From: Jonathan Bonwit
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Revised Objection Letter to Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project_from Jonathan Bonwit_09-29-2024 Date: Sunday, September 29, 2024 5:52:54 PM
Attachments: Revised Objection Letter to City Council from Jonathan Bonwit_09-29-2024.pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Objection to the high-density mixed use Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project
located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
September 29, 2024
Greetings Mayor Van Der Mark and Esteemed City Council Members,
My attached Objection Letter to the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project contains new research and information
for your consideration.
It addresses questionable public statements several of the City Planning Commissioners made at their recent Planning Commission Meeting held on September 24, 20024 whereat they voted to refer this Project to City Council.
Several Commissioners publicly disclosed that they individually met with the developer prior to this meeting and their vote. But it should be noted that two of these same Commissioners unfortunately were not able to allocate a mutually agreed upon time to meet with residents Brian Thienes and me in spite of our multiple requests to meet to discuss this project before the meeting. So, they only heard the developer’s self-serving arguments in favor of this high- density residential Project. Very one-sided.
At the meeting, our allotted 3-minute time to address the Commissioners was inadequate to address the list of code irregularities, research, and objections detailed in my attached updated letter.
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high- density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses pursuant to Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
This revised high-density mixed use Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses,
and is certainly not
complementary of our city’s beach culture.
This Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
I urge you to Reject
the following:
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Reject the General Plan Amendment No. 21-004
Reject the Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003
Reject the Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005
Reject the Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024
This Project should be sent back to the developer for further revisions to conform with adjoining uses.
I simply cannot imagine that any City Council Member is in favor of building more high- density residential Big Box Projects in Huntington Beach.
Thank you.
Respectfully submitted,
Jonathan Bonwit
4622 Oceanridge Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
714-412-2222
[email protected]
Attachments:
1. Objection Letter from HB resident Jonathan Bonwit dated September 29, 2024
2. Map of HB General Plan “Preserve Zone” adopted 10/02/2017
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions.
Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the 2 Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
3 Conclusion
This revised high-density mixed-use Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture.
This Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
I simply cannot imagine that any City Council Member is in favor of building more high-density residential Big Box Projects in Huntington Beach.
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design.
Send this Project back to the developer for further revisions to conform with adjoining uses.
Thank you.
Respectfully Submitted, September 29, 2024
Jonathan Bonwit
Jonathan Bonwit
4622 Oceanridge Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
714-412-2222
[email protected]
Attachment: Map of HB General Plan “Preserve Zone” adopted 10/02/2017
this section is intentionally left blank
From: [email protected]
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: I Strongly Oppose Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Sunday, September 29, 2024 8:00:33 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important I am writing to oppose the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project. I have been a resident of Huntington Beach since 1981, living near Bolsa Chica and Warner. In addition to owning my residence, I also own several rental properties in the city. It is disheartening to watch certain members of the city council and planning department continually push for overdevelopment, seemingly disregarding the long-term impact on our community. Your responsibility should be to prioritize the interests of Huntington Beach residents, not to maximize profits for developers.
Building codes, height limits, setbacks, and other regulations exist for a reason. These standards should not be ignored or relaxed simply because a developer requests it. Bolsa Chica Street serves as the main gateway to the Bolsa Chica Wetlands, and the surrounding neighborhood is designed to harmonize with one of Southern California’s last remaining nature preserves. Every day, and especially on weekends, countless people visit Bolsa Chica. Yet, the city is now considering a proposal to build a four- story monstrosity at the entrance to this delicate wetland environment.
How can our city officials even entertain such an idea? Additionally, I am confident you are aware that this project will negatively impact the General Plan, as it is inconsistent with key goals and policies.
Specifically:
Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D): This policy mandates that new development must be of compatible proportion, scale, and character to complement adjoining uses.
Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B): This policy requires that new and renovated structures be context-sensitive, creative, and complementary to the city’s beach culture, while remaining compatible with surrounding developments and public spaces.
This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft 2 building which is over 250,000 ft 2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces.
Parking needs recalculation.
There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic- volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3 rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not
serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units.
The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors.
This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4 th -floor and extended rooftop parapets.
This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
As a longtime resident of Huntington Beach, I urge you to reject this project in its current form. I also request that you do not waive or alter any existing requirements to accommodate this development. The same planning and building codes that apply to neighboring buildings should be applied to this project. There is no justification for bending the rules for an outside developer at the expense of our residents and the Bolsa Chica Wetlands. Afterall we voted for you to represent us and not the developers.
Regards,
--
Davoud Manouchehri
[email protected]
(714)840-8791 (Cell)
(714)908-1818 (Fax)
--
Davoud Manouchehri
[email protected]
(714)840-8791 (Cell)
(714)908-1818 (Fax)
From: Michael Carr
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Please reject High-Density Residential Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 12:57:19 PM
Attachments: Objection Letter to City Council.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear Huntington City Council Members,
I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649
Please see attached with my signature.
Best,
Mike
--
Mike Carr l 917-374-6482 l www.linkedin.com/in/mikeecarr 1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ (Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] From: [email protected]
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Objection letter to HB City Council
Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:21:26 PM
Attachments: Scan2024-09-30_142400.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important To the HB City Council: I understand a senior care facility may be necessary but the size of it is crazy and does not fit in our neighborhood. Please see attached objection letter. Thank you for your consideration. Elizabeth Gregg
From: Estanislau, Robin
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Reject the General Plan Amendment No.21-004 Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:49:02 PM
Attachments: Revised Objection Letter to City Council for Neighbors to Sign_09-29-2024.pdf -----Original Message-----
From: Annette's Emails <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:12 PM
To: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]> Subject: Reject the General Plan Amendment No.21-004
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
]
Sent from my iPhone
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ (Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
From: Linas Raslavicius
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 3:26:07 PM
Attachments: 2024_09_30_Objection_Letter_Linas_Raslavicius.pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Please review the attached letter and consider its points carefully as you make decisions about the future of our unique beach community, "Surf City USA." Sincerely,
Linas Raslavicius
213-716-1404
5176 Tortuga Drive 203
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Linas Rastavicius
5176 Tortuga Drive #203
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Proud HB Resident for 45 years
Date: September 30, 2024
Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Gouncit
Dear Huntington Beach City CounciI Members,
I strongLy urge you to reject the:
r Revised Draft Environmenta[ lmpact Report (ElR) No.21-004, . General Ptan Amendment No. 21-004,
o Zoning Map Amendment No. 2'1-003,
. ZoningTextAmendmentNo.22-005,and
r Conditionat Use Permit No. 21-024
for the Revised Botsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located aL4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA 92649.
Key Concerns and Regutatory Non-Comptiance:
1. lncompatibititywithAdjoining Uses:
o The project, a high-density complex with 159 units, is vastty disproportionate to the surrounding residentiaI areas.
o lt fails to comply with Land Use Policy LU-1(D), which mandates that new devetopments be of compatibte scate and character with neighboring properties.
2. Exceeds Allowable Density:
o The project proposes 56.6 units per acre, almost double the density defined in the 2017 General Plan for High-DensityResidential areas.
o This is not aligned with adjacent residential zoning standards.
3. Height and Massiveness:
o The fou r-story, s3-foot structu re witt dwarf s urrounding buildings. o Factoring in the grade differentiat and parapets, it witl appear over 56 feet tatt. o This is unacceptable when neighboring residences are one to three stories tatt.
4. Parking Deficiency:
o The project severely underestimates parking needs.
o With onty 104 spaces, the allocation does not meet the needs for 1 10 emptoyees working in shifts, 159 units, visitors, del.ivery trucks, and ground-ftoor businesses. o The devetoper's use of reduced parking standards for "senior care" facilities is misleading.
o The general Blan's standards for mixed-use pro1ects must be applied to avoid sign ifi ca nt traffi c a nd pa rki ng issues.
5. Traffic and Safety lssues:
o The intersection of Warner Avenue and Botsa Chica Street lacks available street pa rki ng, f u rther compou ndi ng traffic congestion.
o Botsa Chica Street, a major access point for several communities, witl be negativelst impacted by the increase in traffic from the project.
6. Environmentatlmpact:
o The project is located in the Pacific Ftyway, a key migratory bird corridor adjacent to the Botsa Chica Ecotogicat Reserve, home to endangered species. o The structure's height poses a significant risk of bird strikes, f urther threatening [ocaI wil.dtifei.
7. Viotation of Land Use Policies:
o The project contradicts Land Use Policy LU 2{B), which requires that new structures be context-sensitive and comptementary to the city's beach cutture. o Additionatty, the designation of a "Specific Ptan" attempts to bypass compliance with existing zoning codes and shou/d be reiected.
8. lnadequate EIR:
o The Draft ElRis severe/ylacking as fottows: does not inctude an accurate project description, underestimates cumu[ative impacts, and faits to provide sufficient ana lysis of a lternatives.
o Traffic, sewer, water, and storm drain capacity are inadequately addressed. o The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
Conclusion:
o This project, in its current form, is incompatibte with the neighborhood, exceeds permissibte density and height, and introduces serious environmentaI and traffic concerns. o As a senior citizen, I support the idea of a senior care facitity to meet community needs.
o AND, it must be property sca[ed to fit the area, with a maximum height of 35 feet, proper setbacks, and a lower density to compty with local. [and use poticies.
P/ease vote NO on this proposal and send it back for revisions that ensur€ compliance with city planning requirements and respect for the local community.
Sinceretv,
M*?o'h
?/so/eoat
Linas Rastavicius
ieut
Emait to City Counci[:
ell\/-nn ol
REFERENCES:
i Bird-buitding coLl.isions in the United States: Estimates of annuaI mortatity and species vutnerabitity, Ihe Condor,Votumell6, lssuel,l February20'l 4,Pages8-23,AccessedOnline: :: i:", !:f i. ;; From: Kim
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Objection letter for Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 3:59:41 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear City Council Members,
I urge you to Reject the each of the amendments presented at the Sept 24th hearing for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at the Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue
There is public concern about the environmental impacts to the already vulnerable Bolsa Chica wetlands and surrounding protected marshlands. This project would be detrimental to this small coastal area and the environmental impacts will most certainly having a lasting effects on the protected wildlife. The damage will be irreversible.
Currently, there is no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue.
Bolsa Chica Street is a “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as street parking for local apartments and an entryway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Wetlands. This project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
As a long time resident of the Cabo Del Mar Community, which is across the street from the proposed site, I have seen the traffic increase exponentially at this intersection due to drivers using Bolsa Chica as a thoroughfare to coast hwy and/or the 405 freeway on the east side of Warner Ave.
This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the businesses,employees, in addition to the endless daily delivery and service trucks.
This Revise Project is too massive in scale, bulk, and size for our neighborhood and the are cannot withstand further traffic congestion.
I urge the city council to ask the developers to consider an alternate location.
Thank you for your time and consideration
Kimberly Decker
714-878-5028
Local Resident
From: Michael McShane
To: [email protected]
Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing rejection
Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 6:19:25 PM
Attachments: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing rejection.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important To the Huntington Beach City Council,
My wife and I have lived off of Bolsa Chica for going on ten years. The high-density senior housing project being planned for the intersection of Warner and Bolsa Chica despite unhappy citizens that will be living next to it. Attached please find a letter indicating our reasons for rejecting this plan.
1. This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants.
2. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses pursuant to Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
3. This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture.
4. This Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Reject the General Plan Amendment No. 21-004
Reject the Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003
Reject the Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005
Reject the Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024
This Project should be sent back to the developer for further revisions I urge you to also consider rejecting this plan.
Respectfully,
Michael McShane
17202 Corbina Ln #108
Huntington Beach, Ca 92649
714-803-7125
From: Marcie Zeller
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Cc: Marcie Zeller
Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing Project
Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 9:15:36 PM
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Dear Huntington Beach City Council,
This letter is to kindly ask that you DO NOT approve the Bolsa Chica/Warner Senior Care Community Project as it currently is. So many of the factors in this project DO NOT MAKE SENSE!
1. Assisted Living seniors do not need apartments with 1700-2000 sq feet. This is larger than many single family homes that seniors live in now.
2. They are including a BAR to sell Liquor to seniors…….does this make sense? Build a smaller building or add parking instead!
3. THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPOTS! Please do not allow a variance on the parking spots. There is no room anywhere outside of the project to park. The existing apartments do not have enough parking to begin with.
On the one hand this builder thinks a Bar is necessary for seniors but not a spot to park their car. Doesn’t make sense!
4. This will be an eye sore on the corner….. It will be a square block of walls and so oversized for the space. Please require landscaping and the aesthetics to blend in with the existing area so it is not built up to the side walks…… 25 foot set back with greenery and only 2 stories like the existing area.
5. MOST IMPORTANTLY……..PLEASE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS………NO HIGH DENSITY HOUSING PLEASE! Keep Huntington Beach charming like the taxpaying residents have requested. Please listen to us. This is not unreasonable!
6. TRAFFIC will be terrible on the corner and Bolsa Chica and Warner. It is presently an issue as is. Heading South on Bolsa Chica to the light at WARNER, there is only ONE LANE to go straight across Warner. Allowing for the additional residents, employees, etc. using that one lane would be a lack of responsibility and obviously a set up for FAILURE, if you approve this project as is. The intersection is highly unusual and confusing for many people. We have heavy pedestrian crossings and 2 left turn lanes, one straight lane, and 2 right turn lanes. There is always mayhem and CLOSE-CALLS every day. This intersection CANNOT handle more daily traffic.
7. Please make sure that what the builder is building is already approved by the state to be an assisted living, memory care facility so the builder cannot change the plan after they get started.
In conclusion, We, the residents of HB do not want high density housing and are requesting that you adhere to our existing regulations and building requirements to keep HB a pleasant place to live. No one likes too much congestion on the local streets and in neighborhoods.
There is NO good reason that the builder CANNOT and SHOULD NOT comply with our city codes as is. The codes are there for a reason. The city council should not let the builder decide how to change our city for their benefit if it does not work for its local residents. Please have the builder revise their plans until they can comply with HB and keep HB safe and sane for its residents.
Thank you for your consideration.
Marcie Zeller
714-904-1236
40 year resident of HB
From: pess co
To: [email protected]
Subject: Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:38:47 PM
Attachments: Revised Objection Letter to City Council for Neighbors to Sign_09-29-2024 (1).pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important We urge City Council to Reject the following:
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Reject the General Plan Amendment No. 21-004
Reject the Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003
Reject the Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005
Reject the Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ (Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Dan Zhu
17191 Corbina Ln Apt 108 Huntington Beach CA 92649
[email protected]
10/01/2024
From: Diane Black
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan
Subject: REJECTION LETTER for Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 10:09:17 AM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear City Council Members,
Please reject all the amendments for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at the Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue Environmental impacts to the Bolsa Chica Wetlandsand wildlife preserve would be detrimental and the environmental impacts will have lasting effects. The damage will be irreversible.
Additionally there is no street parking around this intersection. There is zero street parking on Warner Avenue.
Bolsa Chica Street has limited street parking plus it serves as residential parking for the local apartments.
This project will have a devastating affect on the flow of traffic.
This Revise Project is way too large in scale for this community and neighborhood, and cannot withstand further traffic congestion.
PLEASE PLEASE request the developers consider an alternate location within the city of Huntington Beach.
Thank you,
Kay Gramata
714-421-2285
HB resident
From: Kim
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Re sending Objection to Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 10:11:41 AM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important On Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 3:59 PM Kim <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear City Council Members,
I urge you to Reject the each of the amendments presented at the Sept 24th hearing for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at the Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue
There is public concern about the environmental impacts to the already vulnerable Bolsa Chica wetlands and surrounding protected marshlands. This project would be detrimental to this small coastal area and the environmental impacts will most certainly having a lasting effects on the protected wildlife. The damage will be irreversible.
Currently, there is no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue.
Bolsa Chica Street is a “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as street parking for local apartments and an entryway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Wetlands. This project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
As a long time resident of the Cabo Del Mar Community, which is across the street from the proposed site, I have seen the traffic increase exponentially at this intersection due to drivers using Bolsa Chica as a thoroughfare to coast hwy and/or the 405 freeway on the east side of Warner Ave.
This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the businesses,employees, in addition to the endless daily delivery and service trucks.
This Revise Project is too massive in scale, bulk, and size for our neighborhood and the are cannot withstand further traffic congestion.
I urge the city council to ask the developers to consider an alternate location.
Thank you for your time and consideration
Kimberly Decker
714-878-5028
Local Resident
From: Dan Grommersch
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Objection Letter to the Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 11:02:07 AM
Attachments: objection.pdf
From: Monique x
To: [email protected]
Subject: Objection letter
Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 1:31:19 PM
Attachments: Objection Letter To HB Planning Community Project.docx You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
October 1, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact
Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment
No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003;
Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional
Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica
Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and
4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649
(Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner
Avenue).
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected
in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the
developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the
general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land
Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of
parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
I strongly object to the project for many valid reasons that include but are not limited to the following
objections-
1: This high- density Big Box high-rise apartment is too massive in size, proportion, scope, and density for
surrounding neighborhood.
2: This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR)
with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on
Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
3: This monstrosity will loom 4 stories high in a
neighborhood of single story and two-story buildings.
4: Built on a Zero Lot line with only 10 feet setback from the curb, this monstrosity will sprawl over 3.5 acres
crowding a major traffic intersection in Huntington
Beach.
5: High Density Residential is defined in the 2017
general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning
Commissioner
approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density! 6: The grossly inadequate parking spaces will not
provide enough parking for visitors, vendors, delivery
/service trucks. Spillover parking will saturate the
streets which are all ready overcrowded. This will
grossly impact the major gateway to the public hiking
trails to the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserves.
7: This project is a blatant and improper attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning
scheming and abuse.
8: The Senior Living Community label for this is
misleading as only the wealthy will be able to these
rents
9: This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
10: Huntington Beach is turning into an overpriced,
overbuilt Los Angeles suburb which is not why we live
here.
11: This project will result in substantial impacts to
biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird
corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa
Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of
birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest
building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous
endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
12: This high-density apartment complex is a precedent- setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high -density Big Boxes
that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community. 13: The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has
proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to
overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be
rejected
in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions
and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion,
scale and character to complement adjoining uses,
and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach
culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in
its current format and design.
Sincerely, Monique Parry
17191 Corbina Ln # 112 Huntington Beach CA 92649
[email protected]
From: Joe Mazza
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 5:21:45 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
IMG_2978.jpg
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Estanislau, Robin
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 6:42:15 PM
Attachments: Revised Objection Letter to City Council for Neighbors to Sign_09-29-2024 (1).pdf
From: pess co <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:39 PM
To: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]> Subject: Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B
We urge City Council to Reject the following:
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Reject the General Plan Amendment No. 21-004
Reject the Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003
Reject the Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005
Reject the Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ (Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Dan Zhu
17191 Corbina Ln Apt 108 Huntington Beach CA 92649
[email protected]
10/01/2024
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Estanislau, Robin
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing rejection
Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 6:42:40 PM
Attachments: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing rejection.pdf
From: Michael McShane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 6:21 PM
To: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]> Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Housing rejection
Dear Robin,
My wife and I have lived off of Bolsa Chica for going on ten years. The high-density senior housing project being planned for the intersection of Warner and Bolsa Chica despite unhappy citizens that will be living next to it. Attached please find a letter indicating our reasons for rejecting this plan.
1. This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants.
2. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses pursuant to Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
3. This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture.
4. This Project violates City Land Use Codes: LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Reject the General Plan Amendment No. 21-004
Reject the Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003
Reject the Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005
Reject the Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024
This Project should be sent back to the developer for further revisions
I urge you to also consider rejecting this plan.
Respectfully,
Michael McShane
17202 Corbina Ln #108
Huntington Beach, Ca 92649
714-803-7125
From: Christine Magar
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: NO to High-Density Residential Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 6:54:44 PM
Attachments: Revised_Objection_Letter_to_City_Council_for_Neighbors_to_Sign_09-29-2024.docx [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
God bless,
Christine Magar
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ch __________________________________
(Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], 3 [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] From: Sandee Maheshwari
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project
Date: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 2:59:11 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear City Council Members,
I urge you to please vote NO and reject the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community high-density project in its current format and design located in the City of Huntington Beach (City).
I am in favor of having a senior care community and appreciate the efforts taken with modifying the project scale; however, I am urging you to reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project (Project) located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
Due to multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions.
The facility will stand out as an abnormity due to the proposed size, and will not fit with the ideal scale for the area, which would be more reasonable at 35-feet tall, maintaining exit setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please consider the following before making your vote:
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. The Project is still too tall and massive in scale for our surrounding neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1- story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2- story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units- per-acre, whichis clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high-traffic-volume thorofare that this Project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3 rd party
workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This Project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation.
Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4
th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This Project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices.
Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that includes, but is not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. This Project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The Project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non- compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
21. This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless, regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use, which mandates the residential portion conform with adjoining residential uses.
This revised Project is not
compatible in proportion, scale, and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly NOT complementary of our city’s beach culture. This project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
I trust that you will take the above into consideration and take the proper action in keeping the picture of surf, sand, sun and subtle sophistication which encapsulates what the City of Huntington Beach is all about.
With gratitude,
Sandeepa Maheshwari
5096 Tortuga Dr., #108
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Sandeepa Maheshwari 5096 Tortuga Drive, #108, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 (626) 460-9712 [email protected] October 2, 2024 Dear City Council Members, I urge you to please vote NO and reject the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community high-density project in its current format and design located in the City of Huntington Beach (City). I am in favor of having a senior care community and appreciate the efforts taken with modifying the project scale; however, I am urging you to reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project (Project) located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue). Due to multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. The facility will stand out as an abnormity due to the proposed size, and will not fit with the ideal scale for the area, which would be more reasonable at 35-feet tall, maintaining exit setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). Please consider the following before making your vote: 1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses. 2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. 3. The Project is still too tall and massive in scale for our surrounding neighborhood. 4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica. 5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets. 6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density. 2 7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre, whichis clearly high-density. 8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums. 9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses. 10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks. 11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation. 12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high-traffic-volume thorofare that this Project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic. 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses. 14. The “Senior Care Community” label for is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use. 15. This Project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets. 16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community. 3 17. This Project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process. 18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that includes, but is not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated. 19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision. 20. This Project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The Project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community. 21. This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless, regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use, which mandates the residential portion conform with adjoining residential uses. This revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale, and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly NOT complementary of our city’s beach culture. This project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). I trust that you will take the above into consideration and take the proper action in keeping the picture of surf, sand, sun and subtle sophistication which encapsulates what the City of Huntington Beach is all about. With gratitude, Sandeepa Maheshwari 5096 Tortuga Dr., #108 Huntington Beach, CA 92649
From: No-reply
To: [email protected]; Beckman, Hayden; Planning Commission; Twining, Butch; Kennedy, Don; [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin; [email protected] Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Date: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 10:58:10 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Hi Admin,
clap from email address - [email protected] and address - 26565 West Agoura Road, Calabasas, CA 91302 has signed the letter attached in objection to the Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community project development.
Thank you
From: Alysha Reed
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Objection letter for Bolsa Chica Senior Care Project Date: Thursday, October 3, 2024 8:43:09 AM
Attachments: Revised_Objection_Letter_to_City_Council_for_Neighbors_to_Sign_09-29-2024.docx[1].pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Good Morning,
Please take into consideration my household's objection to this project. We live in the beautiful Brightwater community. See attached
1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
Docusign Envelope ID: A982B3ED-2519-4780-A13D-A48C2C4EFAD5 2 13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ (Signature) (Date)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Name)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Docusign Envelope ID: A982B3ED-2519-4780-A13D-A48C2C4EFAD5 17281 Osterville Lane
[email protected]
Alysha Reed McKeen
10/3/2024
From: No-reply
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Date: Friday, October 4, 2024 9:12:00 AM
Attachments: CF7-1728058077-6751.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Hi Admin,
Jillian from email address - [email protected] and address - 123 main st. La Mirada ca 90538 has signed the letter attached in objection to the Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community project development.
Thank you
Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Copyright © 2024 Bolsa Chica Senior Living
Community 1
Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions.
Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1.Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2.Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3.This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4.This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5.When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6.This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7.High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8.While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9.The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10.This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11.Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces.
Parking needs recalculation.
12.There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue.
And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high-traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Copyright © 2024 Bolsa Chica Senior Living
Community 2
13.An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14.The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15.This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16.This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17.This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18.The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19.This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20.The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design.
Jillian
(Legibly Print Name)
123 main st. La Mirada ca 90538
(Legibly Print Home Address)
[email protected]
(Legibly Print Email Address)
From: No-reply
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin; [email protected]
Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Date: Friday, October 4, 2024 9:29:37 AM
Attachments: CF7-1728059252-8406.pdf
Hi Admin,
Developer from email address - [email protected] and address - test has signed the letter attached in objection to the Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community project development.
Thank you
Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Copyright © 2024 Bolsa Chica Senior Living
Community 1
Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions.
Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1.Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2.Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3.This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4.This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5.When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6.This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7.High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8.While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9.The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10.This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11.Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces.
Parking needs recalculation.
12.There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue.
And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high-traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Copyright © 2024 Bolsa Chica Senior Living
Community 2
13.An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14.The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15.This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16.This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17.This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
18.The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
19.This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
20.The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community.
This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design.
Developer
(Legibly Print Name)
test
(Legibly Print Home Address)
[email protected]
(Legibly Print Email Address)
From: Glunt, G. Paul
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Cc: Glunt, G. Paul; Paul Glunt
Subject: Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community
Date: Sunday, October 6, 2024 10:47:51 AM
Attachments: Paul Glunt Revised_Objection_Letter_to_City_Council_for_Neighbors_to_Sign_09-29-2024.pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Please find attached my letter regarding the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21- 003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649. I look forward to seeing you at the October 15 meeting.
G. Paul Glunt
Principal
Co-Leader of KPMG US Value Chain Management Team
KPMG LLP | 20 Pacifica | Suite 700 | Irvine, CA 92618-3391 Mobile 949.381.8434
[email protected]
KPMG's Value Chain Management
Any advice in this communication is limited to the conclusions specifically set forth herein and is based on the completeness and accuracy of the stated facts, assumptions and/or representations included. In rendering our advice, we may consider tax authorities that are subject to change, retroactively and/or prospectively, and any such changes could affect the validity of our advice. We will not update our advice for subsequent changes or modifications to the laws and regulations, or to the judicial and administrative interpretations thereof. The advice or other information in this document was prepared for the sole benefit of KPMG's client and may not be relied upon by any other person or organization. KPMG accepts no responsibility or liability in respect of this document to any person or organization other than KPMG's client.
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter.
*********************************************************************** 1 Objection Letter to Huntington Beach City Council
September 29, 2024
Dear Huntington City Council Members, I urge you to Reject the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) No. 21-004; General Plan Amendment No. 21-004; Zoning Map Amendment No. 21-003; Zoning Text Amendment No. 22-005; and Conditional Use Permit No. 21-024 for the Revised Bolsa Chica Senior Care Community Project located at 4952 and 4972 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 (Southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue).
This Project requires a Specific Plan because it is a high-density 159 apartment unit complex featuring separate and independent dwelling units that happens to offer extra amenities under the auspices of “Senior Care” to tenants. Nonetheless regardless of its label, it is still a high-density project which is considered mixed use which mandates the residential portion must conform with adjoining residential uses.
Because of multiple city code, zoning, and architectural and site design issues, this Big Box Project still fails to meet city planning requirements and must be rejected in its current “as is” submission format and sent back to the developer for further revisions. Residents welcome the general “concept” of building a new senior care facility, but please cap this monstrosity at 35-feet tall, maintain exiting setback codes, and reduce its density so that it’s compatible with adjoining uses and complies with Land Use Elements LU-1(D) and LU-2(B). The number of parking spaces should also be significantly increased to eliminate traffic congestion during surge visitor times.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU-1(D) mandates: Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses.
2. Land Use Element Policy LU-2(B) mandates: Ensure that new and renovated structures and building architecture and site design are context sensitive, creative, complementary of the city’s beach culture, and compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.
3. This Revise Project is still too tall and massive in scale, bulk, proportion, and size for our neighborhood.
4. This 4-story, 53-feet tall, 205,308 ft2 building which is over 250,000 ft2 viewed from the outside (2.04 FAR) with 159 living units sprawling over 3.1 acres will tower over the three 1-story tall homes across the street on Bolsa Chica Street, and tower over the adjoining 2-story on Warner, and the 3-story Condo’s on Bolsa Chica.
5. When factoring in the grade differential, this Project will be 56-feet tall due to its 3’-6’ feet rooftop parapets.
6. This Project requires a Specific Plan due to its mixed-use designation whereby the general plan requires this project to comply with the adjoining residential density. This Project is almost double the adjoining density.
7. High Density Residential is defined in the 2017 general plan, which Dan Kalmick as Planning Commissioner approved, as 30 or more units-per-acre, yet this Project proposes 56.6 units-per-acre. It is clearly high-density.
8. While Commercial Zoning (CZ) allows a 50-feet tall building, this new zoning should comply with the adjacent residential zoning which only allows 35-feet in height to match neighboring 3-story condominiums.
9. The 32-feet setback will place this towering monstrosity right in the faces of families living in the apartments on the south side of it on Warner Avenue. And it will tower over all other adjoining uses.
10. This Project is grossly under-parked and has insufficient parking spaces for visitors, customers of the ground floor businesses, onsite employees, and a myriad of daily delivery and service trucks.
11. Insufficient parking is due to the developer incorrectly applying parking spaces-per-bed rather than using the correct standards required by the general plan for mixed-use projects which in turn requires significantly more spaces per unit for the residential unit portion of this Project. This mixed-use Project needs to apply a combo of residential parking standards for its residential portion, and apply commercial standards for its commercial use portion in order to calculate the total required number of parking spaces. Parking needs recalculation.
12. There is essentially no available street parking near this particular intersection. There is no street parking on Warner Avenue. And Bolsa Chica Street is a predominantly “red-curbed” zone with extremely limited street parking that also serves as a major parking area and gateway to the public hiking trails in the Bolsa Chica 2 Ecological Reserve. Bolsa Chica Street is the only two-way ingress and egress access point to the Brightwater, Sandover, and Los Patos Avenue communities which makes Bolsa Chica Street a vital high- traffic-volume thorofare that this project will adversely affect and inhibit the flow of traffic.
13. An estimated 110 employees will work in 3 shifts at this complex so during their shift change overlaps there will be approximately 70 employees during shift changes who simultaneously need onsite parking spaces out of the 104 available spaces. That leaves only 34 available parking spaces for its 159 residential units, all of their visitors, outside 3rd party workers, and potential customers of the commercial ground floor businesses.
14. The “Senior Care Community” label for this Big Box is intentionally misleading since it will feature commercial restaurants that serve and provide on-site liquor sales. True convalescent care facilities do not serve liquor or include 1,700 - 2,000 square feet apartment units. The developer conveniently uses the designation of “convalescent care” in order to apply for reduced parking in their specific plan which they hope will give them the fewest number of spaces required by our city for any residential use.
15. This project will result in substantial impacts to biological resources requiring mitigation. Project site is located on the Pacific Flyway, a major migratory bird corridor that uses our nearby state-protected Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve which is a Global Biodiversity Hotspot that supports 23 endangered species of birds and raptors. This complex will be the tallest building in the area and undoubtedly cause numerous endangered species fatalities from bird strikes into its upper 4th-floor and extended rooftop parapets.
16. This high-density apartment complex is a precedent-setting Trojan Horse that will allow other developers to saturate this area with more high density Big Boxes that will destroy our quiet “Surf City” beach community.
17. The project tarnishes the character of Hunting Beach for the residents dos more than simply make our daily life in Huntington Beach less wonderful. It will start an increasing erosion of the more than $500 MILLION of annual direct economic impact thar tourism brings to Huntington Beach and eliminate hundreds, and eventually thousands of jobs of Huntington Beach residents as the tourism reduces as a result of changing - - - for the worse - - - the character and beauty, indeed the unique beach vibe that only HB has. The character and beauty of Huntington Beach are a key contributor to keeping our tourism dollars. At the April 16, 2024 Huntington Beach City Council meeting Visit HB CEO Kelly Miller noted that “We bring in millions of visitors generating about half a billion dollars in annual direct economic impact and supporting over 4,000 jobs.” He continued that “A drop in visitors to Huntington Beach will undoubtedly reduce (hotel) tax revenues, sales tax revenue and parking revenue.” Other data is consistent with those amounts. Destroying the character of a neighborhood that literally overlooks the beach will be the beginning of a slippery slope that erodes not only the beauty of Huntington Beach but jobs, business prosperity and tax revenue.
18. This project is a blatant attempt to Spot Zone which is the oldest recognized form of zoning scheming and corruption. The City lacks substantial evidence to support the “findings” for Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit amongst multiple other violations of City Code, regulations, and established and accepted practices. Approval of this Project can only be obtained by significant abuse of the City’s discretionary approval process.
19. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) fails to provide and analyze an accurate and complete project description, the EIR’s analysis of cumulative impacts is deficient; and the EIR’s analysis of alternatives is deficient; and the EIR fails to support its findings with substantial evidence amongst multiple other violations of the EIR and CEQA that include but are not limited to inadequate traffic, sewer capacity, water capacity, storm drain, loss of scenic vista, project alternatives, and shadow studies that reflect the true height of the structure. The EIR must be revised and recirculated.
20. This Project is located in the City Designated “Preserve Zone” (not a Transform Zone) where land use changes are not envisioned and are not necessary to implement the Community Vision.
21. The project fails to comply with the City’s governing land use policies and codes. The project applicant has proposed a Specific Plan as a creative means to overcome such non-compliances. This ploy must be rejected in favor of protecting and preserving the proportions and character of our local neighborhood community. 3 This Revised Project is not compatible in proportion, scale and character to complement adjoining uses, and is certainly not complementary of our city’s beach culture. This Project violates LU-1(D) and LU-2(B).
Please Vote NO and Reject this High-Density Project in its current format and design. _______________ __________October 6, 2024________________ (Signature) (Date)
___G Paul Glunt
(Legibly Print Name)
_17352 Greatpoint Circle, Huntington Beach, CA 92649______________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Home Address)
[email protected]__________________________________________________ (Legibly Print Email Address)
Email to City Council: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
From: Peter Baker
To: Van Der Mark, Gracey; Strickland, Tony; Burns, Pat; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Bolton, Rhonda; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected]; Estanislau, Robin Subject: Bolsa Chica Objection Letter
Date: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 12:28:55 PM
Attachments: PSBObjectionLetter.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Please see attached letter.
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Estanislau, Robin
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Oppose BOLSA CHICA Sr COMPLEX as proposed
Date: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:11:41 PM
Attachments: psb letter.pdf
From: Peter Baker <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 11:25 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]>; Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]>; Beckman, Hayden <[email protected]> Subject: Oppose BOLSA CHICA Sr COMPLEX as proposed
Dear City Council members,
Please find my attached letter below requesting that you reject the current project.
Peter S. Baker
17042 Bolsa Chica St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
From: [email protected]
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 2:47:11 AM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important To all it may concern.
Again, I urge you all to reject the current four story proposal for this development.
Three stories maximum to blend into the surrounding area.
Since this development is priced for only the affluent, as a retiree well into my seventh decade, I'd have to hit the lotto to be able to live there.
A reply will be appreciated.
Thank you
Chuck Burns
5502 Edinger Ave
Huntington Beach CA.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 07:33:45 AM PDT
Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
I urge you all to do the same. Reject the current proposal of this project being four stories high.
A reply will be appreciated.
Thank you
Chuck Burns
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 07:13:32 AM PDT
Subject: Bolsa Chica Senior Living Community
To whom it may concern,
I urge you to reject the current proposal of this project being four stories high .
At the most no more than three stories high.
A reply will be appreciated
Thank you
Chuck Burns
5502 Edinger Ave
Huntington Beach
714 369-7384
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
From: Fikes, Cathy
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Support for Senior Living Project
Date: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:17:51 PM
Attachments: Davenport support for senior care.docx
From: Seth Davenport <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:09 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Support for Senior Living Project
To Whom It May Concern,
Please see my attached letter in support of the senior living project that will be presented at the upcoming Huntington Beach City Council hearing.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Seth H. Davenport | Executive Vice President
Voit Real Estate Services | The Zehner Davenport Industrial Group Please Update Address – We Moved
2020 Main Street, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92614
D (714) 935-2376 | C (714) 420-2839| F (714) 978-8329
[email protected]
| www.zehnerdavenport.com | License #01413387
Voit Real Estate Services, Broker License #01333376
Huntington Beach City Council
Sent via email
Dear Mayor Van Der Mark and Members of the City Council, I am writing in support of the proposed senior living project in Huntington Beach. As a community, we have the opportunity to address a growing need for quality housing and care options for our seniors—those who have contributed so much to the fabric of our city. This project represents a thoughtful solution, ensuring that our elderly residents can age comfortably and with dignity in a supportive environment.
The senior living project will not only provide much-needed housing but also strengthen the local economy by creating jobs and increasing local spending.
Additionally, the thoughtful design of the project promotes accessibility, community engagement, and well-being, all of which are critical to ensuring a high quality of life for our seniors.
I urge the council to approve this project, as it is a necessary step in addressing the needs of our aging population while maintaining Huntington Beach’s reputation as a welcoming and compassionate community.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to the positive impact this project will bring to our city.
Sincerely,
Seth Davenport
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Fikes, Cathy
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Support for Senior Living Project
Date: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:57:46 PM
Attachments: Davenport support for senior care.docx
From: Seth Davenport <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:08 PM
To: Fikes, Cathy <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Senior Living Project
Good Afternoon,
Please see my attached letter in support of the senior living project that will be presented at the upcoming Huntington Beach City Council hearing.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Seth H. Davenport | Executive Vice President
Voit Real Estate Services | The Zehner Davenport Industrial Group Please Update Address – We Moved
2020 Main Street, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92614
D (714) 935-2376 | C (714) 420-2839| F (714) 978-8329
[email protected]
| www.zehnerdavenport.com | License #01413387
Voit Real Estate Services, Broker License #01333376
Huntington Beach City Council
Sent via email
Dear Mayor Van Der Mark and Members of the City Council, I am writing in support of the proposed senior living project in Huntington Beach. As a community, we have the opportunity to address a growing need for quality housing and care options for our seniors—those who have contributed so much to the fabric of our city. This project represents a thoughtful solution, ensuring that our elderly residents can age comfortably and with dignity in a supportive environment.
The senior living project will not only provide much-needed housing but also strengthen the local economy by creating jobs and increasing local spending.
Additionally, the thoughtful design of the project promotes accessibility, community engagement, and well-being, all of which are critical to ensuring a high quality of life for our seniors.
I urge the council to approve this project, as it is a necessary step in addressing the needs of our aging population while maintaining Huntington Beach’s reputation as a welcoming and compassionate community.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to the positive impact this project will bring to our city.
Sincerely,
Seth Davenport