Minutes 76-07-20MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL
HELD
July 20, 1976
The adjourned regular meeting of the Cypress City Council
was called to order at 7:40 p.m. on Tuesday, July 20, 1976
in the Cypress City Council Chambers, 5275 Orange Avenue,
Cypress, California, Mayor Alice MacLain presiding°
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Harvey, Hudson, Lacayo
MacLain
Councilwoman Sonju
and
Also present were Assistant City Manager Douglas Dunlap,
attorney Elizabeth Strauss, and the following City staff
members: Hawley, Powell and Schatzeder.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilman Harvey led the pledge to
the flag.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor MacLain asked if anyone wished
to speak in regard to any matter which was not on the agenda.
Mr. Joe Hardcastle, 4588 Blanca Drive, Cypress, criticized
the recent oil coating of several streets and reported the
oil was applied unevenly in certain spots. He stated oil
was also sprayed on his camper, landscaping and garage door
but the contractor missed a strip of pavement along the curb.
The Public Works Director explained the oil coating process.
Councilman Lacayo requested the Public Works Department
to inspect the streets which have been coated and direct the
contractor to correct any deficient areas before payment is
made by the City. He requested a report at the July 26
meeting.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
#76-1, ARLAN PROPERTY: Mayor MacLain reopened the public
hearing and asked for the staff's report.
Mr. Dunlap reported he transmitted to the City Council the
land use plan submitted by a resident designated Plan H,
a communication from the Airport Land Use Commission dated
July 16, 1976 reporting on their action on the development
plan approved by the Planning Commission, and a letter from
Safeway Stores expressing comments on the Planning Commission's
action. The Mayor included these correspondence in the public
record.
The Planning Director suggested that the Council
cussion at this hearing to comments on land use
as well as the EIR.
open dis-
alternatives
Mr. Kaleb Nelson of Envista discussed the EIR preparation
process and spoke on the adequacy of the EIR for the Arlan
property. He stated the EIR process is designed to allow
for full public disclosure of the impacts of a particular
project on the environment and to provide for public feedback
into the decision making process. The EIR must cover all
basic environmental categories such as air quality, traffic,
topography, geology and should also address particular areas
of concern which in this case was economics. Mr. Nelson
City Council Minutes July 20, 1976
stated the function of the EIR is to identify problems, not
offer solutions. He stated the purpose also is not to argue
over the merits or demerits of a particular proposal. Mr.
Nelson felt the EIR for the Arlan property was consistent
with the level of detail of the application, the General Plan
amendment. More precise concerns will be addressed later
in environmental impact reports for specific developments.
Mr. Nelson stated that all public comments, many of which
were beyond the level of detail which needs to be addressed
in a General Plan amendment, were responded to in writing.
He felt the EIR is objective and that the areas of critical
concern were addressed at the necessary level of detail. He
requested that he be able to respond to questions when they
are presented.
The Planning Director presented a slide of the land use mix
designated as Plan D which is the plan as recommended by the
Planning Commission. He reported the Commission approved
the phasing program recommended by the Administrative Coor-
dinating Team. The Team made the following recommendations
to ensure public improvements for the property which amount
to over $4 million:
Programs involving cooperation of the property owner
for solicitation of outside funding from county, state
or federal agencies should be considered where possible;
Drainage fees for the entire property, which amount to
$1100 per acre, shall be deposited by the developer as
a condition of each phase of development;
Deeds to the right of way for the widening of all
arterial streets, including the extension of Holder
Street, shall be provided as a condition of the first
phase of development. Mr. Hawley pointed out that
the dedication of rights of way is necessary to apply
for outside funding.
Prior to the start of any subsequent phase of develop-
ment, the preceding phase must be reviewed by the
Planning Commission and City Council for adequacy and
compliance with the General Plan amendment.
Mr. Hawley stated that the City must allow a two
period between applying and receiving funds from
or federal agencies.
year leeway
county, state
Councilman Harvey inquired about the findings of the EIR
citizens' review committee, Planning Commission and staff
regarding the adequacy of the environmental impact report.
The Planning Director reported that all three groups accepted
the EIR as adequate and found it complies with state require-
ments and meets the basic requirements of City Resolution
#1584 which implements the objectives of the California
Environmental Quality Act. He stated the Planning Commission
emphasized that the EIR is designed to bring out impacts
and identify problems but is not required to find solutions.
He stated the EIR does offer some mitigating measures in
certain areas but also points out that there are good and
bad aspects regardless of the development plan. Mr. Hawley
felt many of the public comments objecting to the EIR were
extrapolations of problems which the EIR brought out.
He stated it is difficult for the EIR to address specifics
of development when they are unknown; for instance, the
type of commercial and industrial uses proposed is unknown.
He added that supplemental environmental impact reports
will be required for each phase of development to supplement
the general responses in the draft EIR.
2 o
City Council Minutes July 20, 1976
Mr. Hawley also reported on the property owner's response
to Plan D recommended by the Planning Commission. The
Planning Commission changed the designations of Areas 2 and
11 from residential to industrial with some retail commercial
and changed Area 6 from agricultural transition to residential.
The property owner objected to retail commercial areas west
of Valley View and felt they would decrease the viability
of commercial areas planned at the intersection of Katella
and Valley View. He suggested that all areas west of Valley
View have an industrial designation. The owner indicated
he preferred the original development plan but accepted
all industrial west of Valley View and a residential desig-
nation for Area 6. At the final Planning Commission hearing,
the Commission also changed the designation in Area 9 from
retail commercial and patio homes to all industrial/commercial.
Area 6 was changed from townhouses to patio homes to corres-
pond with the owner's original plan. Mr. Hawley said there
was no official response from the owner regarding the phasing
program.
RECESS: Mayor MacLaln called a recess at 9:00 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 9:15 with Councilwoman
Sonju absent.
Mayor MacLain asked if the applicant wished to speak.
Mr. Louis Warschaw, 417 S. Hill, Los Angeles, representing
the property owner, stated they tried to come up with a plan
that would be acceptable to the City and citizens and they
felt the plan was suitable to themselves and the City. He
stated they are prepared to proceed with the revised Plan Do
Mr. Warschaw stated their intentions for the property are:
they're willing to sell and are actively pursuing the sale
to industrial users; they are willing to build and lease to
users. He stated they want a balanced and versatile devel-
opment in order to finance the property and that income from
the residential development will be used to finance develop-
ment of the industrial property. The property owner felt
the property is not a good location for a regional shopping
center since it is away from freeways. He felt the best
development would be a large community center with small
convenience centers and the rest must be developed indus-
trially. He stated they are willing to proceed on that
basis, otherwise it would take many more years to develop
the property because the cost of improvements, which he
estimated at $25,000 per acre, would be too great a burden.
He urged the Council to approve Plan D so that they may
proceed with development. Mr. Warschaw stated he hoped the
City would be willing to share the cost of public improve-
ments. He stated the phasing program would be inconvenient
but they will go along with it. Mr. Warschaw stated they
did not want to participate in applying for the EDA grant
because it meant expending funds without knowing if the
plan would be approved by the voters. He stated the most
they could receive from grant sources was only a couple of
million dollars. He indicated if they received approval
for an overall plan then they would proceed. Mr. Warschaw
stated his estimate for improvements included recompaction
of the soil and storm and sanitary sewer facilities.
Councilman Hudson asked if the property owner was aware of
the Airport Land Use Commission's action on July 15 after
reviewing the development plan for the Arlan property. Mr.
Warschaw stated he was not advised of their action. Council-
City Council Minutes
July 20, 1976
man Hudson reported that portions of Areas 6 and 10, proposed
for residential use, fall within the 65 CNEL zone which
the Airport Land Use Commission designates as unacceptable
for residential use. He noted that a four-fifths vote is
necessary to override the Airport Land Use Commission and
a housing mix in that area of influence might prevent the
project from going to a vote of the residents of Cypress.
Councilman Hudson read from the July 16 letter from the
Airport Land Use Commission describing their action on July
15: "The Airport Land Use Commission then moved to: Inform
the Cypress City Council that the ALUC recommends against
putting residential units within the 60 CNEL and normally
interposes an objection to residential units within the 65
CNEL. Additionally, inform the Cypress City Council that
noise impact within a 60 CNEL contour is sufficient to require
sound insulation as required by California Noise Insulation
Standards and that adequate provisions should be included
in the General Plan text to provide for sound attenuation
and notice to buyers of aircraft noise. In view of the
Department of Defense's activity in determining the actual
future use of the Air Station, Commission strongly urges
the Cypress City Council to delay action on the Proposed
Plan Amendment for sixty days."
Councilman Harvey recommended that the first portion of the
letter be included in the record which reports on the motion
which failed to carry which stated: "Inform the Cypress
City Council that even though the ALUC recommends against
putting residential units within the 60 CNEL and would nor-
mally interpose an objection to residential units within the
65 CNEL, the land use changes adopted by the Cypress Planning
Commission on June 3, 1976 for the Arlan Property General
Plan Amendment are sufficiently compatible with the Airport
Environs Land Use for NAS, Los Alamitos, so that the Airport
Land Use Commission would not interpose an objection to the
project. Additionally, inform the Cypress City Council that
noise impact within a 60 CNEL contour is sufficient to require
sound insulation as required by California Noise Insulation
Standards and that adequate provisions should be included
in the General Plan text to provide for sound attenuation
and notice to buyers of aircraft noise. In view of the
Department of Defense's activity in determining the actual
future use of the Air Station, Commission strongly urges
the Cypress City Council to delay action on the Proposed
Plan Amendment for sixty days."
It was moved by Councilman Harvey, seconded by Councilman
Hudson and unanimously carried that the Airport Land Use
Commission's communication dated July 16, 1976 be included
in the record. Councilman Hudson stated for the record that
he abstained on the ALUC's motion.
Mr. Warschaw commented on the development plan. In regard
to Area 9 which the Planning Commission designated for com-
mercial/industrial use, he felt it would be difficult to
develop industrial here and he supported residential use
in this area. He did not support retail commercial use in
Area 2 and preferred it designated for industrial use. He
felt commercial development here would compete with the
large commercial development proposed just south. Mr.
Warschaw felt small strip commercial centers in various
locations would not enhance the City and it would be more
beneficial to have a large community center in a good loca-
tion.
City Council Minutes July 20, 1976
Councilman Harvey asked if the staff was going to make a
presentation on Plan H. The Assistant City Manager advised
that the staff has made in depth analyses of General Plan
amendment applications which have been submitted with the
appropriate filing fee and, unless requested by the Council,
would not do an analysis of Plan H since it was submitted
as a communication to the Planning Commission.
Lt. Commander Brown, Los Alamitos Naval Air Station, presented
noise and crash hazard maps prepared by the Navy for areas
surrounding the Air Station which were based on projected
fixed wing, non-jet aircraft operations. The maps indicated
that half the Arlan project site is within the CNR 2 noise
zone (comparable to CNEL 65 noise contour) and most of the
project site is within the APZ I (high crash hazard) zone.
Residential uses are inconsistent with the APZ 1 classifica-
tion. He asked that the Council consider the maps carefully
and that the aircraft impact be included more substantially
in the EIRo Commander Brown read from the House Armed Services
Committee's report dated June 4, 1976 which stated the Com-
mittee did not feel the decision by DOD directing the Navy
to move out the reserve operations and turn the base over
to the Army recognized new initiatives by the Navy for Naval
air reserve flight operations. He also read from a letter
from Rear Admiral Mac Kenzie which indicated the Navy has
submitted a plan to the Office of the Secretary of Defense
whereby the Navy would remain at Los Alamitos and conduct
environmentally compatible fixed wing, turbo prop flight
operations. Commander Brown stated the Navy's proposal
has gone beyond the lower echelon of decision making and
Mr. Rogner of DOD. He stated Mr. Rogner supports moving
the Navy out of Los Alamitos. Commander Brown reported
the Navy's operations are f~lnded up to October 1, 1976 and
that notice to civilians must be given 60 days prior to this
so a decision on the base's future use should be made by
the end of July. He reported on current aircraft operations
at Los Alamitos.
Councilman Lacayo requested that the City Manager contact
the appropriate officials in Washington, including Mr. Rogner,
and try to obtain information regarding the Air Station's
future status prior to the next hearing. Councilman Hudson
suggested that the Mayor meet with Mr. Rogner during her
trip to Washington in August.
Mayor MacLain noted it was 10:00 p.m. The Council agreed
to continue the meeting until 10:30 p.m.
Mr. Howard Rowen, 5831 8hirl Street, Cypress, stated Mr.
Rogner has been trying since 1970 to get the Navy out of
Los Alamitos and it is public information that Mr. Rogner's
superior has stated that the removal of the Navy would not
change flight activity. Mr. Rowen asked that Plan H be
evaluated in the economic report and considered as one of
the alternatives.
Mr. Henry Roberts, 6841 Tonga Circle, Cypress, reported the
concern of the Chamber of Commerce's Arlan Property Study
Committee related to the phasing program. The Committee
suggested that on-site and off-site improvements be constructed
first. With the public improvements in and additional finan-
cing, the residential portions would not have to be developed
first to finance the remaining development. The Committee
was also concerned that if residential development is allowed
to precede industrial and commercial development, the resi-
dents might object to industrial and commercial development
adjacent to them. Mr. Roberts felt it would be appropriate
to continue the hearing until more facts are received and
more Chamber members are able to address the Council.
5 o
City Council Minutes July 20, 1976
Hearing no objections, Mayor MacLain announced the public
hearing would be continued.
CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TO
ATTEND A LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES COMMITTEE MEETING: Mr.
Dunlap presented a report dated July 15 which requested
authorization for him to attend the League Administrative
Services Committee's meeting on July 22 in Berkeley. He was
appointed a member of that Committee.
It was moved by Councilman Hudson, seconded by Councilman
Lacayo and unanimously carried to authorize the Assistant
City Manager to attend the July 22, 1976 meeting of the
Administrative Services Committee in Berkeley and that all
necessary and actual expenses be reimbursed.
The Council reviewed and approved the proposed masthead for
the August issue of Cypress Review. Councilman Hudson suggested
that the Council adopt a uniform masthead.
Councilman Harvey suggested that the Mayor send a communica-
tion to Mr. Rogner indicating the status of the General Plan
amendment, advising that she will be in Washington, and re-
questing an appointment with him to discuss the future status
of Los Alamitos Air Station.
The Council agreed to continue the public hearing regarding
General Plan amendment #76-1, Arlan Property, to Tuesday,
August 10 at 7:30 p.m.
Councilman Lacayo requested that the Council set an adjourn-
ment time of 10:30 p.m. for the regular Council meeting on
August 9.
ADJOURNMENT:
It was moved by Councilman Hudson, seconded by Councilman
Lacayo and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at
10:30 p.m. to Monday, July 26, at 6:30 p.m.
MAYOR OF ~{E CITY OF CYPRESS
ATTEST:
CI~PY CLEkK OF THLF CITY OF CYPRESS