HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1994-02-14
.1
.1
1
,-.
, ..
1-24-94 I 2-14-94
however the separation of major portions of the community is a
concern given the location of the fault line through the city,
to which there is an effort to encourage Surfs ide Colony to have
a link with Huntington Beach should there be damage to the
transportation corridor, likewise College Park East and Rossmoor
with Los Alamitos and Garden Grove, and College Park West with
Long Beach. It was noted that no large gas lines traverse the
fault line, yet there is one line on Lampson, one near the steam
plant, and the off-shore oil line runs First street to Pacific
Coast Highway and north on PCH. The Mayor encouraged all
residents to secure their homes and belongings and noted that
the Planning Scenario cites the potential of citizens being on
their own for up to seventy-two hours, and suggested that they
become familiar with nearby Neighborhood Watch programs,
identification of local sources of medical assistance, etc.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no Oral communications.
CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session was held.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to
adjourn the meeting until Monday, February 14th, 1994 at 6:00
p.m. to meet in Closed Session. The meeting was adjourned by
unanimous consent at 8:03 p.m.
of the
Approved:
Attest:
Seal Beach, California
February 14, 1994
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
adjourned session at 6:05 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the
meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL ~l\T.'L
Present:
Mayor Forsythe
Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Hastings, Laszlo
Absent: None
Also present: Mr. Bankston, city Manager
Mr. Barrow, city Attorney
Mrs. Yeo, city Clerk
2-14-94
CLOSED SESSION
The city Attorney reported the Council would meet in Closed
Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to
discuss the Stark versus City of Seal Beach matter, SA CV 93-
360-LTL(RWRx), another matter pursuant to subsection (b) the'
City Council has determined, based on existing facts, that there
is significant exposure to litigation. It was the order of the 1-'
Chair, with consent of the council, to adjourn to Closed Session
at 6:06 p.m. The Council reconvened at 6:41 .p.m. with Mayor
Forsythe calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney
announced that the Council had discussed the two items of
pending litigation, gave direction to the City Attorney with
regard to one of those matters, and no further action was taken.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to
adjourn the meeting at 6:42 p.m.
Jh
the
Clerk and ex-off1C10
of Seal Beach
Approved:
~u.. /d.oA>~'
Mayor
Attest:
I
Seal Beach, California
February 14, 1994
The city Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
session at 7:08 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to
order with the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Forsythe
Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Hastings, Laszlo
Absent:
None
Also present: Mr. Bankston, city Manager
Mr. Barrow, city Attorney
Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development
Services
Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk
I"
WAIVER OF FULL READING
Brown moved, second by Hastings, to waive the reading in full of
all ordinances and resolutions and that consent to the waiver of
reading shall be deemed to be given by all Councilmembers after
reading of the title unless specific request is made at that
time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution.
AYES:
NOES:
Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
None Motion carried
I
I
I
2-14-94
PRESENTATION
Mayor Forsythe read in full a proclamation declaring the week of
February 13th through February 19th, 1994 as "Vocational
Education Week." Mayor Forsythe introduced Ms. Jeanne Flint,
member of the Los Alamitos School Board, and commended her
efforts in working for the betterment and education of children
for nearly nine years. The Mayor presented Ms. Flint with the
proclamation, and noting her upcoming relocation from the city
of Seal Beach, presented a city plaque personally recognizing
her services as a member of the School Board. Ms. Flint
accepted the proclamation and memento with appreciation.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Galen
Ambrose, Seal Beach, made reference to the upcoming election and
recalled that event four years past. Mayor Forsythe interjected
a request that political comments be avoided in the Council
Chambers, and inquired if a policy exists to accomplish that.
The city Attorney responded that an oral policy has been passed
down through the years for people to refrain from political
comments, however explained that persons have the right to speak
and may not choose to honor that policy. Mr. Ambrose said he
wanted to see property values maintained, he did not want to see
another land use court battle at considerable cost to the City,
commended the current Council for having done a fine job, his
personal desire is that people understand what could come about
if other people were handling City business for the citizens,
and stated he was campaigning for no one. Acknowledging that
there are business persons running for office, Mr. Ambrose
stated his concern is that people equate building, business,
etc. with progress, yet to him progress is quality of life, not
rampant development, subsidizing businesses, businesses in Seal
Beach are meant for the convenience of the citizens. He
suggested that people look at the destruction of property values
in surrounding communities as a result of development, and there
are some promoting more development in Seal Beach because of the
value of property. Mr. Ambrose said he wanted his quality of
life and property values protected, that businesses should not
be subsidized and should succeed on their own merit. Dr. Robert
Feldmeth introduced himself as a Professor of Environmental
Biology at the Claremont Colleges, as well as biological
consultant to the land owner of Bolsa Chica since 1970, and
requested to address the City's comments, specifically Comment
5, to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed
Bolsa Chica project, given his understanding that there are
concerns regarding the potential impacts of the Bolsa Chica
restoration alternatives on the Anaheim Bay wetlands and the
Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. In terms of wildlife
impacts Dr. Feldmeth said the Bolsa Chica restoration will have
the greatest impact on birds, resident bird species continually
move around and seek habitat that is optimal for feeding and
breeding, they do that now and will continue to do so when the
construction and restoration begins, at Bolsa Chica they will
probably move away from construction areas, may move to other
parts of the lowland, or there is a possibility that they will
be displaced and move into adjacent areas like the Anaheim Bay
wetlands; migratory species, such as shore birds and water fowl,
that move up and down the Pacific flyway in spring and fall will
stop at Anaheim Bay, Bolsa Chica, and upper Newport Bay for
feeding and resting purposes; the largest group, the shore
birds, migrate at various times of year, use the mudflat areas
for feeding and openflat for resting and at present the only
habitat for them to feed in the Bolsa Chica area is the outer
Bolsa Bay, the long strip along Pacific Coast Highway south of
Warner Avenue, water birds use the inland portion of the Bay
where there is fresher water ponded behind dikes in the oil
fields. Describing the two plans for this land and the impacts
2-14-94
to Seal Beach, Dr. Feldmeth first made reference to the Koll
proposed plan, creating a large tidal bay connected to the ocean
by a tidal inlet and at low tide much of this Bay will be
mudflat providing a feeding area for various birds similar to
the Anaheim Bay mudflat at low tide, this Bay and the associated
habitats around it will provide more habitat for sensitive
species, the population of which will likely increase because of 1
this restoration. Migratory birds will avoid any construction
areas but will use the outer Bay area that will be left as it
exists, will not be dredged, therefore a problem should not be
realized. The overall impact of the Koll plan in terms of
wildlife affects will be diversion of flood control waters from
the East Garden Grove Flood Control Channel into the ocean
through the large tidal bay, no longer flowing into Huntington
Harbor and Anaheim Bay, a positive aspect of the proposed Koll
project, and there are no negative impacts foreseen on the Seal
Beach and Anaheim Bay areas in terms of wildlife impacts. Dr.
Feldmeth said the County plan has water coming through Anaheim
Bay and Huntington Harbor and flowing into the Bolsa Chica area,
a much smaller tidal bay, the Flood Control Channel will
continue to be routed as it is now, therefore flood control
impacts on outer Bolsa Bay and Huntington Harbor will be the
same, a large channel will need to be dredged in the outer Bolsa
Bay and the bridge on Warner Avenue widened, thus the impact of
the County plan is that there will continue to be flood control
effects upon Huntington Harbor and the Seal Beach wetlands, and
the birds will likely not do as well under this plan during the
period of construction, displaced from the outer Bolsa Bay. He
concluded that the Anaheim Bay, Newport Bay and Bolsa Chica all
have considerable area for more birds because there has been a
reduction in the Pacific flyway numbers, about a thirty percent
reduction during the last twenty-five years, the reason for that 1
remaining uncertain however possibly due to habitat destruction
in South America. Ms. Carla Watson, Seal Beach, recalled
February 14th as the birthday of a former resident who would
have been one hundred years old today and used to tell children
that wetlands are like a filling stations for birds, on which
they depend. Ms. Watson made reference to an ecology book from
which she read the quote "why should any person, group or
commercial enterprise have the right to intrude upon or
interfere with the natural and orderly life of other cultures or
bioregions." There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe
declared Oral Communications closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "B" thru "N"
Councilman Doane requested Item "G" be removed from the consent
Calendar. Councilman Laszlo questioned the current meeting
schedule of the Recreation Commission. The City Manager
reported the Commission has been meeting quarterly for some
time. Hastings moved, second by Brown, to approve the
recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar, except
Item "G", as presented.
B.
Approved regular demands numbered 4361
through 4563 in the amount of $554,017.79
and payroll demands numbered 5267 through
5439 in the amount of $209,823.10 as approved
by the Finance Committee, and authorized
warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for
same.
I'
C. Received and filed the 1992/93 Annual Financial
Statements for the Seal Beach Administration
Building Authority.
D. Received and filed the Parks and Recreation
Commission Resolution Number 93-1 amending their
I
I
I
",
"
'Q"" >:,
. r' ,~-t
2-14-94
meetings days to be the fourth Wednesday of the
months of January, March, May, July, September,
and November.
E.
Adopted Resolution Number 4285 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH DENYING CUP NO. 92-7, A REQUEST FOR
THE INSTITUTION OF OPERATIONS AT OIL SEPARATION
FACILITIES ON A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER 199-010-10 (UNOCAL, 99 MARINA DRIVE.)" By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 4285 was waived.
F. Received and filed the monthly investment report
as of December 31, 1993.
H. Adopted Resolution Number 4286 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF THE NORTH
AND SOUTH BOUND TURNPOCKETS LOCATED AT THE MAIN
STREET/PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 4286 was waived.
I. Accepted the resignation of Mr. Tom Quinn,
District One representative to the Beach
Commission.
J.
Approved the introduction of Ordinance Number
1382 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 1313," (establishing the Beach Commission),
and passed Ordinance Number 1382 to second reading.
By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinance
Number 1382 was waived.
K. Received and filed the staff report relating to
the review of the "AICUZ Study, Los Alamitos Army
Airfield."
L. Accepted the proposal from Willdan Associates for
Assessment Engineering Services for Lighting
District No. 1.
M. Adopted Resolution Number 4287 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA,
ESTABLISHING VOTING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES,
APPOINTING PRECINCT BOARD MEMBERS AND FIXING
COMPENSATION FOR THE PRIMARY MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 29th, 1994." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 4287 was waived.
N. Approved the minutes of the regular meetings of
January lOth and January 24th, 1994.
AYES:
NOES:
Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
None Motion carried
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM "G" - ADOPT A HIGHWAY PROGRAM
Councilman Doane said he wished to personally and on behalf of
the residents of Leisure World thank the Rotary Club for their
adoption of Seal Beach Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway
and Beverly Manor Road for litter control and removal through
the Adopt A Highway Program. Brown moved, second by Doane, to
2-14-94
establish an "Adopt A Highway" Program and authorize the Seal
Beach Rotary Club to adopt Seal Beach Boulevard between Pacific
Coast Highway and Beverly Manor Road.
AYES:
NOES:
Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
None Motion carried
CITY RESPONSE - DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - PROPOSED 1-
BOLSA CHICA PROJECT
The Director of Development Services presented the staff report
and draft response letter, revised pursuant to additional
concerns expressed by the Environmental Quality Control Board,
to the proposed Bolsa Chica project Draft Environmental Impact
Report. The Director emphasized that the primary purpose of the
matter before the Council is to provide comments to the County
of Orange as to the adequacy of the documentation provided as
part of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa
Chica Project. He noted that the focus of staff has primarily
been to those areas felt to have the greatest direct and
indirect impact on the City of Seal Beach and its residents, a
prime concern being traffic, and based upon discussions of the
Environmental Quality Control Board, the impact of Bolsa Chica
wetland restoration projects on the National Wildlife Refuge,
mutual aid agreements between adjQ.ining cities and the County,
and the Armed Forces Reserve Center in performing its function
as a Disaster Support Area. He pointed out that of the sixteen
pages of response comments, staff focus dealt with three major
areas, one being that in several instances the document states
that it only deals with the portions of the project located
within the County of Orange, and although approximately five
hundred of the proposed housing units are actually in the city 1_
of Huntington Beach, the analysis is not clear if it includes
the impacts of those five hundred units or only the 4,286 units
in the unincorporated County area. The second major concern was
with the traffic analysis where the indications throughout the
report were that many of the project alternatives included what
was termed to be an upsizing of Pacific Coast Highway from four
to six lanes. It was felt that proposal was not well delineated
within the EIR document, and in several instances it was
indicated that state agencies having authority to widen Pacific
Coast Highway have no intention of doing so, to which staff
comments were that if that were an infeasible mitigation measure
it should not be included in the alternatives and the EIR should
be relooked with such a measure being proposed. In addition, if
an upsizing of Pacific Coast Highway is proposed the provisions
of CEQA require that when you have a mitigation that in and of
itself would have impacts, those impacts also need to be
described in the EIR document, in this document they are not.
The document does not reflect what the impacts would be on the
communities of Surfside, Sunset Beach and Seal Beach by widening
of Pacific Coast Highway from four to six lanes, whether that
would be accomplished through the taking of privately owned
property, elimination of currently existing on-street parking
areas, what the impacts would be to the parking situation
throughout the area, noise impact from increased vehicles, air
quality impact, there is no discussion within the document of I'
any of those issues, and it is the opinion of staff that they
need to be addressed. The other major concern addressed of the
response letter is that in several of the alternatives discussed
by the County, primarily with regard to reducing the density of
the number of housing units, several of the alternatives were
dismissed fairly early in the analysis process with the general
comment that the developer indicated he would not be willing to
do the wetland restoration if the number of units were reduced
to the lower number(s), to which the response is that that is no
reason to so quickly disregard a proposed alternative, the
purpose of an EIR is to discuss environmental impacts and not
I
I
I
~. ~
2-14-94
whether a developer is particularly inclined to agree to such
alternative at the time, the comment letter suggesting that all
of the alternatives should include the wetland restoration
program, the traffic improvement program, then identify the
impacts to the reduced density project(s) if those components
were included, and the County could then make a decision based
on review of all of the alternatives and all of the impacts, it
would then be up to the developer as to whether he is willing to
agree to all of the conditions imposed by the County. Noting
that the collection of data for an environmental report is
referred to as a study area, the Mayor inquired as to the radius
of the area studied specifically with regard to circulation and
traffic in this case. The Director responded that intersections
studied would be those having an impact of three percent
additional traffic, that being the outside limit of analysis,
with apecific reference to this project the analysis would be of
Pacific Coast Highway to the intersection of Westminster/Second
Street, north to the 405 Freeway, and east on the 405 to the
intersection with Warner Avenue. With regard to the impact upon
cars reaching those points, the Director explained that the
significance of less than three percent of the existing level of
traffic, as defined in the Congestion Management Plan for Orange
County, would be determined to not be a significant impact on an
intersection therefore anything below the three percent
threshold is not addressed. The Mayor inquired about the
reference to Plan 2010. The Director indicated that Plan is a
reference to a post 2010 buildout, explaining that one EIR
analysis is a projection of current levels of development and
current levels of traffic that would occur up to the year 2010
assuming the Bolsa Chica project is not developed, another
analysis shows what would occur with projects that have already
been approved and additional people moving into Southern
California between now and the year 2010, an additional level of
analysis then takes those levels of increased traffic, adds to
it the traffic that would be generated by this particular
project to give the cumulative impact of future projected
traffic regionwide. The Mayor then surmised that the post 2010
analysis, with or without this project, proposes a
recommendation for the widening of Pacific Coast Highway. The
Director said it is believed that the recommendation for
upsizing Pacific Coast Highway is only in relation to a proposed
project on the Bolsa Chica and it is understood that CalTrans
has no plans for widening north of Warner Avenue. Mayor
Forsythe pointed out that it is important to understand that it
is not only the Bolsa Chica development that will impact Seal
Beach, several other projects have been approved close to this
site, those projects cumulatively will generate 138,000
additional vehicular trips on the existing roadway network, the
projects already approved, plus this project, would duplicate
the population of Seal Beach, that within one mile of the City
limits. She said EIR's always seem to mitigate something to a
level of insignificance and if the impact can not be resolved
through a mitigation measure the problem then becomes an
unavoidable adverse impact with no mitigation measures. In this
case with regard to Pacific Coast Highway a quote from the EIR
was that it would exceed capacity if improvements are not made,
the mitigation/improvement provisions then state that if the
appropriate agencies do not upsize PCH it will be necessary to
file a deficiency plan, and the residual impact after
mitigation, which can not be done, is that in the case of no
upsizing of PCH the traffic impacts would be significant and
unavoidable, in other words the General Plan of the County will
be revised to reflect different number standards that will deem
the affects on Seal Beach to be non-existent. She predicted
that persons traveling to employment in the Los Angeles area
will utilize PCH as a north/south route, Seal Beach Boulevard
will be used to access the freeway, the current noise impact for
2-14-94
properties adjacent to PCH is already significant, yet the
County says nothing can be done and in turn is considering
approval of nearly five thousand more homes that will further
increase traffic noise. Mayor Forsythe pointed out as well that
an inlet will be allowed that will erode portions of the beach,
some existing homes will be prone to flooding because of the
realignment, the water quality of Huntington Harbor will I
decrease because there will not be the circulation that there
was previously, hazardous conditions will be created for
swimmers and surfers because of the revetment that will allow
for the tidal inlet, and those adverse impacts, coupled with the
proposal to widen Pacific Coast Highway north of the proposed
project, would significantly impact Sunset Beach, Surfside, and
Seal Beach. Mayor Forsythe requested that the response letter
to the County be strengthened to reflect this City'S adamant
opposition to this project as proposed given the inconsistencies
with CEQA and the Coastal Act, that the unavoidable adverse
impacts on Seal Beach are totally unacceptable, and asked that
letters received from five residents adjacent to Pacific Coast
Highway be included with the response.
Doane moved, second by Laszlo, to authorize the Mayor and EQCB
Chairman to revise the response letter to the Draft
Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Bolsa Chica Project
to reflect the City's strong position on this matter, and
authorize the Mayor and Chairman to execute the response for
submittal to the County by February 18th.
AYES:
NOES:
Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
None Motion carried
Councilmember Hastings noted that the EIR also does not I
adequately address the financial impact in the case of a seismic
event, and quoted from a communication received from Dr. Robert
winchell, Professor of Geological Sciences at Cal State
University Long Beach, claiming that it is the taxpayer who will
ultimately pay for damages to infrastructure and for emergency
services, and making reference to the response letter, the
potential that the City could eventually incur the cost of
traffic mitigation improvements, instead of mitigation being the
responsibility of the developer, emphasizing that local tax
dollars should not be used for infrastructure improvements on
behalf of the Koll Company. Mayor Forsythe added that the
current fiscal environment is different, a housing development
no longer pays for itself and is in fact a financial drain on a
local community, if approved by the County the project will also
be built to County standards which are substandard to those of
the City of Huntington Beach, and in the long term this project
will likely be annexed to Huntington Beach whereby they will
then be responsible for servicing this development.
Councilmember Hastings requested that the response letter
address the fiscal concerns. To an inquiry of Councilman
Laszlo, the City Attorney confirmed that legal actions between
jurisdictions have occurred.
It was the consensus of the Council to allow the public to I
comment on this issue. Dr. Rosenman, 8th Street, expressed
concern with the access to and adequacy of medical facilities in
the event of a disaster. Mr. Ambrose, Seal Beach, commended the
action of the Council on the Bolsa Chica EIR; urged a strong
stand at such time as this project itself is under
consideration; cited a study showing that bays and wetlands
provide a purifying factor with regard to water quality; and
there has been prior testimony that houses can not be built
around wetlands. Ms. Sebring, Bolsa Avenue, expressed her
belief that not only Seal Beach Boulevard and PCH will be
traffic impacted, that half of the Seal Beach Boulevard traffic
I
I
I
,)
.
t.~ 1'4
2-14-94
will likely exit onto Bolsa Avenue, and urged a strong response
to the EIR. Ms. Pat Taylor, Surfside, expressed appreciation
for the City response to the EIR, noted the concern of the
Colony with the impact of traffic, noise, widening of PCB, an
earthquake, and noted that Surfside homeowners are also writing
letters to this issue. Dr. Labedz, Seal Beach, Surfrider
Foundation, stated his belief that the biological aspects of
this issue is a City concern; commended the staff responses
relating to the traffic issues and addition of the Anaheim Bay
~etlands; said he felt the EIR was weak on the issue of building
houses on wetlands, is treated as a wetlands restoration
project, which it is not, where restoration is to take place
only if there is sufficient financial gain by year 2010, the
position of the developer having always been that they would do
no restoration unless they are allowed to build on the wetlands;
compared the impact of human activities on the large Anaheim Bay
wetlands to the relatively small, biodiverse Bolsa Chica
wetlands; a new solution being the Bolsa Chica Land Trust, a
proposal to buy the Bolsa for fair market value given additional
time and community support. Ms. Olson, Seal Beach, added her
concern with the environmental issues, and spoke favorably of
the land trust concept, a fair way to compensate the land owner,
and positive image for large corporations to donate to good
projects. Dr. Feldmeth, Environmental Biology Professor, said
development of the Bolsa Chica would begin about 1998,
restoration commencing about the same time; it is necessary for
the flood control improvements to be done prior to; initial
development would be of the large bay, rerouting of the flood
control channel into the bay, out to the ocean through the tidal
inlet, a six phased project; the Coastal Act allows for degraded
wetlands to be restored, if Fish and Game has found a wetland to
be degraded, twenty-five percent of the degraded wetland can be
built upon, the funds from that can be used to restore the
remaining seventy-five percent, which is the means to fund the
wetland restoration. To a question that if homes are not
allowed to be built in the wetlands lowland area by the State
regulatory agency, would the wetlands be restored, Dr. Feldmeth
indicated that there would be no funds to perform the
restoration unless funding were from another source, in other
words if no development were allowed in the lowland area the
wetlands would not be restored. Mr. Voce, Seal Beach, pointed
out the development of hundreds and thousands of houses in
Southern California, the area over-populated for infrastructure;
this property inappropriate for development due to liquefaction
and seismic conditions; the event of an earthquake along the
existing fault very likely to cause massive damage to bridges
and roadways, posing an inability to commute or receive
emergency aid; suggested that an EIR should ask the question 'is
it legitimate to interject more population into an already over-
populated area;' the availability of water is inadequate for
existing population, a major drought occurring every eight years
as well; the estimated population of the original inhabitants of
the area between the Santa Monica mountains and Orange County
was ten thousand, it is now ten million, that an example of
over-population and direct environmental concern; and the
voluminous EIR does not address all of the concerns and impacts.
Ms. Lillian Robles, an Acagchemem Elder, said some of her people
came here in 1769 and she was speaking as a Native American.
She spoke of ancient remains that have been found on the Bolsa
Chica, some six to eight thousand years old, to which she asked
what has happened to integrity and values, and what will be left
for the great grandchildren. Commending the City Council for
allowing pUblic comments to this issue, she appealed to the
Council to help her people save this land. Ms. Carla Watson,
Catalina Avenue, noted the unresponsiveness of County government
to the people, to which she said what is needed is a declaration
of interdependent government, a networking with other cities
2-14-94
that are likewise concerned with the quality of life. Dr.
Rosenman suggested the communication from Dr. Winchell be
provided the press. Ms. Sally Hirsch, Crestview Avenue,
recalled her objection when the Hellmans fenced their property,
specifically the Gum Grove, however reported a small science
experiment is now occurring adjacent to backyards where various
species of birds are returning to the area, their numbers I
continuing to increase. Councilmember Hastings inquired as to
whether the developer or taxpayers will be required to pay the
cost of upgrading the seven roadways within the LCP project
area, all of which require a Master Plan of Arterial Highways
amendment. The Director reported there is a Area Traffic
Improvement Program proposed by the Xoll Company, required to be
funded by them to provide the roadway improvements primarily in
the Huntington Beach and County areas, again noting there are no
improvements proposed for PCH north of Warner, also explained
that widening would not be involved for all streets, rather
improvements to intersections, turn lanes, signal coordination;
etc. Councilman Laszlo pointed out that the Armed Forces
Reserve Center at Los Alamitos is the Disaster Support Area for
entire southern half of California.
COUNCIL CONCERNS
Councilman Laszlo inquired as to notification of the recent
Airport Land Use Commission meeting to consider the noise
contours for the proposed Bixby project. Staff reported the
agenda for that meeting was received the day following the
meeting, the ALUC was then contacted requesting that the city be
timely notified of their meetings by FAX in the future, and
noted that the ALUC had been provided copies of city's comments
relating to the AICUZ study, the February, 1994 AICUZ study as
well. Councilman Laszlo asked that the Airport Land Use I
Commission be requested to inform the City and himself of
upcoming meetings. Councilmember Hastings inquired as to the
status of H/CD funding for the after school/summer program at
McGaugh School. The Director noted the Council has approved
funding for that program for the past two years, the first
contract was approved in November therefore funds should be
available to commence the program by summer, this to be a City
program run by the Recreation Department.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no further Oral Communications.
CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session was held.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to
adjourn the meeting until Monday, February 28th at 6:00 p.m. to
meet in Closed Session.
By unanimous consent, the
C1ty Clerk and ex-of
City of Seal Beach
the
I
Attest:
Approved: