Robert McGill, P.E.
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
[email protected]
15 June 2022
City Council of Redondo Beach Community
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA. 90277
Ref:
1. Letter to Brandy Forbes, AC Projection Interpretation, 24 January 2021 Meeker Memorandum, Air conditioning compressor units in side setbacks, June 21, 1998
3. Redondo Beach Municipal Code, Title 4, Chapter 24, Noise Regulation.
Dear City Council,
After hearing the concerns of the City Council at the June 14th meeting, I believe the proposed code allowing equipment in setback areas can be improved by the following:
1. Use of Title 4, Chapter 24 for noise regulation.
2. Inclusion of all equipment, including heat pumps, water softeners, and electrical equipment.
Discussion
1. The proposed code specifies that "The decibel level is measured immediately adjacent to the location of the equipment placement, not at a distance from the equipment." This is ambiguous since there is no definition of the term "immediately adjacent" (which implies a short distance) and it contradicts the term "not at a distance", which is also undefined and the opposite of "immediately adjacent".
Measuring close to the equipment rather than at the property line (as specified by 4-24.201) is contrary to the whole reason for limiting sound level, which is to protect adjacent properties from excessive noise. For this reason, it only makes sense to measure sound level at the property line, which is also a clearly defined distance from the equipment.
This would still protect adjacent properties from excessive noise but not penalize equipment installers with unnecessarily excessive regulation.
Measuring sound level at the equipment location does not allow for sound mitigation techniques and materials, such as:
a) Locating equipment to take advantage of existing sound limiting structures and vegetation. b) Installation of sound blocking walls.
c) Installation of sound absorbing blankets.
Since manufacturers provide unit sound level only as an advertisement or sales incentive, these sound levels cannot be relied upon. In this instance, and for units where no sound level is provided, it would be nearly impossible to implement a permit requirement that an AC unit produces only a 55 dB sound level adjacent to the unit since this would need to be measured before installation. The alternative is that it's measured after installation and if the unit does not meet the requirement, it would need to be replaced. This would tend to push homeowners toward other options; such as multiple window units which do not require building permits and are often located in areas that project higher sound levels.
None of the municipalities, or the county, cited in the referenced letter included a sound level limit in the zoning code that permits AC units in a setback area. This is because allowable sound levels are specified in another section of the codes, just like it is for Redondo Beach. Also, section 4-24.301 of the Redondo Beach municipal code specifies levels as low as 40 dB (at the property line) for certain zones and time of day. This potentially results in a lower impact to adjacent properties than the current proposed limit of 55 dB near the unit and is a much more comprehensive requirement. Even if a unit meets the proposed 55 dB sound level limit, it would still be required to meet the limits of code section 4-24.301. Also, units just inches outside a setback would not be required to meet the proposed 55 dB limit but would still be required to meet code section 4-24.301 which can be more restrictive.
2. The proposed code makes no mention of electrical equipment such as PV system inverters, PV system storage batteries, electric power meters, electric safety shut-off switches, and electrical conduits. This seems to be just an oversight that can easily be remedied by adding the term "electrical equipment" and its definition.
Adding electrical equipment to the proposed code update only makes sense since many, many properties already have this type of equipment protruding into a setback area. Note that even one inch or less of protrusion into a setback is nonetheless still a protrusion.
Since AC units are going to be allowed in setback areas, it does not makes sense to limit other types of equipment which will also have to comply with code section 4-24.301, even if a sound limit is imposed.
Summary
Adding a sound limit requirement based on manufacturer advertising, or a measurement adjacent to the unit is ambiguous and confusing. Would the 55 dB limit exclude the requirements of Noise Code 4-24.301, or be an additional requirement. It would also be impossible to implement this requirement until after installation of a unit but it does not allow for mitigation, which is allowed by code section 4-24.301 (since it measures sound level at the property line).
It was demonstrated at the June 14th meeting that when a property owner, or occupant, has a noise complaint, Redondo Beach Municipal code Title 4, Chapter 24, Noise Regulation, works to require a remedy. In this case, I believe a water softener was relocated. The Noise Regulation code applies to all equipment no matter where located, so adding a 55 dB sound level limit measured near the equipment is completely unnecessary.
Since June 21, 1998, AC units have been allowed in the rear setback of a property without any additional sound level requirement (see ref Meeker Memorandum, June 21, 1998). What will be the effect of suddenly adding a new 55 dB requirement? The fact that AC unis in the rear setback have been allowed for the past 24 years proves that an additional sound level requirement is not needed and that the 23 pages of Title 4, Chapter 24 (Noise Regulation) comprehensively and adequate limits sound protrusion into adjacent properties.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sincerely,
R. 9. Megill
Robert McGill, P.E
ADDENDUM
Timeline
September 27, 2020: Applied for a permit to install a heat pump to provide cooling and heating for my home.
October 27, 2020: I received an email saying the external unit could not be placed in the side setback area.
November 29, 2020: Sent email saying the code allows similar features to a water heater in side setback area.
November 30, 2020: Received copy of the Meeker memorandum (see ref) which allows AC units only in rear setback.
January 27, 2021: Letter to Brandy Forbes (see ref) requesting re-evaluation of the Meeker memorandum.
February 2, 2021: Received email from Brandy Forbes denying my request due to comma placement in the code I cited.
February 3, 2021: Sent email to Council person Christian Horvath asking for help with this issue.
March 16, 2021: Council person Christian Horvath brought this issue to the City Council.
October 21, 2021: Planning Commission discussed proposal allowing equipment in side setback. Continued to 12/16/21.
December 16, 2021: Planning Commission continued side setback proposal to 1/20/2022 without discussion.
January 20, 2022: Planning Commission discussed and sent issue to City Council.
June 14, 2022: City Council held public hearing and continued item to 7/5/2022.
My Background
I am an aerospace electromechanical design engineer with 39 years experience in the development and design of aerospace structures, electromechanical devices, electronic enclosures, and rocket engines. I am Professionally Licensed by the state of California (license number 29886). I've been a home owner in Redondo Beach District 3 since December 18, 2004. In 2019, I designed, sourced, and installed a rooftop photovoltaic system on my home by myself without assistance.
CC J1
715|2022
Democracy is built on faith; faith in each other, faith in norms and institutions, faith in those in power. Faith in your fellow people so you can create an environment that's win/ win. Autocracies are imposed through fear, which is used for gaining and maintaining power.
Democracies die in silence.
It is tragically commonplace in political discourse that lies are now normalized; it's constitutionally protected. The people who are actually TRYING to mislead you- the hope is that you get to try that once and then people will never trust you again. One could believe a citizen objecting to new construction; it's noisy and dusty. When the opposition to the BCHD's new building proposal chose to use a steady campaign of misinformation to instill fear in OTHER citizens, it crossed a line.
The latest: encouraging the City Council to exercise Measure DD. It's a zoning measure that doesn't apply here. The property has housed memory care residents for over 25 years. Stating the project is "larger than every home in Beryl Heights added together." The nextdoor app estimates that population to be over 6,000- and includes Torrance.
Apples and oranges. Stating that "80% of future residents will be from PV." How could anyone possibly know? BCHD has received 3 million in funding for allcove to support the youth of the Beach Cities cope with mental health, family, and addiction issues- and this groups solution to addressing this public health emergency is to disband that effort and dissolve BCHD.
posted 6.24.22
on The hextdoor. com site
Mark N.Beryl Heights • 3 days ago
Beware the BCHD Shills-of-Summer... They are out regurgitating BCHD press releases.
Should it be a war crime that BCHD tortures facts - or worse yet - conducts psychological experiments on them and throws away all the inconvenient truths? Staples Center is 950,000 sqft and BCHD is proposing 792,000 sqft for their complete build out. BCHD will be larger than every home in Beryl Heights added together. My garage is only 400 sqft, should I claim that's the size of my house using BCHD logic? Yes, BCHD downsized the RCFE building and super-sized an 8-10 story parking ramp at Prospect & Diamond that will tower over Torrance and Redondo Beach neighborhoods and operate 24/7/365. Oops, BCHD left out that nearly 300,000 sqft surface building. Another comparison is that CenterCal's voter rejected mall-by-the-sea was only 45-feet tall and 550,000 sqft. BCHD plans 110-feet above Beryl Street. Of course BCHD measures from inside their proposed courtyard so they can skip the inconvenient truth that BCHD is on a 30-foot hill. As far as PACE goes, PACE's national association states that only 1 in 1,000 seniors uses PACE. We have fewer than 17,000 seniors in the three beach cities that own BCHD. Why is BCHD proposing a 400 person facility for 383 non-residents and at most 17 residents? Math and facts can be so inconvenient. Same with the BCHD RCFE. In the $12,500/month (pre-inflation) assisted living, 80% of tenants will be non-residents, primarily from PV. PV never paid one dime to BCHD formation and support. And BCHD "allcove" facility is even worse. A full 91% of the service are of "allcove" is Long Beach, Torrance, and other bigger cities. Yet, BCHD is building a permanent facility for "allcove" on Redondo Beach publicly owned and zoned land. BCHD isn't actually building or owning this facility. They are leasing our public land to a 3rd party commercial developer. In fact we expect the developer to emerge from the shadows soon with the BCHD-granted title of Developer/Owner/Operator along with a big long 50-100 year lease for our public owned and zoned land. If the BCHD CEO and Board want to be commercial developers, then they need to all resign and join a company. If they want to be fiduciaries for the three beach cities, they need to give us back our land and not build for 80-96% non-residents. https://easyreadernews.com/letters-to-the-editor-6-23-22/ From: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 12:35 PM
To: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Subject: ACTION ALERT - Request for Letters regarding BCD's Over Development BCHD has engaged its $10K/month PR consultant and volunteers (with free lunches) to orchestrate letter writing campaigns. We need to do so also. After the 4th, we are going to put out weekly messages that folks can use as a base to make comments to Mayors, Councils, Planning Commissions, Media, and other Elected Representatives.
Below is our response to Easy Reader to Bakaly's letter. Folks have been getting some excellent letters published lately, and we need to step up the heat. Enjoy the 4th! Bakaly's letter along with high quality commentary from Lara Duke at the link below. Lara and Geoff Gilbert alsc scored letters in The Beach Reporter this week. CONGRATS! https://easyreadernews.com/letters-to-the-editor-6-30-22/ The Team @ StopBCHD.com
RESOURCES & SUGGESTIONS
Email list for comments/concerns - we'll mail them all! [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Don't forget Social Media - if you see posts about BCHD, by all means comment! We need to show our strength. -- Forwarded message --
From: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 12:18 PM
Subject: StopBCHD.com's Response to Tom Bakaly's Easy Reader News Letter To: Kevin Cody <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>. <[email protected]>
The following is also provided as a Brown Act non-agenda item comment to Redondo Beach, Torrance, Hermosa Beach, and Manhattan Beach Mayors, Councils and Planning Commissions:
Dear Easy Reader:
No, community quality-of-life organizations will not meet with CEO Bakaly or the BCHD Board. BCHD has failed to meet the neighborhood's needs and BCHD publicizes the meetings but ignores the neighborhood's input. That's on BCHD.
BCHD increased the height of the proposed commercial developer/owner/operator project from 60-feet in 2019, to 76-feet in 2020, to 103-feet in 2021. At the same time that BCHD downsized the assisted living facility, it removed 160,000 sqft of underground parking and added an 8-10 story elevated parking ramp above the Prospect & Diamond intersection. That resulted in a net increase in surface buildings dominating the neighborhoods.
Yet to hear BCHD tell the story, it reduced the size of the development. That's nonsense, it is taller and larger than 2019, and over twice as tall as the voter-rejected CenterCal mall-by-the-sea. BCHD is about twice as large as well.
According to page 2 of BCHD's pre-CUP filing at the City of Redondo, its current Phase 1 building is proposed to be 108'-8" tall and 292,170 sqft. That single building is taller than 100% of the existing buildings and nearly the size of The leader of this group called me a "shill" for my recent public statements supporting BCHD. I have served the residents of the Beach Cities as a volunteer for almost 16 years- as have thousands. I have seen the tremendous benefits to our community. I support replacing a decaying building with one that allows the residents of this community to be served better and more efficiently, including public green space.
And I don't have to lie to convince you.
COG, Unlimited
A Medical-Legal Consulting Corporation
Mary Drummer, R.N.
Legal Nurse Consultant
(310) 993-2791
Beryl Heights, Redondo
Beach
• Redondo Beach
88 Population: 6239 residents
• Average age: 48 years old *
Homeowners: 56%
* Average age of homeowners
U.S. Census 2010
Beryl Heights's 2021
Sent from the all new AOL app for Android