be attending the meeting on Wed to learn more about this project.

Sincerely,
Lawrence Yang

I live in the Seagate community and through our association, I was made aware of some potential plans to build high density buildings near our neighborhood.

With this particular project (on Garfield and Ernest), there were a few questions/concerns that I have :

3) Are there other alternative sites for this project that the planning team is looking at? Or has the city already decided that something will be built?

4) For the 11/16 Special Meeting : Other than the 3 options, do we, as citizens in the surrounding neighborhoods, have a say to offer other alternatives?

Sincerely,
Lawrence Yang

I live in the Seagate community and through our association, I was made aware of some potential plans to build high density buildings near our neighborhood.

With this particular project (on Garfield and Ernest), there were a few questions/concerns that I have :

3) Are there other alternative sites for this project that the planning team is looking at? Or has the city already decided that something will be built?

4) For the 11/16 Special Meeting : Other than the 3 options, do we, as citizens in the surrounding neighborhoods, have a say to offer other alternatives?

Sincerely,
Lawrence Yang

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Ryan Benz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 9:04 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Deep Concerns about High Density Housing Proposals Attachments: rbenz_HB_housing_response.pdf
Dear HB Planning Commission,

As a resident of the Seagate Community, and a home owner directly adjacent to the proposed high density housing near the Seagate, I am very concerned about the high density housing proposals being discussed.

In particular “Option 3” seems to address some of our concerns, however, there are key points that are currently not in the proposal, and our community has not been given the time to discuss. Specifically:

 The city should honor the existing HSSP density guideline of 7 du/ac for sites 393 and 394. These guidelines have already been established and were in place when we purchased our home. It is imperative that these guidelines remain to preserve the our community.  We must continue to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Dr, regardless of any new housing construction. The community had already petitioned in the past to prohibit overnight parking on this street adjacent to Seagate and this must continue to be the case.

Please see a signed letter, attached, also summarizing our points and concerns. Thank you for your consideration of these vitally important points.

Best regards,
Ryan Benz

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Roxanne Eisel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 9:10 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Document - Nov 14, 2022
Attachments: Doc - Nov 14 2022 - 9-03 PM.pdf
Scanned with TurboScan.

Hi planning commission,

Regarding the high density housing in Ernest lane:

My first wish is to oppose any rezoning and development. However, if we are forced to have a development on that property, I choose option 3 (see attached letter). I do not want my neighborhood elementary school to change from Seacliff.

I also do not want you to allow cannabis shops in Huntington Beach.

Thank you,

Roxanne Eisel

Sent from my iPhone
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Patrick D <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2022 6:39 PM
To: Planning Commission; Peterson, Erik
Subject: Draft Housing Element
Attachments: Letter---Seagate-Housing-Element-Nov-10.pdf Dear Chairperson Perkins,
City Council and Planning Commission,

Regarding density on sites 393 on 394, while reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac. At the NE corner of Goldenwest and Ernest drive on sites 393 on 394 in Appendix B of the drafting housing element. These sites are on the other side of a 6 foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the Seagate Community Association that are developed at 7 du/ac. The City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

Further, I firmly request that, as indicated in the Seagate Association written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach municipal code to:

* Limit development to two stories on sites 393 and 394.

* Limit development to three stories within 100 feet of Ernest drive.

* Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest drive.

* Overnight parking on Ernest drive was an issue for many Seagate community association residents when they moved into their home. As such, residents collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Dr. I am requesting that the prohibition overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Please see the attached signed letter.

Thank you for your time,

Patrick Di Bernardo

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 12:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Eliminate SP7 and SP9.

Attachments: HDHLetter - Seagate Housing Element Nov 10.pdf I have lived in Seagate neighborhood for 22 years and the traffic and pollution has increased tremendously over the years. I am concerned adding so many residents to our area will bring down our quality of life. I have environmental concerns such as: the shortage of water for residents and the toxic impact of building near active oil pumps, and the increase in noise and air pollution. I am also concerned about overcrowding in our schools and the increased traffic around SeaCliff Elementary school. SeaCliff is not set back in a neighborhood as the other elementary schools are and the children are not protected on Garfield Ave.

Please spread this out more throughout our beautiful city. The current plan I saw at the City Council Meeting had 21,000 new residents while the state has only required approximately 13,000. Please add more affordable housing but bring down the new residences to 13,000, especially lowering the new units in the same area. I request you eliminate SP7 and SP9.

I have attached a letter prepared by our Seagate Board of Directors. Please consider our requests as a neighborhood and as concerned citizens thoughtfully.

Julie Katayama
7115 Ashely Dr.

Huntington Beach 92648
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Aube, Nicolle on behalf of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 2:08 PM
To: Villasenor, Jennifer
Subject: FW: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element - SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

From: nataliearvesen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 10:26 PM
To: housingelement@surfcity‐hb.org
Subject: 2021‐2029 Draft Housing Element ‐ SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

2 Kind regards,
Natalie Arvesen
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Delgleize, Barbara
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 12:36 PM
To: Luna-Reynosa, Ursula; Villasenor, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Housing Element and Implimention Program
Any response that we can give?

Barbara Delgleize
Mayor, City of Huntington Beach
Work 714.536.5553
Cell: 714.421.0103
[email protected]
2000 Main Street. Huntington Beach, CA 92648

From: Dina Randazzo <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 at 11:52 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <city.council@surfcity‐hb.org>
Cc: Dina Randazzo <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing Element and Implimention Program
Dear Honorable Mayor Delgleize and members of the City Council:

I write regarding the Housing Element Update and Implementation Programs to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) which is being considered at the November 16, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting and will be subsequently brought to the City Council for approval.

I am a five-year homeowner in the upper Seacliff neighborhood located at Summit and Goldenwest, fourteen-year resident of Huntington Beach, and parent of two young children that are and will be continuing to attend Seacliff Elementary for the next 8 years. I wish to express my concerns about any potential high-density development along Goldenwest. I hope that the city can consider the following concerns and recommendations while still being able to meet RHNA requirements.

First, I am concerned about the safety of the students at Seacliff Elementary if Saddleback becomes a through street and higher density housing is developed in the parcel behind the school. The many students who bike to school, including my daughter, must cross Saddleback each morning to get to the bike racks in the back of the school. Even with the limited traffic on Saddleback now, it can be dangerous for students because there is no defined bike lane on the street, putting kids in the flow of traffic while they bike down this street on either side. If Saddleback becomes a through street with high traffic, it will be dangerous for students to bike to school. Bikers would likely have to walk bikes along the sidewalk close to the school campus instead of biking along the street. This would create further congestion around an already congested sidewalk on the busy Garfield street and put pedestrian students in danger. If any additional traffic will go down Saddleback, serious consideration needs to be taken regarding how much traffic will flow through that street and ensure safe bike lanes 2 and safe crossing for students coming and going from school, many of which are biking without adult supervision.

Second, I’m concerned about how Seacliff Elementary will absorb any large influx of students. I understand that Seacliff Elementary is not currently overcrowded, but even under the current circumstances all but one classroom at the school is being used. More students will mean no space for students for music, occupational therapy, and other programming. Further, it will place an unfair burden on Seacliff and nearby Smith Elementary, which are already more crowded than all the other schools in the HBCSD. Further, if too many students are added to the Seacliff Elementary school boundaries, it will require resetting the school boundaries within the HBCSD with detrimental effects on the community. Most neighborhoods surrounding Seacliff Elementary have numerous students who bike and walk to school each day, including my neighborhood of Upper Seacliff. Walking and biking my daughter to school has given me a unique opportunity to meet fellow families in my neighborhood and build a tight community that would be lost if we no longer had the chance to see each other each day on our commute to school. Is it imperative that any high density or medium density housing be dispersed fairly throughout the city to ensure schools are evenly impacted and limit any resetting of the school boundaries within the HBCSD. Finally, many families were already displaced just a few years ago when the city closed Perry and reset the boundaries for each elementary school. Asking families to move schools once again destroys community and impacts student education.

Finally, I sincerely hope you will continue to think about Huntington Beach’s stated goal to “preserve and enhance the quality of its neighborhoods for the future.” Any higher density housing should continue to maintain the look and feel of the community.

In light of the above concerns and the Huntington Beach’s stated goals, I urge the city to consider ensuring any approved Housing Element meet the following limits:

1. Reduce density of housing in the Holly-Seacliff area from high density to medium density.

2. Maintain current low-density zoning for the Ellis-Goldenwest area, or at most increase to medium density housing.

3. Maintain current set-backs including a 6-foot sidewalk and 25 feet of landscaping to Garfield and Goldenwest per the current Specific Plans.

4. Limit building heights to 2 stories for the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan and 3 stories for Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan.

5. Provide at least 2 parking spaces for every unit plus guest spaces to avoid overflow parking in the surrounding neighborhoods.

Thank you for your consideration,

Dina
‐‐
Dina M. Randazzo
(916) 316‐0269
[email protected]
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Lisa Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 7:20 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: High Density building/Affordable Housing
Good morning,

It was recently brought to our attention that there is a City of Huntington Beach Affordable Housing Plan Impact proposal that identifies the Thomas-Brindle property (Edwards Hill Community along Goldenwest Street between Ellis & Garfield) as a potential location to meet its affordable housing plan obligations. As citizens of Huntington Beach and homeowners in the Edwards Hill Community, we adamantly oppose this proposal. We are also dismayed that we were only made aware of this proposal recently and it is our understanding that a vote on this proposal will be taking place as soon as the middle of November.

Considering establishing high density housing in that location (Thomas-Brindle property) is not compatible with the residential community that would share its borders.

Under the Ellis- Goldenwest Specific Plan it states that it’s main goals and objectives is to “encourage and maintain a well-balanced variety of residential densities and uncrowded living environments by encouraging rational use of the land.” Page 4 of the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan shows an overall density of 3 units per acre.

The high density overlay zoning that the Planning Commission and City Council is proposing is in violation of the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan.

High density building in the Edwards Hill Community will negatively impact the neighborhood in many ways including: overcrowded schools, safety concerns, congested roads, excessive noise, dust, trash; strain on police, fire and medical services; strain on natural resources; negative impact on the equestrian center and horse riders/trainers; years of ongoing construction and road obstruction; reduction in property values.

Unfortunately, our work schedules do not allow us to attend the Planning Commission meeting in person, but we wanted our voices heard!! We have lived in Huntington Beach for almost 30 years and in the Edwards Hill Community for over 20 years. We did not work this hard and raise our four children in this beautiful city of Huntington Beach only to have a very poor decision by the City Council negatively impact our living situation and the living situation of our neighbors.

We implore you to remove the Brindle/Thomas property on Edwards Hill as part of your high density initiative for Huntington Beach.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Andy & Lisa Williams
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Victor Katayama <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:19 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: High density Housing at SP9 Garfield and Goldenwest Attachments: HDHLetter - Seagate Housing Element Nov 10.pdf I have lived in Seagate neighborhood for 22 years and the traffic and pollution has increased tremendously over the years. I am concerned adding so many residents to our area will bring down our quality of life. I have environmental concerns such as: the shortage of water for residents and the toxic impact of building near active oil pumps, and the increase in noise and air pollution. I am also concerned about overcrowding in our schools and the increased traffic around SeaCliff Elementary school. SeaCliff is not set back in a neighborhood as the other elementary schools are and the children are not protected on Garfield Ave.

I request you continue to study other less crowded areas of Huntington Beach for high density housing. The Housing Element plan puts thousands of new residences in our block of Goldenwest/Garfield/Gothard/Ellis. Please spread this out more throughout our beautiful city. The current plan I saw at the City Council Meeting had 21,000 new residents while the state has only required approximately 13,000. Please add more affordable housing but bring down the new residences, especially in the same area. I request you eliminate SP7 and SP9.

I have attached a letter prepared by our Seagate Board of Directors. Please consider our requests as a neighborhood and as concerned citizens thoughtfully.

Victor Katayama
7115 Ashely Dr.

Huntington Beach 92648

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Kevin Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 10:30 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: High Density Housing Near Seagate
Dear Planning Commission Members,

My name is Ingrid Lee, and I live in the Seagate neighborhood of Huntington Beach. I understand you are meeting tonight to discuss the housing element. Please do not forget the Seagate community. There was proposed 70 units on Ernest and Goldenwest. If you could please consider reducing the density of this are as well, our residents would appreciate it. It would decrease traffic, pollution, crime and overcrowded schools.

Thank you for your time,
Ingrid lee

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: F Spates <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 6:11 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Housing Concerns

2 3

4 5

Sent from my iPad
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Dina Randazzo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 11:55 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Housing Element and Implimentation Programs
Dear Commissioners Perkins, Acosta-Galvan, Mandic, Scandura, Ray, Rodriguez, and Adam:

First, I am concerned about the safety of the students at Seacliff Elementary if Saddleback becomes a through street and higher density housing is developed in the parcel behind the school. The many students who bike to school, including my daughter, must cross Saddleback each morning to get to the bike racks in the back of the school. Even with the limited traffic on Saddleback now, it can be dangerous for students because there is no defined bike lane on the street, putting kids in the flow of traffic while they bike down this street on either side. If Saddleback becomes a through street with high traffic, it will be dangerous for students to bike to school. Bikers would likely have to walk bikes along the sidewalk close to the school campus instead of biking along the street. This would create further congestion around an already congested sidewalk on the busy Garfield street and put pedestrian students in danger. If any additional traffic will go down Saddleback, serious consideration needs to be taken regarding how much traffic will flow through that street and ensure safe bike lanes and safe crossing for students coming and going from school, many of which are biking without adult supervision.

In light of the above concerns and the Huntington Beach’s stated goals, I urge the city to consider ensuring any approved Housing Element meet the following limits:

1. Reduce density of housing in the Holly-Seacliff area from high density to medium density.

2. Maintain current low-density zoning for the Ellis-Goldenwest area, or at most increase to medium density housing.

3. Maintain current set-backs including a 6-foot sidewalk and 25 feet of landscaping to Garfield and Goldenwest per the current Specific Plans.

4. Limit building heights to 2 stories for the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan and 3 stories for Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan.

5. Provide at least 2 parking spaces for every unit plus guest spaces to avoid overflow parking in the surrounding neighborhoods.

Thank you for your consideration,
Dina

--
Dina M. Randazzo
(916) 316-0269
[email protected]
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Martha Morrow <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 4:28 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Housing Element Update
Dear Planning Commissioners:

It is my understanding that you will vote on the revised proposal of the Housing Plan which would exclude the Brindle Thomas Nursery Property (SP7) and reduce the density of the Holly Seacliff properties (SP9) at a special planning commission meeting on Wednesday November 16,2022.

As a 30 year resident of Edwards Hill, I urge you to vote in favor of this revised proposal and preserve the unique character and beauty of our neighborhood.

Thank you
Martha Morrow

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Matt Braun <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 9:41 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL; Delgleize, Barbara; Posey, Mike; Carr, Kim; Peterson, Erik; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; Fikes, Cathy; Zelinka, Al; Villasenor, Jennifer Cc: steve schultz; Diane R Fullerton; Scott Kien; Brian Knorr Subject: Huntington Beach Housing Element
Attachments: Board Letter to City Council re Housing Element #2.docx Members of the City Council,

On behalf of the other board members and the hundreds of homeowners within the Sherwood homeowners association, I am submitting the attached letter that discusses our general support of Option 3, but with a few additional critical items for the SP 9 area. The residents speaking at and representing the Seagate neighborhood at the 11/1/22 meeting were largely not heard until after the City Council deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3.

We request that objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

- Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
- Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive - Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Thank you,
Sherwood Homeowners Association
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Shirlee Settipane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 5:49 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: New housing

I am supporting option 3 of high density housing on Ernest in Huntington Beach

Shirlee Settipane/SS
18863 Coolwater Lane
Sent from my iPhone

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Your Grace <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 3:17 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: OPTION 3 - Seagate Community Association: Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Attachments: Yoon_Option 3_11-14-2022.pdf
ATTN: PLANNING COMMISSION:

A. Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are on the other side of a six-foot high block wall immediately adjacent to homes in the Seagate Community Association that are developed at 7 du/ac. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels.

B. The Objective Design Standards: We further firmly request that, as indicated in the Seagate Community Association written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:
· Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
· Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive · Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive C. Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for many Seagate Community Association residents when they moved into their home. As such, residents collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. We are concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. We request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing

THANK YOU AND REGARDS,
Grace and Stewart Yoon, Seagate Community Homeowners
Ambrose Lane
1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Michele Burch <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 2:10 AM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Sea cliff Housing Development
Many residents took time out of their busy schedules to attend and speak against the current proposed home development at the November 1, 2022 City Council study session.

Most were not allowed to speak due to time limitations.

Please let it be noted that many residents, including myself are against the proposed plans for development in our area.

The decisions you make affect us.

Please listen to the residents who will be directly impacted.

Thank you in advance for making changes to these plans.

Michele Burch

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Colette Wright <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2022 12:23 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Sites 393 and 394

Dear commissioners,
I have been a resident of Huntington Beach since 1965. I have watched the city grow in both positive and negative aspects. However the most recent proposals for sites 393 and 394 may be some of the worst ideas yet! Please consider the community members and limit the density and height of the proposed homes. Understanding that the city must meet housing regulations I request that you not saturate this area of the city in order to meet your obligations. Please listen to the concerns of the Seagate and Cape Ann neighborhoods.

A resident for 57 years,
Colette M. Wright
7440 Prospect Drive
Huntington Beach, CA

[email protected]

Sent from my iPad

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Colette Wright <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2022 12:23 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Sites 393 and 394

A resident for 57 years,
Colette M. Wright
7440 Prospect Drive
Huntington Beach, CA

[email protected]

Sent from my iPad

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Allen Gomez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 8:35 PM
To: Planning Commission
Subject: SP 9
November 10, 2022
Subject: 2021‐2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors’ (inclusive of two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

Objective Design Standards: I further firmly request that, as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:
• Limit development to 2‐stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3‐stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive
Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name: Allen Gomez
Street Name Only/Email: Ashford Lane
Signature/Initials: AMG

1 Villasenor, Jennifer
From: Temple Carl <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 9:46 AM
To: Planning Commission; CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Urge Your Support at 11/16/22 Planning Commission Meeting Attachments: CJTempleRequest111322.pdf
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission,

I am pleased to introduce myself as a 33 year resident of Huntington Beach and an original resident of the Seacliff Seagate Neighborhood since 1997.

I believe you're aware of the great concern and outrage from residents of Seagate, other Sherwood neighborhoods and surrounding Edwards Hill neighborhoods of the proposed draft Housing Element 2021-2029 recommendations. This includes Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) and Edwards Hill specific plan areas.  These proposed dra ft changes in current form significantly increase housing units/per acre in our neighborhoods by as much as 10 fold
 Our neighborhoods are largely single family homes that include equestrian zoned environments. Proposed Housing Element changes could add thousands of new housing units in a very small geographic area of the City  In the case of the proposed hi gh density housing parcels along Ernest Avenue, existing Seacliff Seagate homeowners are within 70 feet of the proposed housing element changes. Having 3-story or more housing development significantly impacts their qualify of life  A surprise by HSSP/Edwards Hill specific plan residents is that residents were not made aware of the proposed housing element details until Planning Commission's October 11, 2022 meeting. To be clear, residents were not notified directly even though public comments by City representatives have suggested otherwise I have attached a letter from HSSP impacted residents to the Planning Commission. I am hopeful you and other Planning Commission members will consider these refinements as reasonable and adopt in the 2021-2029 Housing Element plan at your November 16, 2022 meeting.

We do understand the City's need for additional and affordable future housing but strongly believe the draft Housing Element unfairly targets HSSP and surrounding Edwards Hill specific plan areas due to some open areas and industrial areas that are under developed or utilized.

Thank you in advance for your courtesy and listening to a longtime citizen who does take pride in the City and its quality of life. I am encouraged that the Planning Commission and City Council members will recognize the importance of not overwhelming the qualify of life to roughly 1,000 homeowners in these neighborhoods.

Sincerely,

Carl J Temple
18743 Stratton Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
[email protected]

Matteoni
(§CH'Leacuhgt'm'an

LAWYERS
huiinan E. Matlenni
Peggs M. 0'Lnililin
Biailltay M. Mallianni
Bt+ilon (y. Het'litrn:in
(;t-'n y Hinililiar+
November 11, 2022
Via US Mail & Email
[email protected]
Hon. Chair Brendan Perkins
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 9264ff
Commissioner Kayla Acosta-Galvan
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Commissioner Connie Mandic
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Commissioner lan Adam
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Commissioner John Scandura
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Commissioner Alan Ray
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Commissioner Oscar Rodriguez
Planning Commission
City of Huntington Beach
Community Development Dept.
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Re: Planning Commission Special Meeting on Wednesday, November 16, 2022, at 6 pm-Housing Element Update and Implementation Actions
Dear Hon. Chair and Members of the City Planning Commission:

Our office represents Dimitra Tsigaris, Panagiota Taptelis, Nicholas Tsigaris, and Ursula Margot Keesling, individually and as the trustee of the Ursula Margot Keesling Living Revocable Trust u/Ua March 24fh, 2022, the 848 Tlie Alametla owners Of15511 EdWardS Street, Huntington Beach. The property is San Jose, CA 95126
pli. 408.293.4300
7 ( @ J fax. 408.293.4004
L ' www.matteoni.coin
Hon. Chair and Members of the Planning Commission November 11, 2022

Page 2 ends

currently improved with a 16,000 plus square foot commercial building which is leased to Chuck E Cheese. The lease has two plus years to run.

It was only recently that my clients learned that the City of Huntington Beach is considering rezoning 1551 I Edwards Street from Commercial General to Residential Medium High (RMH) Density and updating the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect this rezoning.

My clients object to the proposed rezoning and General Plan Amendment. The proposed rezoning to RMH would interfere with my clients' ability to continue to lease their building for commercial purposes as it would render the current use a legal non-conforming use. This would make the property far less desirable for the existing tenant and any future tenants as it would limit the tenant's ability to make necessary improvements. Thus, we are requesting that the Planning Commission not rezone 15511 Edwards Street to RMH and not update its General Plan Land Use Map to reflect such a rezoning.

As an alternative to the proposed rezoning and amendment to the General Plan, my clients would suggest that the City adopt a multi-family residential overlay for 15511 Edwards Street that maintains the underlying/base land use such as the City is considering for other commercial properties, which would not interfere with the current use and would permit housing at a later date when and if the property is ready to develop.

Very truly yours,
Bradley Matteoni
BMM/jlc
CC: Nicolle Aube
(via email)

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

We are the Seagate Community Association Board Members and represent the 810 homeowners in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP). Many of our members are original homeowners that have lived in Huntington Beach for over 20 years.

Some Seagate Community Association Board Members attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints most of Seagate residents, including two Board Members, were not able to address the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to the Seagate Community Association in their direction to staff. As such, we would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

harm to the value of the resident's homes that would have a shared backyard wall with a complex of 35 du/ac. We ask you to factor this in and reconsider changing what is already deemed as 7 du/ac. Additionally, we are aware that some of the residents who back up to these parcels are considering litigation and we do not want it to come to that.

• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the Seagate Community Association residents.

Sincerely,

Karen Van Dyke, President
Jennifer Kanowsky, Vice President
Bernie Torbik, Secretary
Jeff Hubbard, Treasurer
Allen Passaquindici, Director
Edward Branam, Director

November 12, 2022

Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element – SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22

Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission,

We are the Bel Air Homeowners Association Board Members and represent the 102 homeowners in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP). Many of our members are original homeowners that have lived in Huntington Beach for over 20 years.

Some Bel Air Homeowners Association Board Members attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints most of Bel Air residents, including Board Members, were not able to address the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 (shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to the Bel Air Homeowners Association in their direction to staff. As such, we would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 91898B86-8146-4485-8612-53C3D25ECA31

Density on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing Draft Housing Element, Option 3 proposes a density of 35 du/ac at the immediate northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Ernest Drive on sites 393 and 394 in Appendix B of the Draft Housing Element. These sites are included in the HSSP at 7 du/ac, and the City should honor the existing HSSP density of 7 du/ac for these parcels. Why would you allow for the HSSP to be overturned from 7 Du/ac to 35 du/ac? This will have a dramatic and irreparable harm to the value of the resident's homes that would have a shared backyard wall with a complex of 35 du/ac. Please reconsider as we are aware that some of the residents are considering litigation. We do not want it to come to that

Objective Design Standards: We further firmly request that, as indicated in the Bel Air Homeowners Association written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:

 Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
 Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive  Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive

Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for many Seagate residents when they moved into their home. As such, residents collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. We are concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. We request that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housing.

Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the Bel Air Homeowners Association residents.

Sincerely,

_______________ – President
_______________ - Vice–President
________________– Treasurer
_______________- Secretary
_______________– Director

DocuSign Envelope ID: 91898B86-8146-4485-8612-53C3D25ECA31

November 10, 2022
Subject: 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element-SUPPORT FOR OPTION 3 AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF 11/16/22
Dear Chairperson Perkins and Members of the Planning Commission, Members of our Seagate HOA attended the 11/1/22 City Council study session on the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element. Due to time constraints, many neighbors' (inclusive of two members of our HOA board) were not heard by the City Council before they deliberated and directed staff to discuss Option 3 ( shown below) with the Planning Commission for further consideration. Because we were not heard before Council deliberations, the Council was not verbally reminded of and implored to include requests that are vital to myself and the SEAGATE community in their direction to staff. As such, I would appreciate if the Planning Commission would carefully consider the following at the 11/16/22 Special Meeting while forming their recommendation to City Council.

Option 3: Mixed density within SP9 plus Frontier site
to AHO-70 Overlay
-~d
':,i
I ... -f
• SP 9 N/of Garfield: Reduces density to
City's existing RH zone (35 du/ac max)
• Capacity assumptions based on 30 du/ac
• Development standards: City's existing
RH zoning standards
• Max. bldg. height; 35 feet
• SP 9 S/of Garfield: remains AHO-70
• Development standards: proposed
Chapter 229
• Max. bldg. height: 4 stories
• May be completed within existing
1 sch~dule and budget
' ·• i "'· .. ,. . , ~• • Removes SP 7 Overlay when
a - ' · combined with Option 2
: ·~~.h~ i~:· :-..•.: • · .. :·. ~,. . .:.. . \ .. j l ,-..:: ._:. .. . ~-. --__ ___._ .....

Generally, 1 support Option 3, specifically the reduction in dens~ty from 70 ~welling units per acre (du/ac) in the industrial area ~etween Ernest D:1ve an~ ?arf1eld Boulevard . Option 3 reduces overall density m the Holly Seachff Spec~flc Pia~ (HSSP) while allowing for higher density south of Garfield Boulevard m walkmg distance to neighborhood-serving retail centers. Option 3 does not, h.owever, incorporate these vital requests of myself and the SEAGATE commumty:
) D ·ty on Sites 393 and 394: While reduced from 70 du/ac in the existing 1 ens1 5 d / h . d" t ft H • g Element Option 3 proposes a density of 3 u ac at t e 1mme 1a e Ora ousm '

Objective Design Standards: I further firmly request that, as indicated in the SEAGATE community written comments, objective design standards be included in the appropriate section of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code to:
• Limit development to 2-stories on Sites 393 and 394
• Limit development to 3-stories within 100 feet of Ernest Drive • Prohibit balconies and roof decks within 100 feet of Ernest Drive Parking on Ernest Drive: Overnight parking on Ernest Drive was an issue for myself and my neighbors when I moved into my home. As such, I collected signatures and petitioned the City to prohibit overnight parking on Ernest Drive. I am concerned that, with the development of housing and incentives/concessions that may reduce parking requirements, new residents will request to park overnight on Ernest Drive. I reguest that the prohibition of overnight parking on Ernest Drive continue and not be reversed with the construction of any new housin&, Thank you for your consideration of these reasonable requests which would allow for development of housing while minimizing potential impacts to the SEAGATE community.

Sincerely,
Undersigned homeowners of Seagate Community Association, Huntington Beach Name:

Street Name Only /Email:

City Council/Public Financing AuthorityNovember 29, 2022

City Council/Public Financing Authority
November 29, 2022