HomeMy WebLinkAbout10042021 and 09072021 Combined Emailed Comments - Item BGloria Harper
From: Lisa Roseman <mroseman@mac.com>
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2021 12:31 PM
To: Gloria Harper
Subject: October 4, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting
Attachments: October 4. Planning Commission.docx
Gloria—
I've attached my letter/email. Please include it for the Planning Commission Meeting tonight regarding Minor Use Permit 21-
2, 84B Surfside Avenue.
Thank you!
Lisa
Lisa Roseman
PO Box 480
Surfside CA 90743
Gloria Harper, City Clerk
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach CA 90740
October 4, 2021
Re: Barry Curtis, Interim Director Department of Community Development
Minor Use Permit 21-2, 84B Surfside Avenue
Dear Gloria,
I would like to acknowledge the work of Barry Curtis, Interim Director Department of
Community Development and his team for their attention to the Request for Minor Use Permit
21-2, 84B Surfside Avenue. Their robust response to the concerns of Surfside Architectural
Review Committee and Surfside shareholders has resulted in a productive process. The Revised
Plan reduces the visibility of the proposed covered roof access "doghouse" by 40%. The
downsizing of the structure above the 35 -foot standard accurately reflects the homes
immediately surrounding 84B.
Sincerely,
Lisa Roseman
Gloria Harper
From: Angie <age]eke@ hotm aim >
Sent: M onday, Septem ber 0 6, 2 0 2 1 9:42 PM
To: G bra H roper
Subj ect : Re he#htexem ptiDn request 84b SurEsdde Ave
To the Seal Beach Planning Commission:
The requested height exemption for 84b Surfside Ave. would adversely affect my use and enjoyment of the
property I own and live in in Surfside. My residence is 83b and is directly next door to the property
requesting the exemption.
As a resident and property owner in the community, part of the appeal of Surfside is of course the proximity to
the ocean and the views of the ocean and harbor that we have from our homes. Part of what enables these views
from so many of the homes is compliance with the maximum height rules. Anything exceeding the maximum
height would directly impede both my views of the ocean and of the harbor as well as my daily views of the
sunset. Such an obstruction of a coveted view would thereby significantly lower my property value and my
resell potential.
In addition part of what makes this community so great is that all the homes have to follow the maximum height
requirement, thereby allowing for the majority of the homes to maximize their potential views. Departure from
these rules creates chaos and unnecessary obstructions for all the residents. The maximum height limit is in
place for a reason, and there is no reason to alter that height limit in this case.
Finally , it should be made clear that the map provided with the notice is inaccurate. The numbers are off by
one. In fact the house that the arrow is pointing to is 85. And the numbers should be shifted down the row
accordingly.
As a member of this community I definitely appreciate the effort to beautify and upgrade the existing home at
84B, however that should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties. Such a dramatic height
addition would not only effect my use and enjoyment as a direct neighbor but also would effect any home that is
already at the maximum allowable height. Any home within the line of sight of 84b that is at the maximum
height and that has a view will no longer have one If this exemption is granted. I'm asking the planning
commission to consider the other residents in the community and deny the exemption request accordingly.
Thank you
Angie Christides
83b Surfside Ave.
Gloria Harper
From: Eliobeth Be3be3jdh < ej:)eiberidh@ gm a2nom >
Sent: Tuesday,Septem ber07,2021 2.46 PM
To: Gbi�a Harper
Subject: Heaidig for84B tonight
Dear Ms. Harper,
We are long standing residences to Surfside and have done several remodels
through the years. It is a common practice and tradition in Surfside to not go over the 35 foot height when
building a home.
We are not a big city with large properties but a small community who values our neighbors and the
colony rules.
In saying this, we totally oppose the variance on the property height of their new home, by Mark Wheeler, but
instead to remain at the 35 feet, the remaining colony members abide by.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen and Elizabeth Berberich
A-80 Surfside Avenue
Elizabeth Berberich
www.marrvinalaterinlife.com
Gloria Harper
From: Lynna@gtkonnectinc.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2021 6:57 AM
To: Gloria Harper
Subject: Public Comment for Tonight's Meeting attached
Attachments: PC Public Comment 09 07 21.pdf
Please submit attached to the Planning Commission.
Please confirm receipt of this email.
Thank you.
Lynn
Good Evening Commissioners,
My name is Lynn Alfieri and I live in the trailer park.
A few months ago I submitted a completed MUP application for a neighbor who wants to install a new
standard 2 story manufactured home. We were on the agenda for the June 7t" meeting.
Just days prior to that meeting, Marco called to advise me that our Height was about 16 inches over the
25ft maximum. Our area is zoned RHD33 (35ft) so height was not on my radar. He referred me to section S.
Development Standards for Cabana's/2 Story Manufactured Homes.
This was puzzling. It's just a 2 story. Nothing special or custom about it.
I quickly contacted the retailer and he apologized because he had automatically included 9ft ceilings, he
was unaware of the height limit in Seal Beach and would revise the plans to 8ft.
Rather than accept his solution to the problem, I engaged him in a conversation about it. I found it curious
that height was not on his radar either. I pulled the item from the Agenda to regroup.
What I learned I thought is worth sharing with you on the off chance that you might find it compelling.
Today, 9ft ceilings are a popular feature in both new stick built and manufactured homes. Both come in
about 23ft (depending on roof pitch) but the manufactured home is built on 12 inch I Beam and has to be
set on a raised foundation, about 26 inches.
Our retailer has set 2 story homes with 9ft ceilings in Newport Beach, Lido Pennisula, Huntington Beach,
Hermosa Beach, Oxnard and many others. None have a height limit and all building permit
applications/approvals go thru HUD only not the city. In fact, only in Seal Beach is there any such
Development Standard and where a MUP is required. I did this MUP application because he doesn't have
the staff for it.
The Purpose and Intent of Section S. is to ensure compatibility and safety within the park. Does increasing
that maximum height by about 18" compromise either?
Respectfully I request that the planning commission revisit the language and consider updating it to read
"under 27ft" so we can enjoy this modern and rather appealing option. The original maximum height limit
was reasonable when it was written but it might not be today.
Alternative to rewriting language, perhaps consider implementing a Height Variance Specific Request Form
with Park signature to be included with our applications.
Incidentally, I also asked if the manufacturer is building 10ft ceilings. No, they can't be transported. This
won't set a precedent. It would end here.
The Retailer and the Manufacturer are both available to answer any questions. I have attached the plan
elevation, a note from the Manufacturer and Section S. for your reference.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
And btw, more grateful I could not be that Seal Beach would have the foresight, in the late 70's, to write
this Standard in the first place. Someone saw a need to protect us from ourselves because there's no doubt
we would have built 35ft cabana's if we could.
Lynn Alfieri
562-493-0353
� M '
m O N 0
W
w
Y
U
m
CR
�a
0
�e
i o "o
N (D
N cD
E
W
F -
z
O
Of
LL
W
F
6 Z
N O
q oe
N
M
G W
o M
2 m �
y00
U
vG
O N
mO
w N
>�
w
z O
C7 y � 4J
Q v y
v ,
zE Y
2 o
m
O�
_ � W
00 M
O 2? N
oLn
w LL $ Ln
w �; 9
a0 q
LL y a N
O N =
N O
O °
O arn O
o WN
O
o SN WO
A N
Vl
An w
O
T
(0
N
H
r M r LL
July 1, 2,021
To whom it may cu ter
Building homes with 9V exterior side alis is approved by HU% and is a common construction feature
offered by Fleetwood homes and throughout the industry.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 951-356-6567
Sincerely,
Gabriel Aguilar
General Sales Mang er
S. Development Standards for 2 -Story Cabanas/Manufactured Homes.
1. Purpose and Intent. In order to ensure the compatibility and safety of 2 -story cabanas or a
2 -story manufactured home within a mobile home park or trailer park, the following
development standards and procedures are established.
2. Permit Requirement. Minor use permit approval pursuant to Chapter 11.5.20:
Development Permits is required to establish a 2 -story cabana or a 2 -story manufactured home.
Determination that the proposed construction complies with the requirement of this section and
all applicable laws including the provisions in Title 25 of the California Administrative
Code shall be made by the building official.
3. Size Limitation -2 -Story Cabana. The size of a 2 -story cabana, including any existing or
proposed single -story cabanas, shall be less than the size of the mobile home or travel trailer
located on the trailer space.
4. Height Limits.
a. The maximum permitted building height shall not exceed 2 stories or 25 feet in
overall height.
b. The area between 20 feet and 25 feet in overall height shall consist exclusively of
roofing.
Decks and Balconies. No decks or balconies shall be permitted above the floor level of a
second story.
6. Safety Requirements.
a. Sprinkler system. A life safety sprinkler system shall be installed throughout the
trailer and cabana or the 2 -story manufactured home in accordance with the requirements
set forth in the California Building Code, Section 1004.2.3.2, as locally amended by City
of Seal Beach Ordinance No. 1488, Section 5-30.12, Exception 7, as may be amended.
b. Fire -rated construction. The exterior of the cabana shall be constructed of stucco, or
one-hour fire -rated material shall be installed under wood siding.
c. Title 25 compliance—Setbacks. The setbacks and clearances of Title 25, California.
Adrninistrative Code shall be applicable to all 2 -story cabanas and 2 -story manufactured
homes.
Gloria Harper
From: Ryan H all< rch-U91@ gm ailzom >
Sent: Tuesday,Septem ber07,2021 8:06 AM
To: Gbi�a Harper
Subj ect : 84B Su3fsiie Plannhg Com m isshn
To the seal beach planning
commission:
I'm writing to state that the requested use permit to exceed the maximum roof
height by 4'6" for 84B Surfside Ave would adversely affect my use and
enjoyment of the property I own and live in Surfside. My residence is 82B and is
two away from the requested permit.
As a resident and property owner in the community, part of the appeal of Surfside
is of course the proximity to the ocean and the views of the ocean and harbor that
we have from our homes. Part of what enables these views from so many of the
homes is compliance with the maximum height rules. Anything exceeding the
maximum height would directly impede both my views of the ocean and of the
harbor as well as my daily views of the sunset. Such an obstruction of a coveted
view would thereby significantly lower my property value and
my resale potential.
In addition part of what makes this community so great is that all the homes have
to follow the maximum height requirement, thereby allowing for the majority of
the homes to maximize their potential views. Departure from these rules creates
chaos and unnecessary obstructions for all the residents. The maximum height
limit is in place for a reason, and there is no reason to alter that height limit in this
case.
Finally, it should be made clear that the map provided with the notice is
inaccurate. The numbers are off by one. In fact the house that the arrow is
pointing to is 85. And the numbers should be shifted down the row accordingly.
As a member of the community I definitely appreciate the effort to beautify and
upgrade the existing home at 8413, however that should not be done at the expense
of the neighboring properties. Such a dramatic height addition would not only
effect my use and enjoyment as a direct neighbor but also would effect any home
that is already at the maximum allowable height. Any home within the line of
sight that is at the maximum height that has a view will no longer have one If this
exemption is granted.
I'm asking the planning commission to consider the other residents in the community and deny
the exemption request accordingly.
Thank you
Ryan 82 B
Ryan C. Hill
15209 Springdale Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Cell: (714) 785 3333
Fax: (714) 8917338
Email: rchill9l(&gmail.com