Cypress City Council
June 27, 2022

Table B- 15: Cost Burden by Household Type (Cypress and Orange County) Renter Households Owner Households
Elderly
Households
Large
Households
All Renter
Households
Elderly
Households
Large
Households
All Owner
Households
Cypress
With Cost Burden (>30%) 48% 79% 59% 41% 29% 28%
Orange County
With Cost Burden (>30%) 62% 57% 53% 33% 30% 31%
Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2013-2017 ACS, 2020.

Note: Data presented in this table are based on special tabulations from sample Census data. The number of households in each category usually deviates slightly from the 100% total due to the need to extrapolate sample data out to total households. Interpretations of these data should focus on the proportion of household in need of assistance rather than on precise numbers.

City of Cypress B-41 Appendix B
As illustrated by Table B- 14 and Table B- 15, renter households experience higher rates of overpayment when compared to owner households. Figure B- 29 and Figure B- 30 provide renter overpayment rates for 2014 and 2019 to provide a comparison over time. As shown on the maps, the rates of overpayment have increased within Tract 1101.17 on the east side of the City. However, renter overpayment has decreased significantly within Tract 1101.14 (generally bounded by Cerritos Ave. and Ball Rd.).

Rates of owner household overpayment are illustrated in Figure B- 31. For owner households, overpayment rates ranged from 20 to 40 percent for the majority of the City. Overpayment rates tend to be higher (ranging from 40 to 60 percent) in the northern and western portions of the City.

City of Cypress B- 42 Appendix B
Figure B- 29: Cost Burdened Renters (2014) Figure B- 30: Cost Burdened Renters (2019) City of Cypress B-43 Appendix B
Figure B- 31: Cost Burdened Owners (2019)
City of Cypress B- 44 Appendix B
Figure B- 32 and Table B- 16 show the distribution of RHNA units by the population of cost burdened renters by tract.

As discussed previously, the City is comprised of mostly tracts where 20 to 40 percent of owners are cost burdened with some areas in the northern and western sections of the City where 40 to 60 percent of owners are cost burdened.

Consistent with this trend, most RHNA units in both sites inventory Alternatives are located in tracts where only 20 to 40 percent of owners are cost burdened (71.9 percent in Alternative 1 and 58.9 percent in Alternative 2). In both cases, a larger proportion of lower income units (43.1 percent in Alternative 1 and 64 percent in Alternative 2) are in tracts where more owners are cost burdened compared to moderate and above moderate income units. In both Alternative 1 and 2, all above moderate income units are in tracts where less than 40 percent of owners overpay for housing. While there are more lower income units in the northern areas where cost burdened owner-occupied households are more prevalent, new affordable housing in these areas could be beneficial These areas have been identified as High Resource areas (see Figure B- 17) and have access to the primary public transportation route through the City, as well as convenient access to other services located on Lincoln Avenue. Additionally, a substantial proportion of lower income units are also located in tracts where less than 40 percent of owners are cost burdened and are generally distributed throughout Cypress.

Table B- 16: RHNA Unit Distribution by Population of Cost Burdened Owners Percent Cost
Burdened
Owners
Lower Income Units Moderate Income
Units
Above Moderate
Income Units Total Units
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Alternative 1
< 20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-40% 1,195 56.9% 918 86.0% 588 100.0% 2,701 71.9%
40-60% 905 43.1% 149 14.0% 0 0.0% 1,054 28.1%
60-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
> 80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,100 1,067 588 3,755
Alternative 2
< 20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-40% 777 36.0% 994 83.5% 495 100.0% 2,266 58.9%
40-60% 1,382 64.0% 197 16.5% 0 0.0% 1,579 41.1%
60-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
> 80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,159 1,191 495 3,845
Figure B- 33 and Table B- 17 show the distribution of RHNA units by proportion of cost burdened renters at the tract level. As described previously, most tracts in the City have populations of cost burdened renters ranging from 40 to 60 percent. There is one area in the City where less than 20 percent of renters are cost burdened. Though only a small proportion of the City has a concentration of overpaying renters smaller than 20 percent, a significant proportion of RHNA units are located in this tract (56.2 percent in Alternative 1 and 37.3 percent in Alternative 2). Placing RHNA units in this section of the City ensures lower income units will not be concentrated in an area where cost burden is already prevalent. Though a larger proportion of lower income units are in tracts where 40 to 60 percent of renters overpay for housing (58.4 percent in Alternative 1 and 85.1 percent in Alternative 2) compared to moderate and above moderate income units, this pattern generally follows the citywide trend. The City also does not exclusively place lower income units in these tracts. Further, the addition of lower income units in these areas may provide additional housing options for households that are currently cost burdened. As discussed above, various opportunities and resources are highly accessible in the northern area of the City, where many lower income units are located.

Table B- 17: RHNA Unit Distribution by Population of Cost Burdened Renters Lower Income Units Moderate Income
Units
Above Moderate
Income Units Total Units
City of Cypress B- 45 Appendix B
Percent Cost
Burdened
Renters
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Alternative 1
< 20% 874 41.6% 650 60.9% 588 100.0% 2,112 56.2%
20-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
40-60% 1,226 58.4% 417 39.1% 0 0.0% 1,643 43.8%
60-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
> 80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,100 1,067 588 3,755
Alternative 2
< 20% 321 14.9% 650 54.6% 465 93.9% 1,436 37.3%
20-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
40-60% 1,838 85.1% 541 45.4% 30 6.1% 2,409 62.7%
60-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
> 80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,159 1,191 495 3,845
City of Cypress B- 46 Appendix B
Figure B- 32: Cost Burdened Owners and Distribution of RHNA Units City of Cypress B-47 Appendix B
Figure B- 33: Cost Burdened Renters and Distribution of RHNA Units City of Cypress B- 48 Appendix B

OVERCROWDING

REGIONAL TRENDS
Overcrowding is defined as housing units with more than one person per room (including dining and living rooms but excluding bathrooms and kitchen). According to the 2014-2018 ACS, nearly 9 percent of Orange County households are overcrowded. Renter households are significantly more likely to experience overcrowding (16 percent of renter households compared to 3 percent of owner households). illustrates rates of overcrowding for Cypress and the surrounding region. Rates of overcrowding in Cypress are generally similar to coastal communities in Orange County, which tend to have lower rates of overcrowding than neighboring inland communities. Regionally, overcrowding rates are highest in Santa Ana, and to a lesser extent, Garden Grove and Anaheim.

LOCAL TRENDS AND THE SITES INVENTORY
According to the 2014-2018 ACS, approximately 4.6 percent of Cypress households were overcrowded, with overcrowding occurring at higher rates for renter occupied units (8.7 percent) than for owner occupied units (2.5 percent). Rates of overcrowding are lower in Cypress when compared to the County. shows that within Cypress, one tract (Tract 1101.10) has higher rates of overcrowding compared to the rest of the City. In this area, which is generally bounded by Walker St. to the west, City limits to the east and north, and Orange Ave. to the South, 11.2 percent of households are overcrowded, which is higher than both the City and County rates.

Figure B- 35 and Table B- 18 show the distribution of RHNA units by population of overcrowded households at the tract level. As discussed previously, the northeast area of the City has a higher concentration of overcrowded households compared to the remainder of the City. Consistent with the citywide trend, in both Alternatives, most RHNA units are in tracts where less than 8.2 percent of households, the statewide average, are overcrowded (91 percent in Alternative 1 and 82.8 percent in Alternative 2). In both scenarios, all above moderate income units are in tracts where less than

8.2 percent of households are overcrowded. There is a larger proportion of lower and moderate income units in the area where 11.2 percent of households are overcrowded in both Alternative 1 (11.5 percent and 9.2 percent, respectively) and Alternative 2 (23.9 percent and 12.3 percent, respectively). However, additional units in this section of the City, specifically lower and moderate income units, may mitigate overcrowding in the area. Further, the City does not place lower or moderate income units in this tract exclusively.

Table B- 18: RHNA Unit Distribution and Overcrowded Households Percent
Overcrowded
Households
Lower Income Units Moderate Income
Units
Above Moderate
Income Units Total Units
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Alternative 1
<8.2% 1,859 88.5% 969 90.8% 588 100.0% 3,416 91.0%

8.2-12% 241 11.5% 98 9.2% 0 0.0% 339 9.0%
12-15% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
15-20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,100 1,067 588 3,755
Alternative 2
<8.2% 1643 76.1% 1045 87.7% 495 100.0% 3183 82.8%

8.2-12% 516 23.9% 146 12.3% 0 0.0% 662 17.2%
12-15% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
15-20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Units 2,159 1,191 495 3,845
City of Cypress B-49 Appendix B
Figure B- 34: Overcrowded Households (Region)
City of Cypress B- 50 Appendix B
Figure B- 35: Overcrowded Households and Distribution of RHNA Units City of Cypress B- 51 Appendix B

SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS
Housing that is 30 years or older is assumed to require some rehabilitation. Features such as electrical capacity, kitchen fixtures, and roofs typically need updating if no prior replacement work has been completed. Overall, Cypress’ housing stock is slightly older than that of the County as a whole. The median year built for structures in Cypress is 1970, compared to 1976 in Orange County. As discussed in the Housing Needs Assessment section, over 80 percent of Cypress’ housing units were built prior to 1980. An additional 15 percent of units were built between 1980 and 1999, and will be over 30 years of age by the end of the planning period. However, the City’s Code Enforcement Division estimates that only about three percent of code enforcement cases involve substantial health and safety violations, indicating the overall condition of the housing stock is good in relation to its age. Figure B- 35 maps the median year built for housing by Census tract in the City. For the majority of Census tracts, the median year built for housing was between 1960 and 1971.

Figure B- 36: Median Year Housing Built
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2015-2019 (5-year estimates).

DISPLACEMENT RISK
UCLA’s displacement project defines residential displacement as “the process by which a household is forced to move from its residence – or is prevented from moving into a neighborhood that was previously accessible to them because of conditions beyond their control.” As part of this project, the UCLA team has identified populations vulnerable to displacement (reffered to as “sensitive communities”) in the event of increased redevelopment and drastic shifts in housing costs. Vulnerability is defined based on the share of low income residents per tract and other criteria including:
1) the share of renters is above 40 percent; 2) the share of people of color is more than 50 percent; 3) the share of low income households severely rent burdened; and, 4) proximity to displacement pressures. Displacement pressures were defined based on median rent increases and rent gaps.

City of Cypress B- 52 Appendix B
Based on this methodology, two Census tracts with the City of Cypress have been identified as vulnerable to displacement (Tracts 1101.10 and 1101.04). Tract 1101.04 has a higher concentration of minority population than much of the City, as previously noted. Additional sensitive communities are located to the east of the City, within the jurisdictions of Stanton and Anaheim, as well as to the north in Buena Park.

Table B- 19 shows the distribution of RHNA units by sensitive community at risk of displacement. In Alternative 1, 24.7 percent of RHNA units are in one of the two identified sensitive communities at risk of displacement compared to 38.8 percent in Alternative 2. A larger proportion of lower income units are located in sensitive communities in Alternative 2 (45 percent) compared to Alternative 1 (26.8 percent). However, Alternative 2 also places a larger proportion of moderate and above moderate income units in sensitive communities. There are several sites identified in tract 1101.04 that can accommodate lower income units. While this area is identified as a community at risk of displacement, it has also been identified as a high resource area. Both scenarios concentrate lower and moderate income units in sensitive communities at a rate exceeding above moderate income units. However, the City’s sites strategy does not place lower or moderate income units in these communities exclusively. Further, lower income units may serve existing and future households residing in this area and reduce displacement risk.

Table B- 19: RHNA Unit Distribution and Communities at Risk of Displacement At Risk of
Displacement
Lower Income Units Moderate Income
Units
Above Moderate
Income Units Total Units
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Alternative 1
At Risk 562 26.8% 366 34.3% 0 0.0% 928 24.7%
Not At Risk 1,538 73.2% 701 65.7% 588 100.0% 2,827 75.3% Total Units 2,100 1,067 588 3,755
Alternative 2
At Risk 972 45.0% 490 41.1% 30 6.1% 1,492 38.8%
Not At Risk 1,187 55.0% 701 58.9% 465 93.9% 2,353 61.2% Total Units 2,159 1,191 495 3,845
City of Cypress B- 53 Appendix B
Figure B- 37: Sensitive Communities
B.3.6. OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS

LENDING PATTERNS
Equal access to credit for the purchase or improvement of a home is a key aspect of fair housing choice. In the past, credit market distortions and other activities, such as “redlining” were prevalent and prevented some groups from having equal access to credit. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 and subsequent Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) were intended to improve access to credit for all groups and hold lenders responsible for community lending. Under the HMDA, lenders are required to disclose information on the disposition of home loan applications and the race, gender, and annual income of loan applicants.

When compared to the overall population, all groups with the exception of Pacific Islanders and those categorized as “Other” appear to be underrepresented in the applicant pool. There may be a discrepancy between the ACS and the HMDA data in what is included within the “Other” category. The overall denial rate for applicants within Cypress is 13 percent. Denial rates for White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian applicants are generally consistent with this rate. However, denial rates for Native American and Pacific Islander applicants are significantly higher, at 40 and 29 percent, respectively.

Table B- 20: Loan Applications and Denial by Race/Ethnicity Race/Ethnicity % Applicant Pool % Population Denial Rate White 48% 55% 12%
Black 2% 5% 15%
City of Cypress B- 54 Appendix B
Hispanic 9% 20% 14%
Asian 29% 38% 10%
Native American <1% 2% 40%
Pacific Islander 2% 1% 29%
Other 19% 6% 17%
Overall Denial Rate 13%
Sources: www.lendingpatterns.com, 2017; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2014-2018 (5-year estimates).

Note: Applicant pool and population columns do not sum to 100% because persons of Hispanic ethnicity may also identify with one or more races. Differences in what is included in the “other” category for the ACS and the HMDA data may also create discrepancies between the applicant pool and population columns.

GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
The populations of special needs groups in Cypress are very similar proportionally to the County (see Table B- 19).

Senior-headed households make up the largest special needs group in the City, comprising 26 percent of all households. Large households are also a significant component of the population, making up 13 percent of all households. Persons with disabilities make up 10 percent of the total population, many of whom are also seniors (see Section Error! Reference source not found. of the Needs Assessment).

Governmental constraints related to non-compliance with state laws aimed at reducing the barriers to development of housing types such as ADUs, transitional and supportive housing, and more can hinder housing choice for special needs populations. Further discussion regarding these constraints can be found in the Housing Constraints section of this Technical Report (Section Error! Reference source not found.). Further, programs have been included in the Housing Programs of the Housing Element to address these constraints.

Table B- 21: Special Needs Populations
Special Needs Group Cypress (% of Total) Orange County (% of Total) Senior-headed Households 26% 26%
Seniors Living Alone 8% 9%
Single-Parent Households 8% 7%
Female Single-Parent Households 6% 5%
Large Households (5+ members) 13% 14%
Agricultural Workers <0.1% 0.2%
Persons with Disabilities 10% 9%
Homeless 0.1% 0.2%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2014-2018 (5-year estimates); 2019 City and County homelessness pointin-time counts processed by SCAG.

B.3. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE SITES

INVENTORY
As previously described, the Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 sites inventories focus new housing opportunities primarily within the Lincoln Avenue Specific Plan and the Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0 (CTCC).

Alternative 1 has been identified by the City as the superior Alternative because it allows for additional lower and moderate income units to be placed in the CTCC, thereby spreading out more evenly throughout the City. However, both sites inventories will affirmatively further fair housing when coupled with the rezoning programs (Programs 12 and 14 of the Housing Element) and the meaningful actions described below.

The majority of the Lincoln Avenue Specific Plan area is within a High Resource area according to the HCD/TCAC Opportunity Maps. One section on the eastern portion of the corridor (block group 1101.10) has a TCAC designation of Moderate Resource (rapidly changing) and has a higher proportion of lower and moderate income households than City of Cypress B-55 Appendix B
elsewhere in the City. In Alternative 2, the highest densities on Lincoln Avenue (60 du/ac) were designated within the this area, including a significant number of lower income sites. However, location of higher densities and lower income units in this area was strategic in order to: 1) provide additional affordable housing options near Cypress College to lower income students; and 2) to further incentivize private investment and revitalization of this area. This area is ideal for new housing for a variety of factors, including convenient access to the OCTA bus line, and walking distance to Cypress College and nearby grocery stores and other services.

Two block groups along the Lincoln Avenue corridor were identified in the analysis as having higher concentrations of minority populations (block groups 1101.043 and 1101.173). In both areas, minorities make up approximately 85 percent of the population, compared to 62 percent citywide. These areas contain a small minority of the identified RHNA units (9 percent in Alternative 1 and 17 percent in Alternative 2). Additionally, both of these areas have been identified on the TCAC Opportunity Maps as high resource areas. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the sites inventory would have negative fair housing impacts in these areas.

While the CTCC is within a Moderate Resource area, for Alternative 2, there are no lower income units designated within the CTCC. For Alternative 1, about 550 units of the total 1,930 units identified within the CTCC would be lower income. With this mix of income levels in the CTCC, lower income units are not being concentrated within a specific area. Additionally, with the new development already occurring within the CTCC and adjacent to the CTCC, identification of opportunity sites in this area will likely contribute to the revitalization of this area. Additionally, Lexington Park, a new 9-acre park in the northwest corner of the CTCC was recently completed, adding to the recreational opportunities for residents in this area.

As previously noted, due to limited availability of vacant land in Cypress, both sites inventory alternatives focus on underutilized commercial properties to accommodate the RHNA. One major benefit of this approach is that the potential for residential displacement is limited. No multi-family properties and just five single family residences were identified for development within the sites inventory. Program 6 of the Housing Element includes provisions for replacement of protected units pursuant to AB 1397. Displacement of small businesses located on Lincoln Avenue is a potential concern as redevelopment occurs; however, small business outreach has been included as a meaningful action as discussed in the previous section.

The City’s sites inventory is further described in Table B- 22 and Table B- 23 by neighborhood and AFFH variable.

Both Alternatives are shown by neighborhood and income level distribution in Figure B- 38.

ALTERNATIVE 1
As discussed previously, Alternative 1 places over a third of RHNA units in the North West neighborhood Additionally, nearly half of the 2,100 lower income units allocated in Alternative 1 (985 units) are located in the North West neighborhood. This area of the City is a high resource area with non-White populations ranging from 57.6 percent to 86 percent and LMI household populations ranging from 38.1 percent to 46.6 percent. Non-White populations and LMI household concentrations in this neighborhood are generally consistent with trends citywide. None of the tracts in the North West area have proportions of overcrowded households exceeding the statewide average of 8.2 percent. The North West neighborhood has slightly larger populations of cost burdened owners and renters compared to the remainder of the City. There is one tract that is considered a sensitive community at risk of displacement. A total of 589 units have been allocated in this area, including 321 lower income units and 268 moderate income units.

The tract in the North East neighborhood where RHNA units have been allocated has also been identified as a sensitive community at risk of displacement. The North East tract is also an LMI area where 55.7 percent of households are low or moderate income and has the highest concentration of overcrowded households (11.2 percent).

All above moderate income units are located in the South West neighborhood. However, the strategy does not exclusively place above moderate income units in this area. The South West neighborhood also contains 874 lower City of Cypress B-56 Appendix B
income units and 650 moderate income units, ensuring a variety of housing types are available to new and existing residents. This neighborhood has a relatively low concentration of overcrowded households, cost burdened households, and LMI households.

While the City’s strategy does concentrate lower and moderate income units in the North East and North West neighborhoods, sites in this area provide additional affordable housing options near Cypress College to lower income students and incentivize private investment and revitalization in this area. As discussed above, this area is ideal for new housing for a variety of factors, including convenient access to the OCTA bus line, and walking distance to Cypress College and nearby grocery stores and other services. Further, this area of the City has been identified as a high resource and moderate resource (rapidly changing) area where new households will have sufficient access to opportunities and resources. The City’s RHNA strategy does not exacerbate existing conditions related to fair housing.

ALTERNATIVE 2
Alternative 2 places a higher concentration of units in the North West neighborhood compared to Alternative 1 (see discussion above for detailed discussion on North West neighborhood). Approximately 45 percent of all units allocated under Alternative 2, including 61.2 percent of lower income units, are in the North West neighborhood. While this does place more units in the high resource area, it distributes fewer units to other areas of the City. Alternative 2 also places more units in the North East neighborhood but fewer in the South West neighborhood compared to Alternative 1 (see discussion above for detailed discussion on North East and South West neighborhoods).

Like Alternative 1, Alternative 2 allocates a variety of unit types, 321 lower, 650 moderate, and 465 above moderate income units, in the South West neighborhood. This strategy ensures lower income units are not concentrated in the moderate resource area and promotes mixed income communities.

Though Alternative 2 also allocates more lower and moderate income units in the North East and North West neighborhoods, this section of the City has highly accessible opportunities and resources. As discussed previously, additional housing in these neighborhoods, specifically lower and moderate income units, can serve existing populations residing in this area, including students. The City’s RHNA strategy ensures lower income units are distributed amongst tracts where the prevalence of fair housing issues is variable. This strategy serves existing at risk populations but limits the concentration of lower income units in LMI areas and communities at risk of displacement.

Overall, neither Alternative 1 or 2 leads to a concentration of lower income units in a lower resource area. With a range of densities and opportunity site sizes, units for various income levels are likely to be distributed well throughout the City. Further, the City is committed to meaningful actions which direct resources to moderate resource areas and mitigate the risk of displacement for vulnerable communities.

City of Cypress B- 57 Appendix B
Table B- 22: Alternative 1 RHNA Unit Distribution by Neighborhood and AFFH Variable Tract
# of
HHs in
Tract
Total
Capacit
y
Income Distribution TCAC
Opp.

Categor
y
% NonWhite% LMI
HHs
% Overcrowded
HHs
% Owner
Cost
Burden
% Renter
Cost
Burden
At Risk
of
Displacement?
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
North East
1101.10 1,814 339 241 98 0 Moderate
(RC)

65.2% -

79.4% 55.7% 11.2% 49.7% 48.3% Yes
North West
1101.04 1,835 589 321 268 0 High 68.9% -

85.5% 46.6% 6.4% 32.5% 52.6% Yes
1101.11 1,907 496 445 51 0 High 57.6% -

73.9% 36.6% 2.1% 44.7% 57.3% No
1101.17 2,074 219 219 0 0 High 59.0% -

86.0% 38.1% 6.9% 42.3% 49.0% No
South West
1101.13 710 2,112 874 650 588 Moderate 62.1% 36.7% 0.0% 37.2% 10.1% No RC = Rapidly Changing
Table B- 23: Alternative 2 RHNA Unit Distribution by Neighborhood and AFFH Variable Tract
# of
HHs in
Tract
Total
Capacit
y
Income Distribution TCAC
Opp.

Category
% NonWhite% LMI
HHs
% Overcrowded
HHs
% Owner
Cost
Burden
% Renter
Cost
Burden
At Risk
of
Displacement?
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
North East
1101.10 1,814 662 516 146 0 Moderate
(RC)

65.2% -

79.4% 55.7% 11.2% 49.7% 48.3% Yes
North West
1101.04 1,835 830 456 344 30 High 68.9% -

85.5% 46.6% 6.4% 32.5% 52.6% Yes
1101.11 1,907 551 500 51 0 High 57.6% -

73.9% 36.6% 2.1% 44.7% 57.3% No
1101.17 2,074 366 366 0 0 High 59.0% -

86.0% 38.1% 6.9% 42.3% 49.0% No
City of Cypress B- 58 Appendix B
South West
1101.13 710 1,436 321 650 465 Moderate 62.1% 36.7% 0.0% 37.2% 10.1% No RC = Rapidly Changing
City of Cypress B- 59 Appendix B
Figure B- 38: Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Sites Inventory by Neighborhood City of Cypress B- 60 Appendix B
B.4. SUMMARY OF FAIR HOUSING ISSUES, CONTRIBUTING

FACTORS, AND MEANINGFUL ACTIONS
B.3.7. INSUFFICIENT LOCAL DATA AND LIMITED OUTREACH
Cypress receives fair housing services from OCFHC as part of the Orange County program. As a non-entitlement City, local City-specific data is unavailable making it difficult for the City to assess the presence of fair housing issues within the community.

Additionally, outreach efforts to make residents aware of fair housing resources available to them have been limited and more proactive efforts are needed. While the City provides information to residents upon request, there is not resource information on the City’s website.

Contributing Factors:
• Lack of data due to participation through the County program • Lack of advertisement of fair housing resources in the City’s various media outlets Meaningful Actions:
• Advocate to receive reports from the Orange County Fair Housing Council that include data specific to the City of Cypress to allow the City to better assess fair housing issues within the community. • Create an updated webpage on the City’s website with information on fair housing rights and resources. • Publish information about fair housing resources in the City’s quarterly newsletter.

B.3.8. VULNERABILITY TO DISPLACEMENT
The analysis found that the northeast portion of the City has been identified as vulnerable to displacement, based on the previously discussed factors. This area has also been identified as a Moderate Resource area on the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps. The analysis found a slight concentration of low and moderate income households as well as racial and ethnic minorities within the northeast portion of the City. This also corresponds with a higher proportion of renters than other areas of the City and a greater proportion of multi-family housing.

Opportunity sites have been identified in the northeast portion of the City along Lincoln Avenue. This was a strategic decision on the part of the City to facilitate development of more affordable housing near Cypress College. While the analysis shows that residents of this area are vulnerable to displacement, no sites with multi-family residential housing have been included in the sites inventory; therefore, lowering the risk of displacement. Nonetheless, the City has incorporated meaningful actions to address displacement risk of both residents and businesses.

Contributing Factors:
• Higher proportion of older multi-family housing rental units • Identification of opportunity sites near Cypress College • Sensitive communities identified in the northeastern portion of the City • Concentrations of lower and moderate income households and racial and ethnic minorities Meaningful Actions:
• Implement requirements for developers to submit an Affirmative Action Marketing Plan for density bonus projects. • Provide targeted outreach to small businesses located within areas targeted for redevelopment through the City’s Economic Development Division.

City of Cypress B-61 Appendix B
• Provide educational materials targeted to landlords and tenants to ensure compliance with the Tenant Protection Act of 2018 (AB 1482), including maximum annual rent increases, just cause evictions, and financial compensation requirements to increase housing stability for vulnerable households.

B.3.9. LIMITED HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER USE
Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) are a key component in the provision of affordable housing due to their flexibility in that they allow voucher holders more mobility in housing options. However, use of HCVs has been limited in the City as discussed in the analysis. Additionally, HCV use has been concentrated within the northern portion of the City, particularly Tract 1101.04, where 9 percent of renters utilize an HCV.

Contributing Factors:
• Limited funding/availability of HCVs at the County level • Limited understanding of regulations surrounding acceptance of HCV tenants Meaningful Actions:
• Expand outreach and education of Source of Income Protection laws (SB 329 and SB 222), which include HCVs and other public assistance as legitimate sources of income for housing. • Include information regarding source of income protections in ADU informational materials.

B.3.10. HIGHER INSTANCE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES
The City has identified one neighborhood that consistently has a higher number of code enforcement complaints and violations. This primarily single-family neighborhood is bounded by Ball Road to the north, Cerritos Avenue to the south, Walker Street to the west, and Valley View Street to the east. The concentration of lower and moderate income households in this neighborhood is 37 percent and the median income is less than the 2020 State median income as defined by HCD.

Contributing Factors:
• Limited income available for home repairs/maintenance • Older single family housing stock
Meaningful Actions:
• Implementation of a Neighborhood Preservation Pilot Program within the identified neighborhood to identify and address code violations and needed right of way improvements. • Outreach and education to neighborhood residents on resources available to address code violations and property maintenance issues.

B.3.11. NEW HOUSING CHOICES IN AREAS OF HIGH OPPORTUNITY The AFFH analysis shows that for Alternative 1, 48 percent of lower income RHNA units are identified in high opportunity areas. For Alternative 2, 62 percent of lower income units are located in high opportunity areas. Due to the desire to locate some opportunity sites strategically near Cypress College and location of opportunity sites within the CTCC area (both moderate resource areas), it was necessary to include a significant proportion of opportunity sites in moderate resource areas. However, the City will implement meaningful actions to promote the development of affordable housing within high resource areas as described below.

Contributing Factors
City of Cypress B-62 Appendix B
• High opportunity areas along Lincoln Ave. corridor with good access to transit • Existing underutilized commercial sites within high opportunity areas Meaningful Actions
• Promote key lower income housing opportunity sites for affordable housing development by providing information about sites inventory properties on the City’s website (within one year of Housing Element adoption) and facilitating communications between property owners and developers, as appropriate (Ongoing). • Conduct a feasibility study on the implementation of an inclusionary housing ordinance and provide recommednations to the City Council for next steps based on the study by 2024. • Support funding applications by nonprofit developers for affordable housing in high resource areas. (Ongoing) B.3.12. INTEGRATION AND SEGREGATION
The AFFH analysis shows that for Alternative 1, 52 percent of lower income units are identified on sites in Moderate Resource areas. For Alternative 2, 38 percent of lower income units are identified on sites in Moderate Resource areas. Location of sites in these areas was both necessary and strategic, as discussed in Section B.3 (Potential Impacts of the Sites Inventory). The City is committed to meaningful actions to direct resources toward these areas.

One such example is the planned rehabilitation of Arnold Cypress Park, which is located in an area identified in the analysis as having a higher concentration of LMI households.

Contributing Factors
• Higher concentration of LMI households and Moderate Resource (rapidly changing) for area near Cypress College.
• CTCC identified as a Moderate Resource area.

Meaningful Actions
• Implementation of meaningful actions intended to mitigate vulnerability to displacement, as described in Section B.3.8.
• Increase access to opportunities for recreation for units developed in the CTCC by facilitating development of park and other open space facilities in the Specific Plan Area. Prioritize connectivity by requiring sidewalks and other public improvements throughout the Plan Area and adjacent development to increase resident access to services, open space, and overall walkability.
• Annually, as part of the budget and capital improvement planning process, coordinate with the Public Works Department to prioritize projects in areas identified as Moderate Resource or having higher concentrations of minority or low income households.

B.3.13. DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS
The AFFH analysis showed that renter households, particularly large households, were disproportionately impacted by overpayment throughout the City. Renter households also tend to have higher rates of overcrowding.

Contributing Factors
• High rents throughout the City, particularly for large units. • Limited subsidized affordable housing.

Meaningful Actions
• Amendment of Density Bonus Ordinance to facilitate production of affordable units (Program 16). • Increase HCV use as described in Section B.3.9.

City of Cypress B- 63 Appendix B

APPENDIX C - PUBLIC OUTREACH
Table C- 1: Organizations Contacted for Input on Housing Element Organization Name Population/
Group Served Organization Name Population/Group Served
Children and Families Commission of Orange
County
Santa Ana, CA
Youth/Families Cypress School District
Cypress, CA Youth/Families
Illumination Foundation
Irvine, CA Homeless North Orange County ROPAnaheim, CA Students Orange County Community Foundation
Newport Beach, CA
Other - Affordable
Housing
Funding/Financing
North Orange County Community College
District
Anaheim, CA
Students
Public Law Center
Santa Ana, CA Low income Orange County Department of EducationCosta Mesa, CA Youth/Families Southern California Indian Center
Fountain Valley, CA BIPOC
Orange County Department of Education,
Special Education Services
Costa Mesa, CA
Youth/special
needs
Vietnamese Community of Orange County,
Inc.

Santa Ana, CA
BIPOC/low
income/special
needs/seniors/famil
ies
OC Community Services, Veterans Service
Office
Santa Ana, CA
Veterans
Asian American Business Women
Association
Huntington Beach, CA
BIPOC/Business
community
OC Health Care Agency
Santa Ana, CA General
Asian Business Association of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA
BIPOC/Business
community
OCTA - Access Paratransit
Orange, CA Special needs
Orange County Small Business Development
Center
Santa Ana, CA
Business
community
PATH
Los Angeles, CA Homeless
Orange County Business Council
Irvine, CA
Business
community
St. Irenaeus - H.O.P.E.

Cypress, CA Homeless
Orange County Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce
Santa Ana, CA
BIPOC/Business
community
Orange County Housing Authority
Santa Ana, CA Low income
Orange County Workforce Investment Board,
Community Investment Division
Santa Ana, CA
General/Business
community
Pathways of Hope
Fullerton, CA Homeless
Veterans Service Center at Joint Forces
Training Base
Los Alamitos, CA
Veterans Project Self-Sufficiency
Huntington Beach, CA
Low income/
single-parent
families
Vietnamese American Chamber of Commerce
of Orange County
Fountain Valley, CA
BIPOC/Business
community
All's Well Home, Inc.

Buena Park, CA Special needs
Affirmed Housing Group
San Diego, CA
Low
income/veterans/fa
milies/seniors
LINC Housing Corportation
Long Beach, CA Low income
Shelter Partnership
Los Angeles, CA Homeless Hyter DevelopmentNewport Beach, CA Other -
Developer
Boat People SOS - Orange County
Westminster, CA BIPOC Century Housing
Culver City, CA
Other -
Affordable
Housing
Funding/Financi
ng
AMCAL
Irvine, CA Low income Merritt Community Capital Corporation Los Angeles, CA
Other -
Affordable
Housing
City of Cypress B-64 Appendix B
Funding/Financi
ng
A Community of Friends
Los Angeles, CA
Special
needs/Homeless
Kennedy Commission
Irvine, CA Low income
Affordable Housing Access
Newport Beach, CA Low income
Clearinghouse CDFI
National CORE
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Other -
Affordable
Housing
Funding/Financi
ng
City Ventures
Newport Beach, CA Other - Developer Mary Erickson Community HousingSan Clemente, CA Low income YMCA of Orange County
Tustin, CA Youth/Families GRC Associates, Inc.

Covina, CA
Other -
Professional
Services
Clifford Beers Housing, Inc.

Los Angeles, CA Homeless
Orange County Community Housing
Corporation
Santa Ana, CA
Extremeley low
income
Habitat for Humanity of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA Low income NeighborWorks Orange CountyOrange, CA Low-Moderate
income
American Family Housing
Midway City, CA Low income Palm Communities
Irvine, CA
Low
income/special
needs
Jamboree Housing Corporation
Irvine, CA
Low
income/veterans/fa
milies/seniors/speci
al needs
Stratus Commercial Partners, LLC
Irvine, CA
Other -
Developer
BRIDGE Housing
Newport Beach, CA Low income Premier Housing ServicesSanta Ana, CA Low income Mercy Housing California
Los Angeles, CA
Low-moderate
income/families/se
niors/special needs
Western Community Housing, Inc.

Costa Mesa, CA
Low
income/families/
seniors/special
needs
USA Multifamily Housing, Inc.

Roseville, CA Low-income Cypress Senior CenterCypress, CA Seniors Orange Housing Development Corporation
Orange, CA
Low
income/families/se
niors
Children's Hospital of Orange County
Orange, CA Youth/Families
National Church Residences
Columbus, OH Seniors
Golden State Water Company - West Orange
County
Los Alamitos, CA
Other - utility
provider
Related California
Irvine, CA
Low
income/families/se
niors
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Orange
County
Santa Ana, CA
Youth
Orange County Assocation of Relators
(OCAR)
Laguna Hills, CA
Other - real estate Casa Youth Shelther
Los Alamitos, CA Youth
Catholic Charities of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA
Low
income/seniors/spe
cial needs
2-1-1 Orange County
Santa Ana, CA General
AIDS Services Foundation of Orange County
Irvine, CA Special needs Dayle McIntosh Disability Resource CentersGarden Grove, CA Special needs Community Action Partnership of Orange
County
Garden Grove, CA
Low income Consumer Credit Counseling Service
Santa Ana, CA General
Council on Aging Orange County
Santa Ana, CA Seniors Asian American Senior Citizen Service CenterSanta Ana, CA BIPOC/Seniors Friends Outside
Santa Ana, CA General Mental Health Association of Orange CountyOrange, CA General Fair Housing Council of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA General OCAPICAGarden Grove, CA BIPOC
City of Cypress B-65 Appendix B
Glennwood Housing Foundation
Laguna Beach, CA Special needs Mission Pacific Coast Recovery CenterLaguna Beach, CA Special needs GOALS
Anaheim, CA Underserved youth MOMS Orange CountySanta Ana, CA Women/families Giving Children Hope
Buena Park, CA
Underserved
youth/families
One OC
Santa Ana, CA
Other -
Professional
Services
Grateful Hearts Storehouse
Los Alamitos, CA Low income Orange County Food BankGarden Grove, CA Low income Hart Community Home, Inc.

Fullerton, CA At-risk youth Orange County Head Start, Inc. Santa Ana, CA Low income
youth/families
Goodwill Industries of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA
Special
needs/veterans/ho
meless/at-risk
youth/formerly
incarcerated
Orange County Rescue Mission
Tustin, CA Homeless
Lutheran Social Services of SoCal
Orange, CA
Seniors/special
needs/veterans/yo
uth/refugee/immigr
ant
Orange County United Way
Irvine, CA
Low
income/families/
homeless
Legal Aid Society of Orange County
Santa Ana, CA Low income Orangewood Children's FoundationSanta Ana, CA Youth Mariposa Women and Family Center
Orange, CA Women/families Salvation Army Orange CountyTustin, CA Low
income/families/
youth/homeless/
special needs
Precious Life Shelter, Inc.

Los Alamitos, CA Women/families Regional Center of Orange CountySanta Ana, CA Special needs Project Access
Newport Beach, CA
Low
income/families/se
niors/youth
We Care Family Support Center
Los Alamitos, CA Low income
The Cambodian Family
Santa Ana, CA
Refugee/Immigrant
families
Southern California Association of NonProfit
Housing
Los Angeles, CA
Other -
Professional
Services
Rebuilding Together Orange County
Santa Ana, CA
Low-Moderate
income
Prepared by:
2021-2029

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT
2021-2029

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT
Ju 202 ne 2
Prepared : for
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final / Initial Study Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank
FINAL

INITIAL STUDY/

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2021-2029

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT

CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 2022
This page intentionally left blank

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... i LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................................ iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Index of Comments Received............................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Format of Response to Comments ................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ............................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Local Agencies................................................................................................................... 2-1

APPENDIX
A: DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» ii This page intentionally left blank

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS H OUSING ELEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Cypress
HCD
IS/ND
California Department of Housing and Community Development Initial Study/Negative Declaration
NOI Notice of Intent
project 2021-2029 Cypress Housing Element
RHNA

RTP/SCS
SCAG
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Southern California Association of Governments
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» iv This page intentionally left blank

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This section comprises the Comments and Responses of the Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) for the proposed 2021-2029 Cypress Housing Element in Cypress, Orange County, California.

The purpose of this document is to respond to all comments received by the City of Cypress (City) regarding the environmental information and analyses contained in the IS/ND.

Consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15073 and in accordance with the City’s Local CEQA Procedures, a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Negative Declaration was sent to responsible agencies and trustee agencies in addition to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals concerned with the project. In addition, the NOI was filed with the Orange County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse on July 16, 2021.

The Draft IS/ND was circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, from July 16, 2021, to August 16, 2021. Copies of the Draft IS/ND were made available for public review at the City of Cypress Planning Division and on the City’s website under Development Information.

Comments were accepted for a period of 30 days to ensure adequate time for residents and agencies to comment on the Draft IS/ND. One comment letter was received during the public review period.

Comments were received from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA and is required to consider agency and public comments on the IS/ND. Although preparation of responses to comments on an IS/ND is not required, responses have been prepared.

1.1 INDEX OF COMMENTS RECEIVED
The following is an index list of the agencies that commented on the IS/ND prior to the close of the public comment period (the City did not receive comments from any interested parties). The comments received have been organized in a manner that facilitates a particular comment or set of comments. Each comment letter received is indexed with an alphanumeric code below.

Comment Letter Index
Comment Code Signatory Date
Local Agencies
L-1 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) August 16, 2021

1.2 FORMAT OF RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Responses to each of the comment letters are provided on the following pages. The comment index numbers are provided in the upper right-hand corner of each comment letter, and individual points within each letter are numbered along the right-hand margin of each letter. The City’s responses to each comment letter immediately follow the letter and are referenced by index numbers in the margins.
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
1 P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» -2 This page intentionally left blank

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» 2-1

2.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

2.1 LOCAL AGENCIES
August 16, 2021
Ms. Alicia Velasco, Planning Director
City of Cypress, Planning Division
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, California 90630
Phone: (714) 229-6720
E-mail: [email protected]
RE: SCAG Comments on the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Cypress Housing Element Update [SCAG NO. IGR10439]
Dear Ms. Velasco,
Thank you for submitting the Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration for the Cypress Housing Element Update (“proposed project”) to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for review and comment. The proposed project includes the adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element that addresses the housing needs of all incomes with population and housing projections based off the 6th Cycle Planning Period for Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

Based on SCAG staff’s review, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) does not reference the most recently adopted 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS or Connect SoCal). SCAG staff comments are detailed in the attachment to this letter.

When available, please send project related documents and notices to [email protected]. If you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please contact the Intergovernmental Review (IGR) Program, attn.: Anita Au, Senior Regional Planner, at (213) 236-1874 or [email protected]. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Rongsheng Luo
Acting Manager, Compliance and Performance Monitoring
August 16, 2021 SCAG No. IGR10439
Ms. Velasco Page 2

COMMENTS ON THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A

NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE [SCAG NO. IGR10439]

SUMMARY
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375, SCAG is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency under state law and is responsible for preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) including the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). SCAG’s feedback is intended to assist local jurisdictions and project proponents to implement projects that have the potential to contribute to attainment of Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) goals and align with RTP/SCS policies.

Based on SCAG staff review, the IS/ND does not reference the most recently adopted 2020 Connect SoCal. SCAG staff recommends including references to Connect SoCal as described in the following sections.

CONNECT SOCAL GOALS
The SCAG Regional Council fully adopted Connect SoCal in September 2020. Connect SoCal, also known as the 2020 – 2045 RTP/SCS, builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. The long-range visioning plan balances future mobility and housing needs with goals for the environment, the regional economy, social equity and environmental justice, and public health. The goals included in Connect SoCal may be pertinent to the proposed project.

These goals are meant to provide guidance for considering the proposed project. Among the relevant goals of Connect SoCal are the following:

SCAG CONNECT SOCAL GOALS
Goal #1: Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness Goal #2: Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability and travel safety for people and goods Goal #3: Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system Goal #4: Increase person and goods movement and travel choices within the transportation system Goal #5: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality Goal #6: Support healthy and equitable communities
Goal #7: Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network
Goal #8: Leverage new transportation technologies and data-driven solutions that result in more efficient travel Goal #9: Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas that are supported by multiple transportation options
Goal #10: Promote conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration of habitats August 16, 2021 SCAG No. IGR10439
Ms. Velasco Page 3
Connect SoCal Strategies
To achieve the goals of Connect SoCal, a wide range of land use and transportation strategies are included in the accompanying twenty (20) technical reports. Of particular note are multiple strategies included in Chapter 3 of Connect SoCal intended to support implementation of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) framed within the context of focusing growth near destinations and mobility options; promoting diverse housing choices; leveraging technology innovations; supporting implementation of sustainability policies; and promoting a Green Region. To view Connect SoCal and the accompanying technical reports, please visit the Connect SoCal webpage.

Connect SoCal builds upon the progress from previous RTP/SCS cycles and continues to focus on integrated, coordinated, and balanced planning for land use and transportation that helps the SCAG region strive towards a more sustainable region, while meeting statutory requirements pertinent to RTP/SCSs. These strategies within the regional context are provided as guidance for lead agencies such as local jurisdictions when the proposed project is under consideration.

SCAG Staff Comments
SCAG staff recommends that you review 2020 Connect SoCal and consider its adopted goals and policies when finalizing the proposed project.

DEMOGRAPHICS AND GROWTH FORECASTS
A key, formative step in projecting future population, households, and employment through 2045 for Connect SoCal was the generation of a forecast of regional and county level growth in collaboration with expert demographers and economists on Southern California. From there, jurisdictional level forecasts were ground-truthed by subregions and local agencies, which helped SCAG identify opportunities and barriers to future development. This forecast helps the region understand, in a very general sense, where we are expected to grow, and allows SCAG to focus attention on areas that are experiencing change and may have increased transportation needs. After a year-long engagement effort with all 197 jurisdictions one-on-one, 82 percent of SCAG’s 197 jurisdictions provided feedback on the forecast of future growth for Connect SoCal. SCAG also sought feedback on potential sustainable growth strategies from a broad range of stakeholder groups – including local jurisdictions, county transportation commissions, other partner agencies, industry groups, community-based organizations, and the general public. Connect SoCal utilizes a bottomup approach in that total projected growth for each jurisdiction reflects feedback received from jurisdiction staff, including city managers, community development/planning directors, and local staff. Growth at the neighborhood level (i.e., transportation analysis zone (TAZ) reflects entitled projects and adheres to current general and specific plan maximum densities as conveyed by jurisdictions (except in cases where entitled projects and development agreements exceed these capacities as calculated by SCAG). Neighborhood level growth projections also feature strategies that help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from automobiles and light trucks to achieve Southern California’s GHG reduction target, approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in accordance with state planning law. Connect SoCal’s Forecasted Development Pattern is utilized for long range modeling purposes and does not supersede actions taken by elected bodies on future development, including entitlements and development agreements. SCAG does not have the authority to implement the plan -- neither through decisions about what type of development is built where, nor what transportation projects are ultimately built, as Connect SoCal is adopted at the jurisdictional level. Achieving a sustained regional outcome depends upon informed and intentional local action. To access jurisdictional level growth estimates and forecasts for years 2016 and 2045, please refer to the Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. The growth forecasts for the region and applicable jurisdictions are below.

August 16, 2021 SCAG No. IGR10439
Ms. Velasco Page 4
Adopted SCAG Region Wide Forecasts Adopted City of Cypress Forecasts Year 2020 Year 2030 Year 2035 Year 2045 Year 2020 Year 2030 Year 2035 Year 2045 Population 19,517,731 20,821,171 21,443,006 22,503,899 50,278 51,524 51,609 51,299 Households 6,333,458 6,902,821 7,170,110 7,633,451 16,374 16,455 16,485 16,591 Employment 8,695,427 9,303,627 9,566,384 10,048,822 28,431 29,799 30,270 30,630 SCAG Staff Comments
In Section 4.14 Population and Housing starting on page 4.14-29 of the IS/ND, SCAG staff recommends including a reference to the population, housing, and employment trends and forecasts based on the most recently adopted SCAG 2020 Connect SoCal Regional Growth Forecasts to recognize the city’s planned growth.

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
On March 4, 2021 SCAG’s Regional Council adopted the 6
th cycle Final Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Allocation Plan which covers the planning period October 2021 through October 2029. The 6th cycle Final RHNA allocation for the applicable jurisdiction is below.

SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation for City of Cypress Very low income 1,150
Low income 657
Moderate income 623
Above moderate income 1,506
Total RHNA Allocation 3,936
Sixth cycle housing elements are due to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by October 15, 2021. SCAG encourages jurisdictions to prepare the draft housing element in advance of the due date to ensure adequate time to address HCD comments and adopt a final housing element. Jurisdictions that do not have a compliant housing element may be ineligible for certain State funding and grant opportunities and may be at risk for legal action from stakeholders or HCD.

SCAG staff would like to call your attention to SCAG’s HELPR 2.0, a web-mapping tool developed by SCAG to help local jurisdictions and stakeholders understand local land use, site opportunities, and environmental sensitivities for aligning housing planning with the state Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) 6th cycle housing element requirements.

SCAG Staff Comments
Table 4.14.A Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2021-2029 on page 4.14-19 of the IS/ND includes the correct Final RHNA Allocation numbers. SCAG staff recommends updating the City’s Housing Element Update webpage to include the Final RHNA Allocation figures.
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2 P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» -6

2.1.1 Response to Comment L-1-1
This comment thanks the City for submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) to SCAG and summarizes the proposed project.

This comment is introductory and does not contain any substantive comments or questions about the environmental analysis or conclusions contained in the Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND). No further response is required.

2.1.2 Response to Comment L-1-2
This comment states that the IS/ND does not reference the most recently adopted 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

Please refer to Responses to Comments L-1-5, L-1-6, and L-1-7 for responses regarding the incorporation of the SCAG RTP/SCS.

2.1.3 Response to Comment L-1-3
This comment provides contact information for related documents and any questions regarding the comments.

This comment has been noted.

2.1.4 Response to Comment L-1-4
This comment states that SCAG’s feedback is intended to assist with implementing projects that have the potential to contribute to RTP/SCS goals and align with RTP/SCS policies. This comment also states that based on SCAG staff’s review, the IS/ND does not reference the most recently adopted 2020 Connect SoCal Plan.

As described in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft IS/ND, the City of Cypress 2021– 2029 Housing Element sets forth the City’s policies and detailed programs for meeting existing and future housing needs as determined by SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process, for preserving and enhancing neighborhoods, and for increasing affordable housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low, and moderate income persons and households. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting its unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021–2029 Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» 2-7 evaluation is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through mitigation measures imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations.

As described above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element was prepared to meet the City’s established RHNA target; however, it should be noted that the final RHNA targets for the 5th Housing Element Cycle (from 2021–2029) were not incorporated into the Connect SoCal Plan. In addition, as described above, the City has included a rezoning program in its 2021–2029 Housing Element, the implementation of which would require the amendment of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. Due to these circumstances, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Therefore, an evaluation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element’s consistency with applicable goals and policies included in the Connect SoCal Plan is neither warranted nor appropriate. No changes to the Draft IS/ND have been made in response to this comment.

2.1.5 Response to Comment L-1-5
This comment provides additional background information regarding the recent adoption of Connect SoCal and states that goals included in Connect SoCal may be pertinent to the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and are meant to provide guidance for its consideration. The comment letter then provides 10 goals from the Connect SoCal Plan, which the commenter notes may be relevant to the 2021–2029 Housing Element.

This comment has been noted. As stated in Response to Comment L-1-4, the inclusion of Connect SoCal Plan’s goals is neither warranted nor appropriate. Therefore, no changes to the Draft IS/ND have been made in response to this comment.

2.1.6 Response to Comment L-1-6
The comment states that a wide range of land use and transportation strategies are included in Chapter 3 of Connect SoCal to support the implementation of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy. These strategies are provided as guidance for lead agencies, including local jurisdictions, when a proposed project is under consideration.

This comment has been noted. This comment does not contain any substantive comments or questions about the environmental analysis or conclusions contained in the Draft IS/ND. No further response is required.

2.1.7 Response to Comment L-1-7
This comment recommends that the City review the Connect SoCal plan and consider its adopted goals and policies as part of the proposed project.
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2 P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» -8 The goals and policies included in Connect SoCal have been reviewed and considered, as suggested.

However, as described above in the Response to Comment L-1-5, no changes have been made to the Draft IS/ND.

2.1.8 Response to Comment L-1-8
This comment provides information on SCAG’s demographic and growth forecasts and includes a table with population, household, and employment growth forecasts for the SCAG region and for the City of Cypress.

This comment has been noted. This comment does not contain any substantive comments or questions about the environmental analysis or conclusions contained in the Draft IS/ND. No further response is required.

2.1.9 Response to Comment L-1-9
The comment recommends including a reference to the population, housing, and employment trends and forecasts in the Connect SoCal Regional Growth Forecasts to recognize the City’s planned growth.

As described in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts related to population and housing, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in potentially significant impacts. If project-specific environmental review is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable adopted development guidelines/standards and mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts, imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area of the City. The inclusion of the population, housing, and employment trends and forecasts included in the recently adopted Connect SoCal Regional Growth Forecasts would not affect the analysis or conclusions of the Draft IS/ND.

Therefore, these growth forecasts were not included. No changes to the Draft IS/ND have been made in response to this comment.

2.1.10 Response to Comment L-1-10
The comment provides background information regarding the adoption of the 6th Cycle Final Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Allocation Plan for the SCAG region, which covers the planning period from October 2021 through October 2029. This comment also encourages jurisdictions to prepare their draft housing elements in advance of the October 15, 2021, due date to ensure adequate time to address comments from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and adopt a final housing element. This comment also noted that SCAG’s HELPR

2.0 tool is available to help local jurisdictions and stakeholders understand local land use, site opportunities, and environmental sensitivities for aligning housing planning with HCD’s 6th Cycle housing element requirements.

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» 2-9 This comment has been noted. This comment does not contain any substantive comments or questions about the environmental analysis or conclusions contained in the Draft IS/ND. No further response is required.

2.1.11 Response to Comment L-1-11
This comment noted that Table 4.14.A, Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2021–2029, on page

4.14-19 of the Draft IS/ND, includes the correct Final RHNA Allocation numbers and recommends updating the City’s Housing Element Update webpage to include the Final RHNA Allocation figures.

The City’s Housing Element Update webpage has been updated to include the Final RHNA Allocation figures as suggested.

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22»

APPENDIX A

DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2021- 2029 C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

CYPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

F INAL INITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J UNE 2022
2 P:\CCP1603.10\Final ISND\Final ISMND.docx «06/14/22» -2 This page intentionally left blank
Prepared by:
2021-2029

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT
2021-2029

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2021
Prepared : for
Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration Draft Initial Study Negative Declaration / This page intentionally left blank
July 2021
DRAFT

INITIAL STUDY/NEGATI VE DECLARATION

CYPRESS HOUSING ELEMENT

CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:

City of Cypress
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, California 90630
Prepared by:

LSA
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614
(949) 553-0666
Project No. CCP1603.10
This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................... i Figures and Tables.................................................................................................................................. ii List of Abbreviations and Acronyms...................................................................................................... iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Contact Person..................................................................................................................1-1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Project Overview...............................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Project Location and Existing Environmental Setting .......................................................2-1

2.3 Project Description............................................................................................................2-5

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED...................................... 3-15

3.1 Determination.................................................................................................................3-15

4.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................... 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics.......................................................................................................................4.1-1

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources...............................................................................4.2-5

4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................4.3-7

4.4 Biological Resources.....................................................................................................4.4-11

4.5 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................4.5-15

4.6 Energy...........................................................................................................................4.6-17

4.7 Geology and Soils.........................................................................................................4.7-19

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions..........................................................................................4.8-23

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................................4.9-25

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ....................................................................................4.10-31

4.11 Land Use and Planning...............................................................................................4.11-41

4.12 Mineral Resources......................................................................................................4.12-43

4.13 Noise...........................................................................................................................4.13-45

4.14 Population and Housing.............................................................................................4.14-49

4.15 Public Services............................................................................................................4.15-51

4.16 Recreation..................................................................................................................4.16-53

4.17 Transportation ...........................................................................................................4.17-55

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ...........................................................................................4.18-57

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems......................................................................................4.19-61

4.20 Wildfire.......................................................................................................................4.20-67

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...........................................................................4.21-69

5.0 RECOMMENDATION......................................................................................... 5-1

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED................................................ 6-1

6.1 City of Cypress...................................................................................................................6-1

6.2 IS/ND Preparers.................................................................................................................6-1

7.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 7-1

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) ii

FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Regional Location.............................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2.2: Opportunity Sites – Scenario 3 ......................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2.3: Opportunity Sites – Scenario 4 ....................................................................................... 2-13 TABLES
Table 4.14.A: Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2021–2029 ................................................ 4.14-49 Table 4.19.A: Orange County Class III Landfills............................................................................ 4.19-64

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
ADU accessory dwelling unit
AMI Area Median Income
BMPs Best Management Practices
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen Code California Green Building Standards Code
CalRecycle California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Cypress
DOC California Department of Conservation
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHSZ fire hazard severity zone
FRAP Fire and Resources Assessment Program
GHG greenhouse gas
GSWC Golden State Water Company
HCD (California Department of) Housing and Community Development HEU Housing Element Update

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) iv I-405 Interstate 405
I-605 Interstate 605
IS/ND Initial Study/Negative Declaration
JFTB Joint Forces Training Base
LRA Local Responsibility Area
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MWD Metropolitan Water District
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP/HCP Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
OCFA Orange County Fire Authority
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
OCWD Orange County Water District
project Cypress Housing Element
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SR-22 State Route 22
SR-39 State Route 39
SR-91 State Route 91
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) v tpd tons per day
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ very high fire hazard severity zone
VMT Vehicles Miles Traveled

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
vi P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, this Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) has been prepared for the Cypress Housing Element Project (proposed project) in the City of Cypress. Consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15071, this IS/ND includes a description of the proposed project, an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts, and findings from the environmental analysis.

This IS/ND evaluates the potential environmental impacts that may result from development of the proposed project. The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA and is responsible for adoption of the IS/ND and approval of the project.

1.1 CONTACT PERSON
Any questions or comments regarding the preparation of this IS/ND, its assumptions, or its conclusions should be referred to:

Alicia Velasco, Planning Director
City of Cypress
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, California 90630
Phone: (714) 229-6720
Email: [email protected]

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
1 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -2 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 2-1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section describes the proposed Cypress Housing Element (proposed project) evaluated in this Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND). A description of the proposed project’s location, objectives, and required approvals is provided.

2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The City of Cypress (City) is updating its Housing Element for the 6th Cycle Planning Period from 2021 to 2029. To comply with State Housing law, the City’s Housing Element must be updated to ensure the City’s policies and programs can accommodate the estimated housing growth needs identified in the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation for the Planning Period. Per the RHNA, the City is allocated 3,936 dwelling units to accommodate the estimated growth needed at various income levels. The Housing Element Update (HEU) includes a candidate site analysis to accommodate the 3,936-unit RHNA and any estimated “carryover” from the 5th Cycle Housing Element, and an additional analysis of candidate sites to address future “no net loss” provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 166. As required by State Housing law, including Assembly Bill (AB) 1397, the HEU must identify the City’s ability to accommodate this estimated growth through available sites and appropriate zoning.

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.2.1 Regional Location
The City of Cypress is located in northwestern Orange County within Southern California. As illustrated in Figure 2.1, Regional Location, the City is bordered on the north by the cities of La Palma and Buena Park, on the east by the cities of Anaheim and Stanton, on the south and west by the city of Los Alamitos, and on the west by the cities of Long Beach, Hawaiian Gardens, and Lakewood. According to the United States Census Bureau, the City of Cypress has a total area of 6.6 square miles. Regional access to the City is provided via State Route 22 (SR-22), Beach Boulevard (State Route 39 [SR-39]), State Route 91 (SR-91), and Interstates 405 and 605 (I-405 and I-605, respectively).

2.2.2 Existing Project Area Conditions
Cypress began as a small dairy community established along Pacific Electric's rail line between Los Angeles and Santa Ana in the early 1900s. The new town began to develop around the rail station at what is now the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Walker Street. Soon after the City's incorporation in 1956, Cypress began a period of rapid development that primarily included the addition of singlefamily housing tracts. Lincoln Avenue emerged as the City’s primary commercial corridor. The Los Alamitos Race Course was built on a 435-acre ranch in the southern portion of the City. Cypress College opened in 1966 on approximately 110 acres southeast of Valley View Street and Lincoln Avenue. The master-planned Cypress Business Park was developed in the mid-1970s and 1980s, providing employment opportunities for the City's residents as well as residents of neighboring communities in the region. An extensive parks and recreation system has been developed to serve City residents and workers. Since the closure of the Cypress Golf Course in the

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -2 This page intentionally left blank
S
erviceLayerCredits:©2021Microsoft
Corporation©2021TomTom

LEGENDP
rojectArea-CypressCityLimits
CityBoundary
LosAngeles
County
Orange
County
Ã73
Ã47
Ã261
Ã72
Ã39
Ã142
Ã1
Ã55
Ã22
Ã19
Ã57
Ã60
Ã91
ProjectLocation
§¨¦10
§¨¦5
§¨¦105
§¨¦110
§¨¦710
§¨¦605
§¨¦405
§¨¦5
SOURCE:USGS7.5'Quad-LosAlamitos(1981),CA
I:\CCP1603.10\GIS\MXD\ISMND\ProjectLocation.mxd(4/20/2021) FIGURE2.1
CypressHousingElement
RegionalLocation
ProjectVicinity
015003000
FEET

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -4 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 2-5 southern portion of the City in 2004, the areas adjacent to the Los Alamitos Race Course have undergone redevelopment, transforming into a Costco, the Cottonwood Church campus, senior housing, and a new sports park. A mixed-use development with 251 residential units, a hotel, and commercial space was approved in May 2020 for a 13-acre property at the northeast corner of Siboney and Katella Avenue. The City is now almost completely built out and contains very limited undeveloped land.

The City is situated within an area typified by a Mediterranean climate, which is characterized by mild winters and dry, warm summers. The interactions of topography and local atmospheric circulation cause this region of California to experience high quantities of photochemical smog. Levels of air pollution measured at a nearby station exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for two of the six pollutants.

The City receives its water from two major sources: the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) and the groundwater basin underlying the northern half of Orange County. Imported water comes mainly from the Colorado River, with a smaller amount being acquired from the State Water Project in northern California. Coyote Creek, Carbon Creek, Moody Creek, and the Stanton Storm Channel comprise the regional drainage systems for the area.

Urbanization within the City has eliminated any sizeable expanses of undisturbed native vegetation.

The City’s terrain is nearly flat, with a gradual downward slope from the northeast to the southwest.

2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project evaluated in this IS/ND includes the adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element. The project is described in greater detail below.

2.3.1 Project Background
State law requires a Housing Element as a mandatory component of a jurisdiction’s General Plan and requires that this Element be revised every 8 years. Periodic updates of the Housing Element ensure that local policies and programs are responsive to changing conditions and future housing needs.

Housing Element law requires the City to analyze resources available and to quantify projected housing needs by income category. The City must demonstrate that there is available land with the appropriate densities to allow the development of affordable housing to occur, and that it has programs in place or it will develop programs that will modify any regulatory measures serving as a constraint to the development of affordable housing.

2.3.2 2021–2029 City of Cypress General Plan Housing Element Pursuant to State law, the City has prepared an update to its Housing Element covering the 6th Cycle Planning Period from October 2021– October 2029. The draft 2021–2029 Housing Element addresses the needs of all income levels. It contains an analysis and update of housing and population data based on the most current conditions and sources of information. The revisions incorporate current population and housing projections based upon SCAG’s RHNA adopted in March 2021 for the 6th Cycle Planning Period. In accordance with State Housing law, the draft 2021–2029 Housing Element contains the following:

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -6

1. An assessment of housing needs in the City of Cypress;

2. An assessment of actual and potential constraints to the provision and maintenance of affordable housing;

3. An analysis of the City’s accomplishments during the 2014–2021 Housing Element cycle;

4. An evaluation of potential residential development based on the current General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and

5. The formulation of goals and policies the City will implement to address a number of important housing-related issues and to ensure sufficient land capacity to meet the RHNA objectives.

The draft Housing Element calls for the continuation of existing policies and programs to enable the City to meet future housing demands for all economic segments of the community that address housing quality and quantity, housing affordability and access, equal housing opportunities and natural resources, energy efficiency and conservation, and identifies new programs in conformance with recent housing legislation for implementation during the 2021–2029 Housing Element cycle.

2.3.3 Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The 2021–2029 Housing Element consists of a detailed analysis of the City’s demographic, economic and housing characteristics, as well as an 8-year housing strategy to address the housing needs of the community. The Housing Element calls out goals, policies, and objectives relative to meeting the housing needs of the community. The goals of the Housing Element are to promote housing that helps to create safe, livable, and sustainable neighborhoods, facilitate the construction and provision of quality housing to meet the City’s diverse needs, create opportunities for affordable housing, particularly in vulnerable areas and in areas of opportunity, and promote equitable and accessible housing options and resources.

The 2021–2029 Housing Element does not propose or approve any specific development projects. The Housing Element acknowledges and addresses recent State legislation regarding requirements for local density bonus programs, surplus lands, accessory dwelling unit (ADU) streamlining, and removing local barriers to housing. It is not possible to predict which properties in the City, if any, may propose and qualify for density bonus programs. The Housing Element includes a policy that requires that a rezoning program be undertaken during the early portion of the 6th Cycle Planning Period to ensure internal consistency between the various elements of the City’s General Plan and its Zoning Ordinance. The adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element will not result in any physical changes to the environment. Future discretionary governmental approval of site-specific housing projects, including those proposing a density bonus component, will require review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and, if applicable, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

2.3.4 Opportunity Sites
All new development under the proposed Housing Element is planned for areas already designated for residential or commercial development. Development of the housing units identified in the Housing Element to meet the RHNA allocation would not increase the number of dwelling units and the population beyond the assumptions used in the General Plan.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 2-7 This IS/ND analyzes the potential environmental impacts that would be expected to result from the adoption of the Housing Element. Although the Housing Element identifies several adequate sites that are able to accommodate the development of up to 1,620 new housing units, the City has a large unaccommodated housing need of 2,316 units in order to meet its RHNA allocation of 3,936 units.

The City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for future housing development.

Amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan may be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. Because the City’s General Plan is required to be “internally consistent,” meaning any and all conflicts between General Plan elements must be acknowledged and resolved, the Housing Element is required to contain a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan to accommodate this housing need.

Due to the various complexities that are often involved with processing a General Plan amendment and rezoning, State law provides local jurisdictions with a grace period for rezoning/amending their General Plans. Generally, any rezoning or General Plan amendments required to ensure internal consistency should occur no later than 3 years and 120 days from the beginning of the planning period.

On April 12, 2021, the Cypress City Council selected two scenarios (Scenarios 3 and 4) for meeting its RHNA allocation, both of which would require rezoning and/or a General Plan amendment. These scenarios are described in detail below.

The environmental analysis in this IS/ND is limited to the policies included in the HEU. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including the corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

2.3.4.1 Scenario 3 – Lincoln Avenue/Los Alamitos Race Course As shown in Figure 2.2, Opportunity Sites - Scenario 3, this scenario generally splits the City’s RHNA between the Lincoln Avenue Specific Plan and the Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan

2.0 (the Los Alamitos Race Course property), with some of the RHNA also falling within the Cypress Business and Professional Center Specific Plan along Katella Avenue. The Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0 would be amended to allow up to 1,930 units (it currently allows up to 1,250 units). The majority of the zoning in the Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0 would remain unchanged, with 109.9 acres allowing densities ranging from 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre. Densities within the other approximately 14.5 acres would increase to 45 to 50 dwelling units per acre. Any changes to the Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0 would require voter approval. Under this scenario, all of the opportunity sites within the Lincoln Avenue Specific Plan would be zoned for 30 dwelling units per acre. The opportunity site within the Cypress Business and Professional Center Specific Plan would be zoned for 60 dwelling units per acre.

Upon State certification of the HEU, Scenario 3 requires the City Council to implement its zoning changes through the public hearing process, and changes to the Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0 require voter approval. Because Scenario 3 cannot be implemented without an election, the State requires that the City submit a back-up scenario (Scenario 4) as part of the HEU. If voters do not approve the modifications to Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0, the City would be required to implement the selected backup option.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -8 This page intentionally left blank
/D /XQD 'U
'
:LOGH
G $YH
/RV
R HQ] 'U
6DQ 0DU 6D
W 6
0\UD $YH
H
6W
HHN 0
6+,5/(<
2UDQJ
GXDF
 GXDF
3URSRVHG'HQVLW\
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
FIGURE 2.2
Opportunity Sites - Scenario 3
I:\CCP1603.10\G\Opportunity_Sites_S-3.ai (4/20/2021)
Cypress Housing Element
SOURCE: City of Cypress
MILES
0 0.25 0.5

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -10 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 2-11

2.3.4.2 Scenario 4 – Lincoln Avenue Mixed Density
As shown in Figure 2.3, Opportunity Sites - Scenario 4, this scenario includes densities between 30 and 60 dwelling units per acre along Lincoln Avenue and allows up to 60 dwelling units per acre at one property within the Cypress Business and Professional Center Specific Plan. In total, 21 parcels at the east end of the Lincoln Avenue corridor, closest to Cypress College, would be zoned for 60 dwelling units per acre. Other areas of the Lincoln Avenue corridor would be zoned for 30 or 50 dwelling units per acre. Scenario 4 would not affect any of the zoning for the Los Alamitos Race Course, which is established by the voter-approved Cypress Town Center and Commons Specific Plan 2.0; therefore, 1,250 units at the Los Alamitos Race Course property would be credited towards the City’s RHNA allocation. Upon State certification of the HEU, Scenario 4 requires the City Council to implement its zoning changes through the public hearing process.

2.3.5 Discretionary Actions
Discretionary approvals required for the proposed project are outlined in the table below:

Discretionary Action Agency Responsible
Adoption of the Housing Element for the City of Cypress Cypress City Council Adoption of this IS/ND Cypress City Council
IS/ND = Initial Study/Negative Declaration
The following provides a description of the City’s primary discretionary approvals for the proposed project.

2.3.5.1 Adoption of the Housing Element
Adoption of the Housing Element would be conducted pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code. As part of this review, the City would consider whether the proposed project is in compliance with State law (Section 65580–65589.8 of the California Government Code) requirements.

2.3.5.2 Adoption of Final IS/ND
The City Council would confirm that the Final IS/ND addresses the potential environmental effects of the proposed project and identifies appropriate mitigation measures to address any potentially significant effects.

2.3.6 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
There are no other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) for the proposed City of Cypress Housing Element. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) reviews and determines whether the proposed Housing Element complies with State law; however, HCD approval is not required for the City’s adoption of the Housing Element.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -12 This page intentionally left blank
/D /XQD 'U
:LOG
G $YH
/R
R '
6 W
$YH
H
HN 0
(<
2 XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
3URSRVHG'HQVLW\
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
XQLWVDF
FIGURE 2.3
Opportunity Sites - Scenario 4
I:\CCP1603.10\G\Opportunity_Sites_S-4.ai (4/20/2021)
Cypress Housing Element
SOURCE: City of Cypress
MILES
0 0.25 0.5

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) -14 This page intentionally left blank

I N I TI AL S TU D Y /NEGATIV E DECLARATION
J U LY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 3-15

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist in Chapter 4.0.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

3.1 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date
Digitally signed by Alicia
Velasco
Date: 2021.07.15 11:01:01
-07'00'

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
3 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -16 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4-1

4.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
4 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -2 or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.1-1

4.1 AESTHETICS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element sets forth the City’s policies and detailed programs for meeting existing and future housing needs as determined by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process, for preserving and enhancing neighborhoods, and for increasing affordable housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low, and moderate income persons and households. The 2021–2029 Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. The goals and policies in the Housing Element Update would not result in any impact to scenic vistas or resources, would not degrade the visual character of the City, and would not cause light or glare impacts beyond what has already been contemplated in the General Plan and Zoning Code. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The location and nature of development will continue to be guided by the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Future housing projects will continue to be reviewed through the City’s entitlement process and in compliance with CEQA to ensure that existing views and aesthetic conditions are preserved, and that the projects are consistent with all General Plan goals,

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.1 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -2 objectives, and policies. Therefore, the Housing Element Update would have no impacts on aesthetic resources, including substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. As described above, the Housing Element Update does not propose any direct changes to land uses, nor does it call out or approve any specific development projects. The goals and policies in the Housing Element Update would not result in any impact to scenic resources beyond what has already been contemplated in the General Plan and Zoning Code. As described above, the Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to scenic resources as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential aesthetic-related impacts are location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards, and any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact. Therefore, the Housing Element Update would not substantially damage scenic resources. No mitigation is required.
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? No Impact. According to the United States Census Bureau, the City of Cypress is located within the Los Angeles—Long Beach—Anaheim, CA Urbanized Area.1 As described in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15387 and defined by the United States Census Bureau, an “urbanized area” is a central city or a group of contiguous cities with a population of 50,000 or more people, together with adjacent densely populated areas having a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile.2 Therefore, the City of Cypress is considered an urbanized area. 1 United States Census Bureau. 2010a. Los Angeles—Long Beach—Anaheim, CA Urbanized Area No. 51445.

Website: https://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/dc10map/UAUC_RefMap/ua/ua51445_los_angeles--long_ beach--anaheim_ca/DC10UA51445_000.pdf (accessed April 8, 2021). 2 United States Census Bureau. 2010b. Census Urban Area FAQs. Website: https://www.census.gov/ programs-surveys/geography/about/faq/2010-urban-area-faq.html (accessed April 8, 2021).

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.1-3 As discussed above, the Housing Element Update does not propose any direct changes to land uses, nor does it call out or approve any specific development projects. The Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to existing visual character or quality of public views as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential aesthetic-related impacts are location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards protecting and enhancing the City’s visual character and public views. All future projects would be required to conform to all applicable development standards and design guidelines in the City’s Municipal Code, General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plans, that regulate scenic quality. Any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact.

Therefore, the Housing Element Update would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. No mitigation is required. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. As described above, the Housing Element Update does not propose any direct changes to land uses nor does it call out or approve any specific development projects. The Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, create sources of substantial light or glare that adversely affect views as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or the rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential aesthetic-related impacts are location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to all applicable requirements related to light and glare, including applicable regulations of the 2019 State Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) and all applicable lighting standards in the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Any impacts identified with individual development projects would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact. Therefore, the Housing Element Update would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.1 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -4 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.2-5

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to agricultural resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

There is no land within the City of Cypress zoned for agricultural uses or land designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Important on maps prepared as part of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program by the California Department of Conservation (DOC). As of 2018, all land within the City was designated as “Urban and Built Up Land.”1 The Housing Element
Update would not convert farmland to a non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural resources would occur, and no mitigation is required.
1 California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2018. Orange County Important Farmland 2018.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.2 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -6 b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact. The Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to agricultural resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. There is no land within the City of Cypress zoned for agricultural uses. The proposed project would not affect Williamson Act contract lands because there is no land under a Williamson Act Contract within the City.1 The proposed project would not convert farmland to a non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract would occur, and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to timber land or forest land, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Additionally, there is no land zoned as forest land or timberland within the City, and forest land and timberland do not exist within the City. The proposed project would not convert forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impacts to forest land or timberland would occur, and no mitigation is required. d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forestland to non-forest use? No Impact. As stated in the response under Threshold 4.2(c) above, the proposed project would not contribute to environmental changes that could result in conversion of forest land to a non-forest use.

Therefore, no impacts to forest land would occur, and no mitigation is required. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. The City does not contain land used for agricultural production and does not contain any forest land. In addition, the City of Cypress has not designated any land within the City for any type of agricultural production. The 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Therefore, no impacts to farmland or forest land would occur, and no mitigation is required. 1 California DOC. 2017. Division of Land Resource Protection. State of California Williamson Act Contract Land.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.3-7

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Impacts Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting its unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The location and nature of development will continue to be guided by the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The Housing Element includes goals, policies, and programs designed to maintain and improve the existing housing stock, ensure that new development is affordable to a range of household income levels, and provide a variety of housing types. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the air quality plans prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to attain State and national air quality standards, or violate any air quality standard. Future housing projects would continue to be reviewed through the City’s entitlement process and CEQA to ensure consistency with local, State, and federal air quality standards and consistency with the goals, policies, and standards established within the other elements of the General Plan that are intended to protect air quality. As such, the proposed project would result in no impacts related to a conflict or obstruction of implementation of applicable air quality plans. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.3 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -8 b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
No Impact. As described above, the 2021-2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to air quality as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts would be potentially significant. Potential air quality-related impacts are location- and project-specific and often cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts related to a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. No mitigation is required. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, as it does not propose any development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts would be potentially significant. Potential air qualityrelated impacts are location- and project-specific and often cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards.

If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Short-term air quality impacts resulting from construction of the sites, such as dust generated by clearing and grading activities, exhaust emissions from gas- and dieselpowered construction equipment, and vehicular emissions associated with the commuting of construction workers would be subject to localized significance thresholds determined by the SCAQMD for Central Orange County. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No mitigation is required. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. As described above, the Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, produce pollutants or odors as it does not propose any development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any potential impacts would be potentially significant. Potential odor-related impacts are location- and project-specific and often

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.3-9 cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards including SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. SCAQMD Rule 402 regarding nuisances states: “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.” Any impacts identified with development allowable under the rezoning program would be addressed through compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in other emissions or objectionable odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.3 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -10 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.4-11

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Impacts Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Cypress General Plan Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element addresses the long-range conservation, preservation, and enhancement of the City's open space and natural environment. The 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to biological habitats as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.4 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -12 program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts would be potentially significant. Potential biological impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. As described above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts would be potentially significant.

Potential biological impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. No mitigation is required. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. As described above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element would not result in any adverse impacts to biological resources. The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to State or federally protected wetlands as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts to State or federally protected wetlands would be potentially significant. Potential biological impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.4-13 is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands. No mitigation is required. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. As described above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element would not result in any adverse impacts to biological resources. The Cypress General Plan Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element addresses the long-range conservation, preservation, and enhancement of the City's open space and natural environment. The 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any impacts would be potentially significant. Potential biological impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No mitigation is required.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element has been prepared to be consistent with the City’s adopted local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources. Future development projects allowed under the rezoning program would be required to be consistent with local policies and ordinances. The City has a Landmark Tree Ordinance in its Municipal Code that protects designated landmark trees, which are specifically identified in the City’s Inventory of Landmark Trees (July 1996).

Additionally, per Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code, Street Trees, any tree within the public rightof-way belongs to the City of Cypress and any work conducted on street trees would be done in accordance with the City Council’s adopted Parkway Tree Policy. Future development consistent with the Housing Element would be required to comply with the City’s tree preservation requirements.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.4 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -14 f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The City is not currently participating in a Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other habitat conservation plan. The Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) 2016 Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) includes a Plan Area that covers the entirety of Orange County, including Cypress. The City is not a party to the OCTA NCCP/HCP, and development activity within the City is not subject to the provisions of the OCTA NCCP/HCP. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to conflicts with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.5-15

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
No Impact. The Cypress General Plan Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element addresses the long-range conservation, preservation, and enhancement of Cypress's open space and natural environment. The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to historical resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential impacts to historical resources are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that development project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
No Impact. The Housing Element is a policy document consistent with the General Plan. The Cypress General Plan Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element addresses the long-range conservation, preservation, and enhancement of Cypress's open space and natural environment.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.5 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -16 The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to archaeological resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether those projects would result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential impacts to archaeological resources are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. In addition, if project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Any evidence of cultural resources that might be unearthed in the process of construction would become immediate grounds for the halting all construction until the extent and significance of any find is properly catalogued and evaluated by archaeological and cultural resource authorities recognized as having competence by the State of California. Furthermore, if it can be concluded that a project would cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, appropriate mitigation measures would be required to preserve the resource in place, in an undisturbed state. Mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, planning construction to avoid the site, deeding conservation easements, or capping the site prior to construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. No mitigation is required.
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
No Impact. The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in the disturbance of any human remains as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether the implementation of those projects could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential cultural impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. As described above, if project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development projects would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, planning construction to avoid the site, deeding conservation easements, or capping the site prior to construction. Additionally, all future development would be required to comply with the State’s Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 in the event human remains are encountered. Therefore, the proposed project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.6-17

4.6 ENERGY
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element is a policy document consistent with the General Plan. The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to energy resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not actually amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential energy impacts are project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards, including California Building Code requirements. New buildings must achieve compliance with 2019 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2019 California Green Building Standards requirements. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.6 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -18 No Impact. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it would result in any impacts that could be potentially significant. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. Future housing development fostered by the Housing Element Update would be required to obtain permits and comply with federal, State, and local regulations aimed at reducing energy consumption. Federal and state energy regulations, such as the California Energy Code Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 24, Part 6), the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) (CCR Title 24, Part 11), and SB 743 transportation-related impact analysis requirements would also be imposed through future development permit review to minimize future energy consumption.

Therefore, future development fostered by the proposed project would be required to be consistent with applicable federal, State, and local laws, policies, and regulations related to renewable energy and energy efficiency. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.7-19

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidences of known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.)
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to geology and soils, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning

C Y PRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.7 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -20 program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Any future housing development would continue to be required to adhere to the California Building Code (CBC) and other standards and regulations for building designs. Impacts resulting from ground shaking, ground failure, landslides, and liquefaction hazards would be required to comply with existing codes and adherence with the recommendations of the project-specific geotechnical report, including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design. Any proposed construction would be required to implement appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Future housing development would be subject to permits and required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing impacts concerning soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Short-term construction-related erosion would be addressed through compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, which requires implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) intended to reduce soil erosion. Considering these requirements, the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

No mitigation is required.
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-site or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on any soil resources as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine that any potential impacts are less than significant. Future housing development would be subject to permits and required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing impacts caused by unstable geological units or soils and would require adherence with the recommendations of a project-specific geotechnical report,

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.7-21 including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design. Any proposed construction would be required to implement appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the proposed project. No mitigation is required.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating direct or indirect substantial risks to life or property? No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact related to expansive soils, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine that any potential impacts are less than significant. Any future housing development that is fostered by the Housing Element would be subject to permits and required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing impacts caused by expansive soils and would require adherence with the recommendations of a projectspecific geotechnical report, including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design.

Any proposed construction would be required to implement appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not create direct or indirect substantial risks to life or property as a result of expansive soils. No mitigation is required.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. As described above, future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. However, any future housing development that is fostered by the Housing Element Update would be in areas served by the City’s sanitary sewer system and would therefore not use septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on any unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s

C Y PRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.7 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -22 unmet housing needs; however, it does not actually amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential impacts to paleontological resources are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. Future housing development fostered by the Housing Element Update would be subject to permits and required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing impacts to paleontological resources. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.8-23

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not actually amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts.

While future projects would emit GHGs, existing regulations and standards that would apply to any future residential development would significantly reduce GHG emissions associated with future projects. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential GHG-related impacts cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until specific details regarding the type and location of a project are known. At such time that a housing development proposal is considered, it would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.8 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -24 No Impact. As a policy document, the Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in the emission of GHGs as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Existing regulations and standards that would apply to any future residential development, would reduce GHG emissions associated with future projects. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts. The City of Cypress has not adopted a GHG reduction plan. In addition, the City has not completed the GHG inventory, benchmarking, and goal-setting process required to identify a reduction target and to take advantage of the streamlining provisions contained in the State CEQA Guidelines amendments adopted for SB 97. Since no other local or regional climate action plan is in place, future projects may be assessed for their consistency with the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) adopted Scoping Plan.1 This would be achieved with an assessment of a project’s compliance with the elements of the Scoping Plan. In addition, future projects would be required to comply with Title 24 of the CCR established by the California Energy Commission (CEC) regarding energy conservation and green-building standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

No mitigation is required.
1 CARB. 2017. November. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/ scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf (accessed June 22, 2021).

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.9-25

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. Adoption of the City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program would be required to comply with applicable State and federal regulations for the proper transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous waste and may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.9 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -26 would result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential hazard-related impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that development project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
No Impact. Adoption of the Housing Element Update would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. All future development allowed under the rezoning program would be required to comply with applicable State and federal regulations for proper handling of hazardous materials and may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential hazardrelated impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that development project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No mitigation is required.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. As described above, adoption of the Housing Element Update would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Any future housing development allowed under the rezoning program would need to adhere to mandatory requirements and regulations related to the emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or wastes near schools to reduce the potential for impacts to schools. As a result, future housing development facilitated by the Housing Element Update would not conflict with any State or local plan aimed at preventing emissions or handling of hazardous materials near schools. All future

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.9-27 development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential hazard-related impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that development project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. No mitigation is required. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. As described above, adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in impacts related to hazardous materials sites, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. All future development would require site-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts related to hazardous materials sites. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that development project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts related to hazardous materials sites. No mitigation is required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in impacts related to safety hazards in the vicinity of airports, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

There are no public or private airports located within the City’s limits. The closest airport to the City is the Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) Los Alamitos, which is located approximately 0.5 mile southwest of the City’s boundaries in the neighboring City of Los Alamitos. The facilities at JFTB Los Alamitos include two runways and associated taxiways, ramp space, and hangars. According to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for JFTB Los Alamitos,1 the entire City is within the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Part 77 Notification Area and most of the City, with the exception of the 1 Airport Land Use Commission. 2017. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos. August 17.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.9 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -28 northernmost portion of the City, is within an AELUP height restriction zone for JFTB Los Alamitos.1 The second closest airport is the Long Beach Municipal Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles west of the City in Long Beach. According to the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan,2 the northernmost portion of the City is located within the Part 77 Notification Area for the Long Beach Municipal Airport. Height limitations are imposed on projects within a height restriction zone so that structures or trees (1) do not obstruct the airspace required for take off, flight, or landing of aircraft at an airport, or (2) are not otherwise hazardous to the landing or taking off of aircraft.

Any future development allowed under the rezoning program would be required to comply with all appropriate Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards and requirements, including notifying the FAA of any proposed structure(s) that would penetrate the 100 to 1 imaginary surface the surrounds the runways at JFTB Los Alamitos and the Long Beach Municipal Airport, to ensure potential aviation hazards are avoided. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No mitigation is required. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. All future development allowed under the rezoning program may require site-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts related to adopted emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans. All future housing development would be required to meet the fire department and emergency personnel access requirements and therefore would not interfere with emergency response and evacuation plans. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan and/or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland 1 Orange County Airport Land Use Commission. 2016. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos. Website: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JFTB-AELUP2016 ProposedFINAL.pdf (accessed December 29, 2019). 2 Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission. 2014. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan.

December 1.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.9-29 fires, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future housing development allowed under the rezoning program would be located in an urban area and would not expose people or structures to a substantial risk of wildfires. Therefore, there would be no risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.9 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -30 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.10-31

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
k) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as
temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical stormwater pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens,
petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment,
nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash)
l) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction?
m) Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream?
n) Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff?
o) Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes?

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.10 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -32 p) Be tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired?
q) Be tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? r) Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters?
s) Have a potentially significant adverse impact on
groundwater quality?
t) Cause or contribute to an exceeded applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or
degradation of beneficial uses?
u) Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat?
v) Would the project include new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practices (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant
environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors or odors)? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Or
f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Or
k) Would the project result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical stormwater pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash) Or
l) Would the project result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction?
Or
r) Would the project have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters?
No Impact. Adoption of the City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element would not have an impact on hydrology or water resources, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.10-33 Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan.

After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether any potential impacts are less than significant. Potential waterrelated impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. If a project proposes to disturb more than 1 acre of soil, the State requires that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes BMPs, be prepared. BMP examples generally include an effective combination of erosion and sediment controls, which include barriers such as silt fences, hay bales, drain inlet protection, and gravel bags, etc. Existing vegetation should be preserved as much as possible. Therefore, there would be no impacts. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Future housing development fostered by the Housing Element Update would be required to incorporate features that would reduce impervious area, as feasible, and promote water infiltration. Treatment control and hydromodification management facilities would promote retention and infiltration of stormwater. Redevelopment of developed sites requires compliance with water quality standards intended to reduce runoff, increase infiltration, and improve water quality. Potable water would be obtained from the Orange County Water District (OCWD). Increased water use would not substantially affect groundwater supplies because the groundwater basin has been sustainably managed by OCWD over the last 10 years, and it is anticipated that the Coastal Plain of the Orange County Groundwater Basin will continue to be sustainably managed with implementation of the Basin 8-1 Alternative. The Basin 8-1 Alternative establishes objectives and criteria for groundwater management within the Coastal Plain of the Orange County Groundwater Basin.
1 1 Orange County Water District. 2017. Basin 8-1 Alternative – OCWD Management Area. January 1, 2017.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.10 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -34 Future housing development would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing construction and operations impacts to groundwater supplies.

Considering these requirements, future housing development fostered by the Housing Element Update would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Housing Element Update may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Therefore, there would be no impact, and no mitigation is required. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Or
d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Or
e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Or
m) Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? Or
n) Would the project result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff? Or
o) Would the project create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on existing drainage patterns of a site or area or create or contribute runoff water, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts. Future development may be subject to site-specific environmental studies as determined by the City and would comply with applicable policies related to hydrology and water quality issues, including the requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as enforced by the State Regional Water Control Board, which requires compliance with the NPDES permit for construction runoff and long-term urban runoff. Future housing development would be

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.10-35 required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding construction and operations impacts that could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or alter the course of a stream or river. Considering these requirements, future housing development facilitated by the Housing Element Update would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area.

This includes no alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Or
h) Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The vast majority of the City is located in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone X, ‘Area of Minimal Flood Hazard’. Select areas of the City generally located adjacent to the Carbon Creek and Bolsa Chica storm drain channels are subject to inundation by the 1-percentannual-chance flood event (Zone A). Adoption of the Housing Element Update would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential flood-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flows. No mitigation would be required.
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. As described in the Cypress General Plan Safety Element, the City is located within the dam inundation area of three dams: Prado, Carbon Canyon and Whittier Narrows.1 Prado Dam is located approximately 23 miles northeast of the City in Riverside County. The dam was designed in the 1930s but has recently increased its functioning capability due to the Seven Oaks Dam, which was 1 City of Cypress. 2001. City of Cypress General Plan Safety Element. October 5.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.10 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -36 completed in November 1999 and is located approximately 40 miles upstream on the Santa Ana River.

During a flood, Seven Oaks Dam will store water destined for Prado Dam for as long as the reservoir pool at Prado Dam is rising. When the flood threat at Prado Dam has passed, Seven Oaks Dam will begin to release its stored flood water at a rate that does not exceed the downstream channel capacity. Working in tandem, the Prado and Seven Oaks Dams provide increased flood protection to Orange County.

In addition, construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project was initiated in 1989 and is scheduled for completion in 2021. The Santa Ana River Mainstem Project will increase levels of flood protection to more than 3.35 million people in Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties.

Improvements to 23 miles of the Lower Santa Ana River channel, from Prado Dam to the Pacific Ocean, are 95 percent complete, with the remaining bank protection improvements in Yorba Linda currently under construction. Improvements to the Santa Ana River channel include construction of new levees and dikes. In addition, the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project includes improvements to Prado Dam that are currently underway and are estimated to be completed in 2021. The Prado Dam embankment has been raised and the outlet works have been reconstructed to convey additional discharges.

Remaining improvements to Prado Dam include acquisition of additional land for the expansion of the Prado Reservoir, construction of protective dikes, and raising of the spillway.1 Carbon Canyon Dam, located in the northeastern portion of the City of Brea, is an earthfill dam that was designed to hold 12,000-acre feet of water. If dam waters were to exceed this capacity, the portion of Cypress below Orange Avenue could be completely covered. The Whittier Narrows Dam is located in Pico Rivera and is also of earthfill construction. The City has prepared emergency evacuation plans for the Prado, Carbon Canyon, and Whittier Narrows Dams.

Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential floodrelated impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. The potential for dam failure is remote and the City’s emergency evacuation plans would be implemented if these dams were susceptible to rupture during heavy rains or other events. Therefore, there would be no impact related to the exposure of people and structures to significant risk associated with flooding as a result of dam failure. No mitigation is required.
1 Orange County Public Works. 2019. Orange County Flood Division. Santa Ana River Project. Website:
http://www.ocflood.com/sarp (accessed April 16, 2021).

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.10-37 j) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. There are no open bodies of water in the vicinity of the City; therefore, it is not located within an inundation zone of a seiche. The City is also relatively flat and not at risk from mudflow. The City is located approximately 5 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean and is not located within a tsunami inundation zone, according to the Orange County Tsunami Inundation Maps.1 Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in impacts related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Furthermore, as discussed above, no areas within the City are prone to inundation due to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, no impact from inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would occur, and no mitigation is required.
p) Would the project be tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired?
Or
q) Would the project be tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions?
No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on hydrology or water resources, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential waterrelated impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. If a project proposes to disturb more than 1 acre of soil, the State requires that a SWPPP, which includes BMPs, be prepared. BMP examples generally include an effective combination of erosion and sediment controls, which include barriers such as silt fences, hay bales, drain inlet protection, and gravel bags, etc. Existing vegetation should be preserved as much as possible. Therefore, there would be no impacts to impaired water bodies or other environmentally sensitive areas. No mitigation is required. s) Would the project have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? 1 California Department of Conservation. 2019. Orange County Tsunami Inundation Maps. Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/orange (accessed April 16, 2021).

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.10 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -38 Or
t) Would the project cause or contribute to an exceeded applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? No Impact. Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not have an impact on surface or groundwater quality, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Future housing development allowed under the rezoning program may be required to incorporate features that would capture and treat stormwater runoff on-site and reduce the volume of stormwater and the infiltration of pollutants into groundwater. Future housing development would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing construction and operations impacts to surface and groundwater. Considering these requirements, future housing development fostered by the Housing Element Update would not have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality or cause or contribute to exceeded applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses. Therefore, there would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.
u) Would the project impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? No Impact. The City is currently developed and located in an urban area. Runoff from the City is directed toward one of two storm drainage channels before reaching the Pacific Ocean. The southeastern portion of the City drains toward the Bolsa Chica Channel, a rock-lined trapezoidal channel that does not provide aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat. Anaheim Bay, the ultimate receiving water from the Bolsa Chica Channel, is a wetland that supports aquatic and riparian habitat.

The northern and western portions of the City drain toward the San Gabriel River, which does not provide aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat. The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential impacts to aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If projectspecific environmental review is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat. No mitigation is required.
v) Would the project include new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practices (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors or odors)?

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.10-39 No Impact. Adoption of the Housing Element Update would not have an impact related to stormwater treatment control BMPs, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Impacts related to any proposed stormwater treatment control BMPs would be addressed through project-specific environmental evaluation. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental review is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, there would be no impacts. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.10 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -40 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.11-41

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting its unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The location and nature of development will continue to be guided by the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in the physical division of an established community, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential land use-related impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through mitigation measures imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, there would be no impact related to the physical division of an established community. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element sets forth the City’s policies and detailed programs for meeting existing and future housing needs as determined by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process, for preserving and enhancing neighborhoods, and for increasing

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.11 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -42 affordable housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low, and moderate income persons and households. As described previously, although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting its unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The location and nature of development will continue to be guided by the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. With implementation of the rezoning program, the 2021–2029 Housing Element would be consistent with the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential land use-related impacts are location- and project-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through mitigation measures imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.12-43

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) enacted by the California Legislature in 1975 provides guidelines to assist with classification and designation of mineral lands. These areas were designated under the basis of several geologic factors but not in regard to existing land uses and ownership. These Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) are divided into the following four categories:
• MRZ-1: An area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-2: An area where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-3: An area containing mineral deposits of which their significance cannot be properly evaluated.
• MRZ-4: An area where information is not adequate enough to be able to assign to any other MRZ zone.

From these four categories, areas classified as MRZ-2 are considered to of the greatest importance.

Under an MRZ-2 classification, areas have been found to possess a high likelihood for the presence of a significant amount of mineral deposits. Additionally, MRZ-2 areas are designated by the State of California Mining and Geology Board as being “regionally significant.” The entirety of the City of Cypress is shown to not contain any MRZ-2 zones or be within proximity to these areas.1
There are no known mineral resources in the City and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely due to the urbanized nature of the area. 1 California Department of Conservation (DOC). Division of Mines and Geology. 1981. Mineral Land Classification Map. Los Alamitos Quadrangle. Special Report 143, Plate 3.17.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.12 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -44 The Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to mineral resources as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. All future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental review is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, no impacts related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource would occur, and no mitigation is required. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. As stated in above, the City is clearly shown to not be a part of a mineral resource zone containing any known valuable mineral resources, which would suggest a high unlikelihood of minerals being extracted in the City. Additionally, the Housing Element would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to mineral resources as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential mineral-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.13-45

4.13 NOISE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? No Impact. Adoption of the City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in exposure of persons to noise in excess of established standards, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential noise-related impacts are project- and location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental review is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.13 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -46 No Impact. As described above, adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in the generation of excessive vibration or groundborne noise, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential vibration-related impacts are project- and location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the specific details of a project and its location are known. At such time that a housing development proposal is considered, it would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. No mitigation is required.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The closest airport to the City is the Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) Los Alamitos, which is located approximately 0.5 mile southwest of the City’s boundaries in the neighboring City of Los Alamitos. According to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for JFTB Los Alamitos1 and Exhibit SAF-82 in the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan, southeastern portions of the City are within the 60 and 65 dBA CNEL (A-weighted decibel community noise equivalent level) noise contours for JFTB Los Alamitos, which are defined by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan as Noise Impact Zone 2 (moderate noise impacts) and Noise Impact Zone 1 (high noise impacts). These areas of the City are primarily composed of business park facilities; however, some existing residences are within these noise contours. None of the opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element are located within either of the Noise Impact Zones identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan.

The second closest airport is the Long Beach Municipal Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles west of the City in Long Beach. According to the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan,3 the entire City is located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour for the Long Beach Municipal Airport. Therefore, aircraft noise generated from the two closest airports would not expose people residing or working on the project site to excessive noise levels due to the proximity of a public airport.

Adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels, as the Housing Element does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of 1 Airport Land Use Commission. 2017. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos. August 17. 2 City of Cypress. General Plan Safety Element. 3 Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission. 2014. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan.

December 1.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.13-47 existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts. Potential noise-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards, including review by the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission to confirm that a proposed housing development is consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for JFTB Los Alamitos. If projectspecific environmental review is required, any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.13 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -48 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.14-49

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The project represents a revision to the City’s existing Housing Element as required by State law. SCAG has allocated the following RHNA to the City of Cypress for the 2021–2029 Housing Cycle, as shown in Table 4.14.A. This RHNA represents the City’s fair share of the housing needs for the Southern California region, including an equitable share of affordable housing.

Table 4.14.A: Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2021–2029 Income Level Number of Units Percent of Total RHNA
Very Low* (<50% of AMI) 1,150 29.2%
Low (50–80% of AMI) 657 16.7%
Moderate (80–120% of AMI) 623 15.8%
Above Moderate (>120% of AMI) 1,506 38.3%
TOTAL 3,936 100%
Source: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2021. 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation.

Note: An estimated half of Cypress’ very-low-income housing needs (573 units) are for extremely lowincome households earning less than 30% of AMI).

AMI = Area Median Income
RHNA = Regional Housing Needs Assessment
As part of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs. Amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.14 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -50 elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update recommends various housing programs to assist in providing housing for all income levels including extremely low-, very low-, low- , moderate-, and above moderate-income households. The housing element is one part of the General Plan, which establishes policy to guide the orderly development of the community. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update sets forth programs and policies to facilitate housing conservation, maintenance, and diversity, and no aspect of the project involves the displacement of existing residents.

The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts related to population and housing, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in potentially significant impacts. Potential impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. If project specific environmental review is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable adopted development guidelines/standards and mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts, imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area of the City. No mitigation is required. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts from the displacement of people or housing, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Potential impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. If project-specific environmental review is required, any potentially significant impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable adopted development guidelines/standards and mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts, imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, no impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing would occur. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.15-51

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

I. Fire protection?
II. Police protection?
III. Schools?
IV. Parks?
V. Other public facilities?
No Impact. The primary purpose of the City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update is to establish City housing goals, objectives, and policies, address governmental constraints, and identify opportunities to meet housing needs for the next 8 years. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.15 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -52 the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in environmental impacts associated with the construction of new or additional facilities needed as a result of reduced public service performance objectives as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential public services-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a housing development proposal is considered, it would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.16-53

4.16 RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Or
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to parks or recreational facilities as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it could result in any potentially significant impacts.

Potential recreation-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a specific development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards. Section 25- 43 of the City’s Municipal Code establishes a standard of 3.0 acres of land per 1,000 residents for park and recreational purposes, and an additional 1.5 acres of land per 1,000 residents for such purposes that are made available at K–12 schools through a cooperative arrangement between the City and local school districts and local park and recreation districts. This results in a total of 4.5 acres of land

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.16 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -54 per 1,000 residents. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations (as described above) and with any mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts to recreational facilities. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.17-55

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Or
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update is consistent with regulations to promote pedestrian and bicycle pathways, transit, and other actions to decrease Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) within the City. New development would be subject to policies described in the Circulation Element of the General Plan, as well as other policies that promote reduction of VMT.

Therefore, the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in transportation impacts, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development.

Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.17 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -56 environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). No mitigation is required. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Or
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact. As described above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in transportation impacts, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations, with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Street designs for future roads would be required to conform to the typical street widths and design elements. The roadway design standards for the City of Cypress are based on engineering standards and on evolving policies and practices regarding the City’s transportation infrastructure. The roadway design standards meet both State and nationally acceptable design criteria. All street improvements within the City would be subject to the approval of the City Engineer; furthermore, these improvements would be subject to the standards of the latest adopted edition of the Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual, where applicable. Long-term congestion relief resulting from implementation of the Circulation Element would improve emergency access throughout the City for police, fire, and emergency protection services. Therefore, no dangerous design components or inadequate emergency access would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to inadequate emergency access. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.18-57

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k)? Or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? Or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact. AB 52 and CEQA Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, subdivisions (b), (d), require a lead agency to consult with any California Native American tribe that requests consultation and is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on January 19, 2021, to conduct a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and provide a Native American Contact List for the project site pursuant to AB 52 and

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.18 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -58 CEQA Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, subdivisions (b), (d). The NAHC responded on February 16, 2021, stating that an SLF search was completed for the project site with negative results.

The NAHC recommended that 17 Native American individuals representing the Diegueño, Gabrielino, Juaneño, Cupeño Luiseño, Cahuilla, Cahuilla Luiseño, and Kumeyaay groups be contacted for information regarding cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project. Letters were also sent to two additional individuals who had requested to be notified of projects during AB 52 consultation (and were not listed by the NAHC), representing the Cahuilla Luiseño, Juaneño, and Gabrielino groups. Nineteen individuals were contacted through letters sent via U.S. Postal Service Certified Mail on February 25, 2021. One response was received from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation on March 22, 2021, requesting consultation. The City responded to clarify that the project does not involve ground disturbance and asked whether the Tribe still wished to consult.

The Tribe responded that there is no need for consultation if there is no ground disturbance.

California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of SB 18) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan, or to designate open space that includes Native American Cultural Places. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the NAHC. The City conducted SB 18 outreach to California Native American tribes and provided an opportunity for the tribes to consult regarding the Housing Element Update. The NAHC was contacted on January 19, 2021, to conduct an SLF search and provide a Native American Contact List for the project site pursuant to SB 18. The NAHC responded on February 16, 2021, stating that an SLF search was completed for the project site with negative results. The NAHC recommended that 17 Native American individuals representing the Diegueño, Gabrielino, Juaneño, Cupeño Luiseño, Cahuilla, Cahuilla Luiseño, and Kumeyaay groups be contacted for information regarding cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project. Letters were also sent to two additional individuals who had requested to be notified of projects during AB 52 consultation (and were not listed by the NAHC), representing the Cahuilla Luiseño, Juaneño, and Gabrielino groups. Nineteen individuals were contacted through letters sent via U.S. Postal Service Certified Mail on March 2, 2021. One response was received from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation on March 22, 2021, requesting consultation. The City responded to clarify that the project does not involve ground disturbance and asked whether the Tribe still wished to consult. The Tribe responded that there is no need for consultation if there is no ground disturbance.

The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update identifies sites designated for residential development and does not propose specific development at this time. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to tribal cultural resources, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require project-specific environmental evaluation. Potential tribal cultural-related impacts are location specific and cannot be

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.18-59 assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations (such as consultation through AB 52), with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts, imposed as part of the tribal consultation and environmental review process. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts on tribal cultural resources. No mitigation is required.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.18 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -60 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.19-61

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Although the City has identified several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Potential utilities and services-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.19 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -62 location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered, that project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to utilities and service systems. No mitigation is required.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. The Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations and with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

The City of Cypress is served by the West Orange County System of the Golden State Water Company (GSWC), a private water service provider. Water provided in the West Orange County System is a blend of groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin and imported water. According to GSWC’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for the West Orange County System, the company delivered 13,441 acre-feet of water to the service area in 2015. The total service demand was expected to increase to 16,442 acre-feet by 2020 and projected to increase to 17,010 acre-feet by 2035. According to the UWMP, the West Orange County System is expected to have the ability to supply 17,510 acre-feet of water in 2035, exceeding the projected demands. 1 Therefore, adequate
water supply is available to accommodate the RHNA during the Housing Element planning period.

Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts related to water supplies. No mitigation is required.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental 1 Golden State Water Company (GSWC). 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, West Orange.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.19-63 evaluation. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations and with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

Wastewater in the City of Cypress is collected, treated, and disposed of by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The OCSD provides wastewater collection, treatment, and recycling for approximately 2.6 million people living within a 479-square-mile area of central and northwestern Orange County.1
According to the OCSD’s 2020 Sewer System Management Plan, “OC San’s CIP assures that older facilities are upgraded as needed to ensure adequate capacity through the system.

OC San works under annual and long-range plans that have proven effective, and OC San is not currently experiencing capacity related problems. Indications of possible capacity problems seen by the Collections Facilities O&M Division are brought to the attention of the Engineering Department for further evaluation.”2 Therefore, there are no constraints on the availability of wastewater disposal or treatment.

SB 1087 also mandates priority sewage collection and treatment service to housing developments providing units affordable to lower-income households. The City would provide a copy of the adopted Housing Element to the OCSD within 30 days of adoption and the City would continue to coordinate with the OCSD to ensure priority service provision to affordable housing developments.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to the provision of wastewater treatment services. No mitigation is required.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation. If project-specific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations and with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process.

The City currently contracts with Valley Vista Waste and Recycling Services, a private solid waste hauler, to collect and dispose of the solid waste generated throughout the City. Solid waste collected 1 Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2018. 2018-2019 Annual Report. Website: https://www.ocsd. com/Home/ShowDocument?id=29415 (accessed April 15, 2021). 2 OCSD. 2020. System Management Plan for Orange County Sanitation District. Website: https://www.ocsd. com/Home/ShowDocument?id=29880 (accessed April 15, 2021).

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.19 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -64 in the City by Valley Vista would be transported to one of the Class III landfills operated and maintained by Orange County Waste & Recycling (OCWR). OCWR owns and operates three active landfills (i.e., the Olinda Alpha Landfill in Brea, the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill in Irvine, and the Prima Deshecha Landfill in San Juan Capistrano). All three landfills are permitted as Class III landfills, which only accept non-hazardous municipal solid waste for disposal; no hazardous or liquid waste is accepted. County residents are able to dispose of their household hazardous waste items at any of OCWR’s four household hazardous waste collection centers, located in the Cities of Anaheim, Huntington Beach, Irvine, and San Juan Capistrano.
1 Table 4.19.A identifies the Class III sanitary
landfills operated by OCWR.

Table 4.19.A: Orange County Class III Landfills
Landfill Location
Approximate
Distance from City
(miles) Service
Frank R. Bowerman 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road
Irvine, CA 92602
20 Commercial dumping;
no public dumping
Olinda Alpha 1942 North Valencia Avenue
Brea, CA 92823
14 Commercial dumping;
public dumping allowed
Prima Deshecha 32250 La Pata Avenue
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
31 Commercial dumping;
public dumping allowed
Source: Orange County Waste & Recycling.

Of the three Class III landfills currently operated by OCWR, the closest active landfill to the City is the Olinda Alpha Landfill. The Olinda Alpha Landfill, which is currently permitted by the California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery (CalRecycle) to receive a maximum of 8,000 tons per day (tpd) of waste, currently receives an average of approximately 7,000 tpd.2 Therefore, the Olinda Alpha Landfill is currently operating at approximately 87.5 percent of its daily capacity. As of November 2014, the Olinda Alpha Landfill had an estimated remaining disposal capacity of 34,200,000 cubic yards.3 If the State-permitted daily tonnage limit is reached at any County landfill, waste haulers are subject to diversion to local transfer stations located throughout the County.

Therefore, the proposed project would be served by existing landfills. Future housing development allowed under the rezoning program would be subject to discretionary permits and required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for solid waste reduction and recycling.

Considering these requirements, the Housing Element Update would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of local infrastructure’s capacity. Therefore the proposed project would have no impact on planned solid waste capacity, and no mitigation is required.
1 OC Waste & Recycling (OCWR). Household Hazardous Waste. Website: http://www.oclandfills.com/ hazardous (accessed April 15, 2021). 2 OCWR. Olinda Alpha Landfill. Website: http://www.oclandfills.com/landfill/active/olindalandfill (accessed April 15, 2021). 3 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Solid Waste Information System Facility Detail: Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill. Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/ Directory/30-AB-0035/Detail/ (accessed April 15, 2021).

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.19-65 e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. The 2021–2029 Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation. If projectspecific environmental evaluation is required, any impacts identified with the proposed development project would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulations and with mitigation measures specific to any potentially significant impacts imposed as part of the environmental review process. Solid waste disposal practices in California are governed by multiple federal, State, and local agencies that enforce legislation and regulations ensuring that landfill operations minimize impacts to public health and safety and the environment. The California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) changed the focus of solid waste management from landfill to diversion strategies (e.g., source reduction, recycling, and composting). The purpose of the diversion strategies is to reduce dependence on landfills for solid waste disposal. AB 939 established mandatory diversion goals of 25 percent by 1995, 50 percent by 2000, and 75 percent by 2020. The City provides curbside recycling for both residential and commercial uses, as well as curbside residential green waste, which both count toward the City’s solid waste diversion rate. CalRecycle tracks and monitors solid waste disposal on a per capita basis.

Future projects allowed under the rezoning program would be required to comply with the City’s Construction and Demolition Ordinance (City Ordinance No. 1166). The Applicant/Developer would also be required to submit a Materials Questionnaire should the contractor haul away its own demolition waste. As stipulated by City Ordinance No. 1097 and the 2019 California Green Building Standards, the future projects would be required to divert a minimum of 65 percent of construction and demolition debris in order to obtain building permits.1 Additionally, Valley Vista Services certifies 75 percent diversion for all construction and demolition material, 2 which would contribute to an
increased waste diversion rate within the City.

Future projects would be required to comply with existing and future statutes and regulations, including waste diversion programs mandated by City, State, and federal law. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an impact related to federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes, and no mitigation is required. 1 City of Cypress. Construction and Demolition Recycling Requirement. Website: http://www.cypressca.org/ work/building-division/c-d-recycling-requirement (accessed April 15, 2021). 2 Ibid.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.19 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -66 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.20-67

4.20 WILDFIRE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Impact Analysis
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Or
b) Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Or
c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Or
d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. The City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update would not, in and of itself, result in impacts related to wildfires, as it does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Although the City has identified

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.20 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -68 several opportunity sites that are candidates for meeting the City’s unmet housing needs, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other elements in its General Plan will be required to allow for housing development to occur on some of the opportunity sites. The Housing Element contains a program to zone and/or rezone sites or amend the General Plan (rezoning program) to accommodate this housing need; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities. Future development allowed under the rezoning program may require subsequent project-specific environmental evaluation to determine whether it would result in any potentially significant impacts.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped areas of significant fire hazards in the State through its Fire and Resources Assessment Program (FRAP). These maps place areas of California into different fire hazard severity zones (FHSZ), based on a hazard scoring system using subjective criteria for fuels, fire history, terrain influences, housing densities, and occurrence of severe fire weather where urban conflagration could result in catastrophic losses. As part of this mapping system, CAL FIRE is responsible for wildland fire protection for land areas that are generally unincorporated and they are classified as State Responsibility Areas (SRAs). In areas where local fire protection agencies (e.g., Orange County Fire Authority [OCFA]) are responsible for wildfire protection, the lands are classified as Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs). CAL FIRE currently identifies the entire City of Cypress as an LRA. In addition to establishing local or State responsibility for wildfire protection in a specific area, CAL FIRE designates areas as very high fire hazard severity zones (VHFHSZ) or non-VHFHSZ.

According to the CAL FIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps for the Orange County region, the City of Cypress is designated as a non-VHFHSZ.1 The City does not include any SRA. The nearest VHFHSZ to the City is approximately 5 miles to the northeast in the Coyote Hills on the western side of Fullerton.2 The nearest SRA is in the Puente Hills, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City.

Because the City is not located in or near an SRA or VHFHSZ, the project would not result in any impacts related to wildfire. No mitigation is required. 1 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2011. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6739/fhszl_map30.pdf (accessed June 24, 2020). 2 Ibid.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 4.21-69

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Impact Analysis
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No Impact. As described throughout Section 4.4, Biological Resources, Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, and Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the analysis indicates that the City of Cypress 2021–2029 Housing Element Update does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce fish or wildlife habitats, impact wildlife populations or ranges, or eliminate historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources. As described throughout the analysis, the Housing Element contains a rezoning program to accommodate the City’s unmet housing needs; however, it does not specifically amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance or other elements in its General Plan. After the State certifies the Housing Element, a separate environmental study will be necessary to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the rezoning program, including any corresponding changes in land uses and development intensities.

The proposed Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development. Development projects would continue to be subject to existing requirements for project-level review. For the reasons stated above, the project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

4.21 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -70 eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. No mitigation is required.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? No Impact. The Housing Element Update does not entitle, propose, or otherwise require the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development that could contribute to short-term or long-term cumulative impacts that have not previously been contemplated by the General Plan and Zoning Code, which would continue to guide the location and nature of future development in Cypress. Therefore, the proposed project would not have cumulatively considerable impacts. No mitigation is required.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No Impact. As indicated throughout the analysis, the Housing Element Update would have no adverse impacts on people or the environment. The proposed project would not create environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The project would improve the City’s housing stock providing beneficial impacts especially to lower income households. Therefore, the proposed project would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. No mitigation is required.

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 5-1

5.0 RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information and environmental analysis contained in the Initial Study/Environmental Checklist, we recommend that the City of Cypress prepare a Negative Declaration for the 2021–2029 Cypress Housing Element Update. We find that the proposed project would not have a significant effect. We recommend that the first category be selected for the City of Cypress’ determination (see Section 3.1, Determination, in Chapter 3.0, Environmental Factors Potentially Affected).

Date: 7/15/2021
Ryan Bensley, AICP
Project Manager
LSA

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
5 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -2 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 6-1

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED

6.1 CITY OF CYPRESS
The following individuals from the City of Cypress (City) were involved in the preparation of this Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND):
• Alicia Velasco, Planning Director, Community Development Department • Veronica Tam and Associates, Housing Element Consultant

6.2 IS/ND PREPARERS
The following individuals were involved in the preparation of this IS/ND. The nature of their involvement is summarized below.

6.2.1 LSA
The following individuals were involved in the preparation of this IS/ND:
• Deborah Pracilio, Principal in Charge
• Ryan Bensley, AICP, Associate/Project Manager
• Jonathan Hidalgo, Senior Environmental Planner
• Kerrie Collison, Senior Cultural Resources Manager
• Marlene Watanabe, Environmental Planner
• Abby Annicchiarico, Environmental Planner
• Jazmine Estores, Assistant Environmental Planner
• Gary Dow, Associate, Graphics
• Matt Phillips, Graphics Technician
• Lauren Johnson, Technical Editor
• Chantik Virgil, Senior Word Processor

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
6 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -2 This page intentionally left blank

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA
P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx (07/15/21) 7-1

7.0 REFERENCES

AESTHETICS
United States Census Bureau. 2010a. Los Angeles—Long Beach—Anaheim, CA Urbanized Area No. 51445. Website: https://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/dc10map/UAUC_RefMap/ua/ua 51445_los_angeles--long_beach--anaheim_ca/DC10UA51445_000.pdf (accessed April 8, 2021).
_____. 2010b. Census Urban Area FAQs. Website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ geography/about/faq/2010-urban-area-faq.html (accessed April 8, 2021).

AGRICULTURE
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2018. Orange County Important Farmland 2018. _____. 2017. Division of Land Resource Protection. State of California Williamson Act Contract Land.

City of Cypress Zoning Map. Website: https://www.cypressca.org/government/departments/ community-development/zoning-map (accessed March 25, 2021).

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
City of Cypress. 1996. Inventory of Landmark Trees. July.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
CARB. 2017. November. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/ files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf (accessed June 22, 2021).

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
California Department of Conservation. 2019. Orange County Tsunami Inundation Maps. Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/orange (accessed April 16, 2021).

City of Cypress. 2001. City of Cypress General Plan Safety Element. October 5.

Orange County Public Works. 2019. Orange County Flood Division. Santa Ana River Project. Website:
http://www.ocflood.com/sarp (accessed April 16, 2021).

Orange County Water District. 2017. Basin 8-1 Alternative – OCWD Management Area. January 1, 2017.

MINERAL RESOURCES
California Department of Conservation (DOC). Division of Mines and Geology. 1981. Mineral Land Classification Map. Los Alamitos Quadrangle. Special Report 143, Plate 3.17.

C YPRESS HOUSING E LEMENT

C YPRESS , C ALIFORNIA

I NITIAL S TUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION
J ULY 2021
7 P:\CCP1603.10\2 Screencheck ISND\Draft ISND AV LV Clean.docx «07/15/21» -2 NOISE
Airport Land Use Commission. 2017. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos. August 17.

City of Cypress. General Plan Safety Element.

Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission. 2014. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan.

December 1.

POPULATION AND HOUSING
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2021. 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation.

RECREATION
City of Cypress. 2021. Municipal Code. April.

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Solid Waste Information System Facility Detail: Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill. Website: https://www2.calrecycle. ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/30-AB-0035/Detail/ (accessed April 15, 2021).

City of Cypress. Construction and Demolition Recycling Requirement. Website: http://www.cypress ca.org/work/building-division/c-d-recycling-requirement (accessed April 15, 2021).

Golden State Water Company (GSWC). 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, West Orange.

Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2018. 2018-2019 Annual Report. https://www.ocsd.com/ Home/ShowDocument?id=29415 (accessed April 15, 2021).
_____. 2020. System Management Plan for Orange County Sanitation District. Website:
https://www.ocsd.com/Home/ShowDocument?id=29880 (accessed April 15, 2021).

OC Waste & Recycling (OCWR). Household Hazardous Waste. Website: http://www.oclandfills.com/ hazardous (accessed April 15, 2021).
_____. Olinda Alpha Landfill. Website: http://www.oclandfills.com/landfill/active/olindalandfill (accessed April 15, 2021).

WILDFIRE
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2011. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6739/fhszl_map30.pdf (accessed June 24, 2020).

CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 3.

FROM: Alisha Farnell, City Clerk
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Receive and File Public Comments Submitted for the June 27, 2022 City Council Meeting

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file submitted public comments.

BUDGET IMPACT
None.

LEGAL REVIEW
None required.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 5.

FROM: Alisha Farnell, City Clerk
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Approve Minutes - Meeting of May 23, 2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve as submitted.

BUDGET IMPACT
None.

LEGAL REVIEW
None required.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
May 23, 2022 City Council Minutes

REGULAR MEETING

CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL
MAY 23, 2022
5:45 P.M.

A regular meeting of the Cypress City Council was called to order at 5:45 p.m. by Mayor Morales in the Council Chambers, 5275 Orange Avenue, Cypress, California.

ROLL CALL
Cypress City Council, also acting as the Ex-Officio Governing Board of Directors of the Cypress Recreation and Park District
Mayor Paulo Morales
Mayor Pro Tem Anne Hertz-Mallari
Council Member Frances Marquez
Council Member Scott Minikus
Council Member Jon Peat

STAFF PRESENT
City Manager Peter Grant
City Attorney Fred Galante
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Matt Burton City Clerk Alisha Farnell

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

CLOSED SESSION

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Negotiators: City Manager and Director of Finance and Administrative Services Employee Group: Cypress Police Officers Association
Mayor Morales recessed the meeting at 5:47 p.m.

RECONVENE
Mayor Morales called to order the 7:00 p.m. session of the City Council meeting at 7:02 p.m.

ROLL CALL
Cypress City Council, also acting as the Ex-Officio Governing Board of Directors of the Cypress Recreation and Park District
Mayor Paulo Morales
Mayor Pro Tem Anne Hertz-Mallari
Council Member Frances Marquez
Council Member Scott Minikus
Council Member Jon Peat

STAFF PRESENT
City Manager Peter Grant
City Attorney Fred Galante
Director of Public Works Doug Dancs
Director of Recreation and Community Services Jeff Draper Chief of Police Mark Lauderback
City Clerk Alisha Farnell
City Engineer Nick Mangkalakiri
Management Analyst Kirsten Graham
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council Member Scott Minikus led the Pledge of Allegiance.

INVOCATION Father Binh Nguyen, St. Irenaeus Catholic Church, led the Invocation.

REPORT OF WORKSHOP AGENDA/CLOSED SESSION
The City Attorney reported that the City Council met in Closed Session regarding Conference with Labor Negotiator concerning the employee group Cypress Police Officers Association, he reported the City Council received a briefing, provided direction, and no further reportable action was taken.

PRESENTATION
The City Council recognized “Every Student Succeeding” award recipients.

The City Council presented a Proclamation to the Public Works Department in recognition of “National Public Works Week.”
The Chief of Police introduced Officer Gonzalez and Officer Castillo.

Director of Recreation and Community Services provided a presentation on Pickleball Month.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (Limited to 30 minutes – three minutes per speaker, unless extended by the City Council)
Pat O’Toole, Cypress, spoke regarding the solid waste franchise agreement.

Dennis Brandt, Cypress, spoke regarding incident in Barry Drive neighborhood.

Beth Culver, Cypress, spoke regarding city services and accomplishments.

Harumi Lucak, Cypress, thanked City Council for their leadership, city services, and for maintaining at-large elections.

Michelle Eschardiues, Cypress, thanked City Council for city programs/services and expressed support for at-large elections.

Edwin Kraemer, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 9, in support of district elections, and in support of collaboration between the City and school districts.

Helen Le, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18 and solid waste bulky item pickups.

Malini Nagpal, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18 and contracts.

PUBLIC HEARING
Item No. 1: Introduce an Ordinance Amending Section 12 (Density Bonus), Section 5 (Residential Zoning Districts), Subsection 3.11.050 (Allowed Projections Into Required Setback Areas), Subsection 3.17.020 (B) (Accessory Structures Used For Living Purposes) Subsection 3.17.200 (Accessory Dwelling Units), Subsection

4.18.040 (Authority for Land Use and Zoning Decisions), Section 31 (Definitions), and Creating a New Subsection 4.19.200 (Reasonable Accommodation) of the Zoning Ordinance
Mayor Morales stated the Planning Director was unable to participate in the meeting.

Mayor Morales opened the public hearing to accept public testimony.

Timothy Yerian, Cypress, spoke regarding accessory dwelling units.

Edwin Kraemer, Cypress, spoke regarding accessory dwelling units.

Mayor Morales stated the public hearing will remain open.

A motion was made by Council Member Minikus, and seconded by Council Member Peat, to continue this item to the June 13, 2022 City Council meeting.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Marquez, Minikus, Peat, Hertz-Mallari and Morales NOES: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The public hearing remained open.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a Council Member requests separate action on a specific item.

Council Member Marquez requested to pull Agenda Items No. 9 and 14.

Mayor Morales stated that Agenda Item No. 17, the Warrant Register, includes electronic fund transfer No. 11018 for $751.22 as reimbursement for medical coverage he is entitled to receive as a CalPERS annuitant. He indicated that in voting for any motion to approve the Warrant Register, he would not be voting on electronic fund transfer No. 11018 for the reason disclosed.

Council Member Minikus stated that Agenda Item No. 17, the Warrant Register, includes electronic fund transfer No. 11017 for $286.18 as reimbursement for medical coverage he is entitled to receive as a CalPERS annuitant. He indicated that in voting for any motion to approve the Warrant Register, he would not be voting on electronic fund transfer No. 11017 for the reason disclosed.

It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Hertz-Mallari, and seconded by Council Member Peat, to approve Consent Calendar items No. 2 through 8, 10 through 13, and 15 through 17.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Marquez, Minikus, Peat, Hertz-Mallari and Morales NOES: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
Item No. 2: Receive and File Public Comments Submitted for the May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting
Recommendation: Receive and file submitted public comments.

Item No. 3: Introduce and/or Adopt All Ordinances and Resolutions Presented for Consideration by Title Only and to Waive Further Reading Item No. 4: Approve Minutes - Meeting of April 11, 2022 Recommendation: Approve as submitted.

Item No. 5: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing Regulations Prohibiting the Unlawful Possession of Catalytic Converters Recommendation: Approve the second reading and adopt an Ordinance, by title only and waive further reading, establishing regulations prohibiting the unlawful possession of catalytic converters.

ORDINANCE NO. 1195

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYOF
CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 17-75 OF THE

CYPRESS MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS

PROHIBITING THE UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF CATALYTIC

CONVERTERS IN THE CITY
Item No 6: Appoint City Commissioners
Recommendation: Appoint Commissioners to the Recreation and Community Services, Senior Citizens, and Traffic Commissions.

Item No. 7: Approve Plans and Specifications and Award Contracts for Concrete Rehabilitation, Project 293
Recommendation:

1. Approve Plans and Specifications for Concrete Rehabilitation, Project 293; and

2. Award a contract to CJ Concrete Construction Inc., Santa Fe Springs, CA, for $286,080, and authorize a contingency of $40,000; and

3. Approve a Task Order for Construction Inspection Services to TRC (Vali Cooper and Associates, Inc.), for $26,168 and authorize a contingency of $4,000.

Item No. 8: Approve Plans and Specifications and Award Contracts for the Street Rehabilitation, Project 313
Recommendation:

1. Approve Plans and Specifications for the Street Rehabilitation, Project 313; and

2. Award a contract to American Asphalt South Inc., Riverside, CA, for $337,925.45, and authorize a contingency of $51,000; and

3. Approve a Task Order for Construction Inspection Services to TRC (Vali Cooper and Associates, Inc.), for $39,637 and authorize a contingency of $6,000.

Item No. 10: Award an On-Call Contract for Traffic Control Services Recommendation: Award a contract services agreement for on-call traffic control services to Southern California Barricades.

Item No. 11: Award a Professional Services Contract for Arnold Cypress Park Rehabilitation, Project 308, Constructability Review
Recommendation: Award a professional services contract to Griffin Structures for $86,065, and authorize a contingency of $8,600.

Item No. 12: Approve the Purchase of One Replacement Police Vehicle Recommendation:

1. Authorize the purchase of one replacement police vehicle, including most upfitting, for $61,060 from Wondries Fleet Group via National Auto Fleet Group through the Sourcewell cooperative purchasing program; and

2. Authorize an appropriation increase of $62,326 in the City’s Capital Replacement Fund to purchase and fully upfit the replacement police vehicle; and

3. Authorize a transfer of $51,160 from the General Liability Fund to the City’s Capital Replacement Fund for available insurance proceeds received.

Item No. 13: Approve a Task Order for the Senior Center Interior Improvements Design, Project 290
Recommendation: Approve a Task Order to BOA Architecture for $31,500 for architectural design services and authorize a contingency of $4,700.

Item No. 15: Receive and File the Strategic Plan Six-Month Objectives Update Recommendation: Receive and file the strategic plan six-month objectives update.

Item No. 16: Receive and File the Investment Report for the Month Ended April 30, 2022
Recommendation: Receive and file the attached investment report.

Item No. 17: Approve Register of Warrants, Transfers, and Wires Issued for the Period of April 23, 2022 through May 6, 2022
Recommendation: Approve the attached payment register summarized below for the period of April 23, 2022 through May 6, 2022
• Electronic Funds Transfers 11001 through 11045
• Warrants 59344 through 59461
• Payroll Transfers W1474

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Regarding Item No. 9: Award a Contract for Graffiti Removal Services Council Member Marquez commented on this item.

A motion was made by Council Member Peat, and seconded by Councilmember Minikus, to award a two-year contract to Superior Property Services for Graffiti Removal Services for $225,000 with an option for up to three, one-year extensions.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 4 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Minikus, Peat, Hertz-Mallari and Morales NOES: 1 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Marquez
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
Regarding Item No. 14: Receive and File the Five-Year Technology Master Plan Council Member Marquez commented on this item.

The City Attorney and City Manager provided information.

A motion was made by Council Member Peat, and seconded by Council Member Minikus, to receive and file the Five-Year Technology Master Plan for FY 2022-23 through FY 2026-27.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Marquez, Minikus, Peat, Hertz-Mallari and Morales NOES: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None

CONTINUED ITEMS
Item No. 18: Consider a Proclamation in Support of Diversity and Inclusion Council Member Minikus commented on this item.

Council Member Marquez commented on this item.

A motion was made by Council Member Minikus, and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem HertzMallari, to approve a Proclamation in support of diversity and inclusion.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 4 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Marquez, Minikus, Hertz-Mallari and Morales NOES: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Peat
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (Five minutes per speaker, unless extended by the City Council)
Carolyn Balagot, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18.

Glenn Button, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18.

Malini Nagpal, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18.

Marilyn Reams, Cypress, spoke regarding recent public comments and Agenda Items No. 14 and 18.

Helen Le, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 18 and district elections.

Edwin Kraemer, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 14.

Britney Cook, Cypress, spoke regarding Agenda Item No. 14.

The City Manager responded to public comments.

Timothy Yerian, Cypress, spoke regarding election format.

COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS AND REMARKS
The Mayor asked the City Attorney to comment regarding allegations made by Council Member Marquez at the last City Council meeting.

The City Attorney responded to an allegation of a potential Brown Act violation against Mayor Morales and stated he did not find any revelation of any Closed Session information. He further commented about a statement made that the Mayor was behind public comments regarding a Council Member’s family member and reminded the City Council of the Civility, Conduct and Governance policy.

Council Member Minikus:

No Report.

Council Member Peat:

Responded to public comments regarding Agenda Item No. 9. Attended the Buena Park State of the City event. Attended the Cypress College Foundation scholarship awards ceremony. Attended the Police Department Open House. Presented an award to Council Member Minikus for coaching his first season of Cypress Champion Baseball. Responded to public comments regarding lack of support for the disabled community.

Council Member Marquez:

Attended the Police Department Open House. Attended the Cypress Police Foundation Luncheon. Attended the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base energy resilience project groundbreaking event. Spoke regarding the City of La Palma’s public hearing process regarding district elections.

Mayor Morales called for a point of order and informed Council Member Marquez that Council Member Reports and Remarks is to report matters related to the City of Cypress.

Discussion ensued.

The City Attorney recommended Council Member Marquez provide clarity regarding the connection of her comments about City of La Palma to the City of Cypress.

Council Member Marquez continued her comments regarding the City of La Palma’s district elections.

Mayor Pro Tem Hertz-Mallari:

Attended the Cypress Police Foundation luncheon. Attended the Police Department Open House. Attended the Cypress College Foundation scholarship award ceremony.

Mayor Morales:

Attended the Police Department Open House. Attended the Cypress Police Foundation luncheon. Commented on allegations made by Council Member Marquez at the last City Council meeting.

CITY MANAGER REMARKS
The City Attorney provided a report on two Supreme Court cases related to City policies.

The City Manager announced City Hall will be closed in observance of Memorial Day and stated the annual Forest Lawn Memorial Day Ceremony will be held virtually on their Facebook page at 11 a.m.

ADJOURNMENT
By motion of Council Member Peat, and seconded by Council Member Minikus, and unanimously carried 5-0, to adjourn at 9:04 p.m. The next Regular Council Meeting will be held on Monday, June 13, 2022, beginning at 5:30 p.m. in the Executive Board Room. _______________________________

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
ATTEST:
___________________________________

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 6.

FROM: Matt Burton, Director of Finance and Administrative Services DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Approve Second Reading and Adopt and Ordinance Amending Section 21A-15 of the Municipal Code Related to the Disposition of Surplus Supplies and Equipment

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the second reading and adopt an Ordinance, by title only and waive further reading, amending Section 21A-15 of the Municipal Code regarding the disposition of surplus supplies and equipment.

DISCUSSION
On June 13, the City Council approved the first reading of an Ordinance amending Section 21A-15 of the Municipal Code which prescribes the processes required to dispose of surplus equipment and supplies. The proposed amendment to Section 21A-15 would allow the City Manager to declare certain office furniture and equipment as surplus and allow the items to be donated to local non-profit organizations and other governments. The total cumulative value of any donated office furniture and equipment to a single non-profit or government cannot exceed $1,000 annually without City Council approval.

It is recommended that the City Council approve the second reading and adopt the Ordinance. The Ordinance will become effective July 27, 2022.

BUDGET IMPACT
Donating surplus furniture and equipment, rather than disposing by auction or for scrap value, will result in a small decrease in General Fund revenues. Such donations are expected to occur infrequently and be for items with a low market value, so any revenue declines are expected to have a negligible budget impact.

LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the attached Ordinance.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYOF CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 21A-15(d) TO THE CYPRESS

MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS ALLOWING THE

CITY MANAGER TO SURPLUS OFFICE FURNITURE AND RELATED
EQUIPMENT WITH AN ESTIMATED VALUE OF LESS THAN $1,000
WHEREAS, the City periodically replaces city-owned office furniture, office equipment and supplies which creates unneeded city-owned property with a negligible dollar value; and
WHEREAS, section 21A-15 of the Cypress Municipal Code provides that all equipment or supplies that do not have an identified use for the City are considered surplus and must go through either a bidding process for disposition of such items or can be sold for the highest scrap value obtained.

WHEREAS, some office furniture and office equipment and supplies determined to have a negligible fair market value may be of use to local non-profits and/or other local public agencies.

WHEREAS, donating such office furniture and office equipment and supplies to local non-profits and/or other public agencies will be for the common benefit of the community with negligible financial impacts to the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Cypress DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 21A-15(d) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby added to read in its entirety as follows:
“Sec. 21A-15(d).
d. The city manager or designee is authorized to declare surplus office furniture, office equipment and supplies (with a negligible fair market value) as eligible for distribution to local non-profit organizations and local public agencies rather than disposal through a formal bidding or auction process.

All non-profit agencies that participate in the Cypress Non-Profit Grant Request Program will be notified when such items become available for donation.

Any entity requesting a donation must demonstrate a transparent need for the item(s) and must utilize the item(s) as part of their operating activities. The city manager or designee will determine the entities selected to receive a donation based on overall value to the community. The total cumulative value of any donated office furniture, office equipment and supplies to a single non-profit or local public agency cannot exceed $1,000 annually.

SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and this Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall take effect as provided by law.

FIRST READING at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cypress held on the _______ day of ________, 2022 and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting held on the ______ day of _____, 2022.
___________________________
Paulo Morales, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Alisha Farnell, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
I, Alisha Farnell, City Clerk of the City of Cypress, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing was duly adopted at a regularly scheduled meeting of said City Council held on the ____ day of ______________, 2022, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
__________________________
Alisha Farnell, City Clerk
CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 7.

FROM: Alicia Velasco, Planning Director
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Cypress Municipal Code Related to Accessory Dwelling Units, Density Bonus, and Reasonable Accommodations

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the second reading and adopt an Ordinance, by title only and waive further reading, related to accessory dwelling units, density bonus, and reasonable accomodations.

SUMMARY
On June 13, 2022, the City Council conducted a public hearing and first reading of an Ordinance amending the Cypress Municipal Code, relating to accessory dwelling units, density bonuses, and reasonable accommodations, and finding the action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. The amendments are required as part of the City's 2021-2029 Housing Element.

It is recommended that the City Council approve the second reading and adopt the attached Ordinance. Once approved, the Ordinance will become effective in 30 days, or on July 27, 2022.

The attached Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

BUDGET IMPACT
None.

LEGAL REVIEW
The Ordinance has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
Ordinance
Notice of Exemption
ORDINANCE NO. ___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUBSECTION 2.05.030 (RESIDENTIAL

ZONING DISTRICT LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS),
SUBSECTION 2.05.050 (RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING
REQUIREMENTS), SUBSECTION 3.11.050 (ALLOWED PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED SETBACK AREAS), SECTION 12 (DENSITY BONUS), SUBSECTION 3.17.020(B) (ACCESSORY STRUCTURES USED FOR
LIVING PURPOSES), SUBSECTION 3.17.200 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS), SUBSECTION 4.18.040 (AUTHORITY FOR LAND USE AND ZONING DECISIONS), AND SECTION 31 (DEFINITIONS) AND
CREATING A NEW SUBSECTION 4.19.200 (REASONABLE

ACCOMMODATION) OF APPENDIX I OF THE CYPRESS MUNICIPAL

CODE AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

WHEREAS, Sections 65915-65918 of Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.3 of the Government Code contains regulations pertaining to density bonuses and other incentives for the development of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 of Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4 of the Government Code contains regulations pertaining accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”) and junior accessory dwelling units (“JADUs”) and limits a local authority’s scope of regulation upon ADUs and JADUs; and
WHEREAS, the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“Fair Housing Laws”) provide for reasonable accommodation in the application of zoning laws, building code, and other land use regulation, policies, and procedures for persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to update the City’s regulations so that it is consistent with State law and Fair Housing Laws; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Ordinance is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. Housing Element Goal HOU-5 is to “mitigate any potential governmental constraints to housing production and affordability”. The Ordinance furthers this goal by ensuring that the City’s zoning regulations are consistent with State laws intended to facilitate and incentivize the development of affordable housing and accessory dwelling units. Housing Element Goal HOU-6 is to “promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the housing of their choice”. The Ordinance is consistent with this goal in that it establishes procedures for persons with disabilities to request reasonable accommodations that will allow them to reside in the housing of their choice; and
WHEREAS, on May 23, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing and considered testimony on the Ordinance; and

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the above Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as findings of the City Council.

SECTION 2. The alphabetical list of land uses in Table 2-2 (Allowable Uses and Permit Requirements for Residential Zoning Districts) of Subsection 2.05.030 of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows, with all land uses renumerated alphabetically (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

TABLE 2-2

ALLOWABLE USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
Land Use Permit Requirement by District
RS-15000 RS-6000 RS-5000 RM-15 RM-20 MHP-20 See Section Residential
Accessory Dwelling Units P P P P P 3.17.200
Granny Units C C C — — — 6.31.020(G)
Second Dwelling Units not
more than 640 sq. ft. P P P — — — 3.17.200
Second Dwelling Units more
than 640 sq. ft. C C — — — — 3.17.200
SECTION 3. The alphabetical list of land uses in Table 2-4 (Residential Zoning District Parking Requirements) of Subsection 2.05.050 of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows, with all land uses renumerated alphabetically (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

TABLE 2-4

RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Residential Uses Vehicle Spaces Required
Residential Land Uses
Accessory Dwelling Units See Section 3.17.200(F)(5)
Second dwelling units
1 space per bedroom in addition to the spaces required
for the single-family dwelling unit on the site. If the second dwelling unit is conditionally approved pursuant to Section 3.17.200(I), the required parking spaces shall be enclosed.

SECTION 4. Table 3.1 (Allowed Projections into Required Setback Areas, Residential Zoning Districts) of Subsection 3.11.050 of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

TABLE 3.1

ALLOWED PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED SETBACK AREAS

RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
Feature Front Setback Rear Setback Side Setback
Architectural adornments such as
cornices, eaves, sills, etc.
4 feet 4 feet Not more than one-half
of the required side
setback
Balconies (a) 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet
Bay window or similar feature which
does not extend the structure’s
foundation
4 feet 4 feet Not more than one-half
of the required side
setback
Canopies, Pop up Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed
Chimneys 4 feet 4 feet Not more than one-half
of the required side
setback
Fire escapes Not allowed No restriction No restriction
Canopies, gazebos, patio covers —
open
Not allowed Within 5 feet of the
property line.

Overhanging and
cantilevered roofs and
eaves may project to
within 2 feet 6 inches
from the rear property
line.

Within 5 feet of the
property line.

Overhanging and
cantilevered roofs and
eaves may project to
within 2 feet 6 inches
from the side property
line.

Pool motors and similar equipment Not allowed May be located anywhere within rear
setback.

May be located
anywhere within side
setback. Refer to
additional requirements
in Subsection 3.17.200
(Second Dwelling Units)
Porches 4 feet 4 feet Not more than one-half
of the required side yard
setback
Roofs of accessory structures (b) Not allowed No closer than 5 feet to the lot line
No closer than 5 feet to
the lot line, except for
units developed on zero
lot line parcels
Notes:
(a) Balconies shall be limited in width to six feet. Second floor decks other than balconies, such as (e.g., sundecks) are prohibited.
(b) Roofs shall be no more than 10 feet in height.

SECTION 5. Section 12 (Density Bonus) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with a new Section 12 (Density Bonus), which shall read as follows:

SECTION 12. DENSITY BONUS

3.12.010. Purpose.

The purpose of this section is to provide incentives for the production of affordable housing in accordance with California Government Code Sections 65915-65918 (“State Density Bonus Law”).

3.12.020. Definitions.

The definitions found in State Density Bonus Law shall apply to the terms contained in this section.

3.12.030. Applicability.

This section applies to a “housing development”, as defined in Government Code Section 65915(i), or an “eligible housing development”, as defined in Government Code Section 65917.2, when an applicant proposes a density increase above the maximum allowable density and/or other regulatory incentives and concessions in exchange for reserving a portion of the units for lower-income, moderate-income, or senior households, as provided in this section and State Density Bonus Law.

3.12.040. Application Requirements
A. Required submittals. In addition to the application filing requirements established in Section 18 (Applications, Processing, and Fees), the following information shall be provided by the applicant on a form supplied by the Community Development Department:

1. How the proposed project will satisfy the eligibility requirements of Government Code Section 65915 or 65917.2.

2. The requested density bonus pursuant to subsection 3.12.050 (Density Bonus).

3. Any incentives and concessions that are sought under Government Code Section 65915(d). The applicant shall provide reasonable documentation to show that any requested incentive or concession will result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs or rents.

4. Any waivers and reductions that are sought under Government Code Section 65915(e). The applicant shall provide reasonable documentation that the development standard(s) for which the waiver is requested will have the effect of physically precluding the development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by State Density Bonus Law.

5. Any requested parking reductions sought under Government Code Section 65915(p).

6. Documentation of how the project will comply with Government Code Section 65915(c)(3) pertaining to replacement units.

B. Fee. Payment of a fee in an amount set by resolution of the City Council, pursuant to Section 18 of the Cypress Zoning Ordinance.

C. Concurrent review. Density bonus requests shall be filed concurrently with the other planning permit application(s) required for the development. The density bonus request shall be processed concurrently with the underlying planning permit or entitlement for the project.

3.12.050. Density Bonus.

A. Calculation. Density bonuses shall be calculated as set forth in Government Code Section 65915 and 65917.2.

1. In determining the total number of units to be granted, each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.

2. When calculating the number of affordable units needed for a given density bonus, any fractions of affordable units shall be rounded up to the next whole number.

3. The density bonus units shall not be included in determining the number of affordable units required to qualify a housing development for a density bonus pursuant to State Density Bonus Law.

B. Each housing development is entitled to only one density bonus. If a housing development qualifies for a density bonus under more than one income category or additionally as senior housing or housing intended to serve transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, or homeless persons, or other category qualifying for a density bonus under the State Density Bonus Law, the applicant shall select the category under which the density bonus is granted.

C. The applicant may elect to receive a density bonus that is less than the development is entitled to under State Density Bonus Law, including a density bonus of zero. In such cases, the applicant retains their entitlement to incentives, concessions, and parking reductions as provided in State Density Bonus Law.

3.12.060. Incentives and Concessions.

A. The applicant may request up to the number of incentives and concessions for which the project is entitled pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(d)(2).

B. The City shall grant requested incentives and concessions unless a specified finding is made as set forth in Government Code Section 65915(d)(1). However, the City is not required to deny a proposed incentive or concession solely because it can make a finding under Government Code Section 65915(d)(1).

3.12.070. Waivers and Reductions.

A. An applicant may submit to the City a proposal for waivers and reductions of development standards that physically prevent construction of a housing development and density bonus units meeting the criteria of Government Code Section 65915(b).

B. The City may deny waivers and reductions for the reasons set forth in Government Code Section 65915(e)(1).

3.12.080. Affordable Housing Requirements
A. Maximum affordable housing costs. The maximum total housing costs paid by a qualifying household, adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit, shall be pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 50052.5 and 50053.

B. Term of affordability. The term of affordability for affordable units shall be at least the period of time required by Government Code Section 65915(c).

C. Sale and resale of owner-occupied units. Sale and resale of owner-occupied units is subject to the requirements of Government Code Section 65915(c)(2).

D. Development Standards.

1. All affordable units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the housing development.

2. Affordable units shall be made available for occupancy concurrently with or prior to the market rate units in the development. In the event the City approves a phased project, the affordable units shall be provided proportionately within each phase.

3. Affordable units shall be comparable with the market rate units in terms of design, construction quality, exterior appearance, exterior finished quality, and size.

4. The bedroom mix of the affordable units shall be equivalent to the bedroom mix of the market rate units of the development, unless otherwise approved by the City.

5. Comparable amenities. Residents of affordable units shall have equal access to project amenities available to other residents, including, but not limited to, access to recreational, parking, and storage facilities and interior amenities such as microwaves and dishwashers.

6. Parking. Unless the City’s adopted parking standards will result in fewer parking spaces, the applicant may request a reduction in parking standards pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(p).

3.12.090. Affordable Housing Agreement and Senior Housing Agreement.

A. Affordable Housing Agreement. Applicants that have been conditionally granted a density bonus, incentives and concessions, and/or waivers for the provision of affordable housing shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall, at a minimum, include the following:

1. The total number of units and the number of units that will be made affordable;

2. The size, bedroom count, and location of each affordable unit;

3. The income levels of the affordable units and an acknowledgement that the City will verify tenant and home buyer incomes to maintain the affordability of the units;

4. The term of affordability for the units, which shall not be less than the period of time required by Government Code Section 65915;

5. The approved density bonus, incentives, concessions, waivers, and/or parking reductions, if any;

6. Schedule of development for all units; and

7. An affirmative fair marketing plan that is approved by the City to ensure advertising of the availability of the affordable units to a wide spectrum of City residents.

B. Senior Housing Agreement. Applicants that have been conditionally granted a density bonus, incentives and concessions, and/or waiver for the provision of market rate senior housing shall enter into a Senior Housing Agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Senior Housing Agreement shall require the development to operate as a senior citizen housing development pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(b)(1)(C). The Senior Housing Agreement shall also include the following:

1. Approved density bonus, incentives, concessions, waivers, and/or parking reductions, if any; and

2. Schedule of development for all units.

C. Recordation. The executed Affordable Housing Agreement or Senior Housing Agreement shall be recorded against the housing development prior to final map approval or, where a map is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits. The Affordable Housing Agreement or Senior Housing Agreement shall bind all future owners and successors in interest for the term of years specified therein.

3.12.100. Enforcement and Monitoring.

A. The provisions of this section shall apply to all developers and their agents, successors, and assigns proposing a housing development governed by this section.

No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued, nor any entitlement granted, for a project receiving a density bonus, incentive, concession, or waiver until it meets the requirements of this section.

B. The director shall establish administration regulations which contain guidelines and procedures for the effective implementation of this section. The administrative regulations may include fees for monitoring, reports, transactions, and other administrative activities to the extent allowable by State Density Bonus Law. All fees shall be approved by the City Council in an amount set by resolution, pursuant to Section 18 of the Cypress Zoning Ordinance.

C. All affordable units shall be rented or owned in accordance with this section and the administrative guidelines. Any individual who sells or rents an affordable unit in violation of the provisions of this section shall be required to forfeit all monetary amounts so obtained.

D. The City Attorney shall be authorized to enforce the provisions of this section and all Affordable Housing Agreements, Senior Housing Agreements, covenants, resale restrictions, promissory notes, deeds of trust, and other requirements placed on affordable units by civil action and any other proceeding or method permitted by law.

3.12.110. Interpretation.

If any portion of this subsection conflicts with State Density Bonus Law or other applicable state law, state law shall supersede this section. Any ambiguities in this section shall be interpreted to be consistent with State Density Bonus Law.

SECTION 6. Subsection 3.17.020(B) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

B. Accessory structures used for living purposes. An accessory structure used for living purposes shall meet the requirements of subsection 3.17.200 (Second Accessory dwelling units).

SECTION 7. Subsection 3.17.200 (Second dwelling units) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with a new Subsection 3.17.200 (Accessory dwelling units), which shall read as follows:

3.17.200. Accessory dwelling units.

A. Purpose. The purpose of this subsection is to allow and regulate accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) in compliance with Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22.

B. Effect of conforming. An ADU or JADU that conforms to the provisions of this subsection shall:

1. Be deemed an accessory use or an accessory building and shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located;

2. Be deemed a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designation for the lot upon which it is located; and

3. Not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth.

C. Application and review procedures.

1. Review. Applications for ADUs or JADUs shall be considered ministerially through the plan check process. The director or their designee shall consider and approve or disapprove a complete application for an ADU or JADU within 60 days from the date the City receives a complete application. Review is limited to whether the proposed ADU or JADU complies with the requirements of this subsection. If the application to create an ADU or JADU is submitted concurrently with an application to create a new single-family dwelling on the lot, the director may delay acting upon the application for the ADU or JADU until the City acts on the application to create the new single-family dwelling.

2. Nonconformities. The correction of nonconforming zoning conditions shall not be required for the creation of an ADU or JADU.

D. Locations permitted.

1. ADUs conforming to the provisions of this subsection may be located on any lot in the City that is zoned to allow single-family or multi-family residential uses and that includes a proposed or existing legally developed single-family or an existing legally developed two-family or multi-family dwelling.

2. JADUs conforming to the provisions of this subsection may be located within a proposed or existing legally developed single-family dwelling on any lot in the City that is zoned to allow single-family residential uses.

3. ADUs and JADUs shall not be permitted on any parcel that has obtained a permit for a two-unit development and urban lot split pursuant to Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7.

E. Number of ADUs and JADUs permitted.

1. Single-family lots. No more than one (1) ADU and one (1) JADU is permitted on a lot developed or proposed to be developed with a single-family dwelling.

2. Multi-family lots. A lot developed with a two-family or multi-family dwelling shall be permitted either:
a. No more than two (2) detached ADUs; or
b. Up to twenty-five (25) percent of the number of existing multi-family dwelling units within existing multi-family or two-family dwelling structures. The ADUs must be converted from portions of the existing multi-family dwelling structure that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings. For the purposes of calculating the number of allowable ADUs, the following shall apply:
i. Fractions shall be rounded down to the next lower whole number of dwelling units, except that at least one (1) ADU shall be allowed. ii. Previously approved ADUs shall not count towards the existing number of multi-family dwelling units.

F. Development standards. Except as modified by this subsection, ADUs and/or JADUs shall conform to the development standards applicable to the lot on which it is located as set forth in the Cypress Zoning Ordinance and/or in an applicable specific plan.

1. Lot area. There shall be no minimum lot area required in order to establish an ADU or JADU.

2. Unit size.
a. ADUs.
i. No ADU shall exceed 1,200 square feet in size.
ii. An attached ADU that is created on a lot with an existing or proposed singlefamily dwelling is further limited to fifty (50) percent of the floor area of the existing or proposed primary dwelling.
iii. An ADU constructed solely through the conversion of an existing building or structure or in the same location and same dimensions as an existing structure shall be limited in size to the existing square footage of the building or structure converted or replaced, except that an expansion of not more than 150 square feet is permitted to accommodate ingress and egress to the ADU only.
iv. The application of requirements related to lot coverage, floor area ratio, or open space may further limit the size of an ADU; however, in no case shall the application of such requirements limit the size of an ADU to less than 800 square feet.
b. JADUs. No JADU shall exceed 500 square feet in size. c. Minimum size. The minimum size of an ADU or JADU shall be at least that of an efficiency unit, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1.

3. Setbacks.
a. Minimum setbacks of no less than four (4) feet from the side and rear property lines are required for newly constructed ADUs.
b. The minimum setback from the front property line shall be the same setback requirement that applies to the primary dwelling.
c. For conversion of an existing building or structure or replacement in the same location and same dimensions as an existing structure, no additional setback is required beyond the existing setback, provided it is sufficient for fire and safety.

4. Height.
a. Newly constructed ADUs shall not exceed one (1) story and a height of sixteen (16) feet.
b. ADUs and JADUs converted from an existing building or structure shall not exceed the height of the existing structure.

5. Parking.
a. ADUs. A minimum of one (1) parking space shall be provided for each ADU unless they are not required pursuant to paragraph (5.b) below. The required parking space may be permitted in setback areas or through tandem parking on a driveway.
b. Exceptions. Off-street parking for the ADU is not required in the following instances:
i. The ADU is a studio;
ii. The ADU is located within one-half (1/2) mile walking distance of public transit, as that term is defined in Government Code Section 65852.2; or iii. When parking for the ADU is not required pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2 (d).
c. JADUs. No parking shall be required for JADUs.
d. No Replacement. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is converted or demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or JADU, those off-street parking spaces are not required to be replaced.

6. Kitchens.
a. ADUs. ADUs shall have a kitchen, as required by the Building Code, which shall include a kitchen sink, cooking device, refrigeration, food preparation counter, and storage cabinets.
b. JADUs. JADUs shall include an efficiency kitchen, including a cooking facility with appliances, and a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the JADU.

7. Design. Exterior finished materials on the ADU or JADU shall match the exterior finished materials for the primary dwelling unit.

8. Fire sprinklers. Fire sprinklers are required in an ADU only if sprinklers are required in the primary residence.

9. Exterior access. An attached or converted ADU or JADU on a single-family lot must have independent exterior access that is separate from the access to the proposed or existing primary dwelling.

10.Passageway. No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an ADU and/or JADU. For the purposes of this chapter, "passageway" shall mean a pathway that is unobstructed, clear to the sky, and extends from the right-of-way to one (1) entrance of the ADU and/or JADU.

11.Utilities.
a. ADUs. An ADU may be served by the same water, sewer, and other utility connections serving the primary dwelling on the property, and the installation of a new or separate utility connection directly between an ADU and a utility is not required. However, separate utility connections and meters for ADUs may be installed at the property owner’s option, when permitted by the utility provider, and subject to the payment of all applicable fees. b. JADUs. A JADU shall be served by the same water, sewer, and other utility connections serving the primary dwelling in which it is located, and no separate utility meters shall be permitted for a JADU.

G. Other requirements.

1. No separate conveyance. Except as otherwise provided in Government Code Section 65852.26 or by other applicable laws, an ADU or JADU may be rented separate from the primary residence(s), but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence(s). A lot shall not be subdivided in any manner which would authorize such separate sale or ownership.

2. Short-term rental prohibited. Rental of an ADU or JADU for a term of thirty (30) days or less is prohibited.

3. Owner occupancy requirements.
a. ADUs.
i. For any ADU created on or after January 1, 2020, but before January 1, 2025, owner occupancy of the primary dwelling or ADU is not required. ii. For all ADUs created on or after January 1, 2025, an owner of record of the lot upon which the ADU is located must occupy either the primary dwelling or ADU as their principal residence.
b. JADUs. An owner of record of the lot upon which a JADU is located must occupy either the JADU or the remaining portion of the primary single-family dwelling as their principal residence. However, the owner occupancy requirement does not apply if the property is entirely owned by another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.

4. Deed restriction. Prior to issuance of a building permit for an ADU or JADU, a deed restriction shall be recorded against the title of the property in the county recorder’s office and a copy filed with the Community Development Department. The deed restriction shall run with the land and bind all future owners. The form of the deed restriction will be provided by the City and shall include the following:
a. The ADU or JADU may not be sold separately from the primary dwelling(s). b. The ADU or JADU is restricted to the approved size and to other attributes allowed by this subsection, including owner occupancy restrictions and the prohibition on short-term rental.
c. The deed restriction runs with the land and may be enforced against future property owners.
d. The deed restriction may not be modified or terminated without the prior written consent of the director.
e. The deed restriction is enforceable by the director or their designee for the benefit of the City. Failure of the property owner to comply with the deed restriction may result in legal action against the property owner, and the City is authorized to obtain any remedy available to it at law or equity, including, but not limited to, obtaining an injunction enjoining the use of the ADU or JADU in violation of the recorded restrictions or abatement of the illegal unit.

5. Impact fees.
a. No impact fee is required for an ADU that is less than seven hundred fifty (750) square feet in size.
b. Any impact fee that is required for an ADU that is seven hundred fifty (750) square feet or greater in size shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit (e.g., the floor area of the primary dwelling, divided by the floor area of the ADU, times the typical fee amount charged for a new dwelling).
c. For purposes of this section, “impact fee” does not include any connection fee or capacity charge for water or sewer service.

SECTION 8. A new Subsection 4.19.100 (Reasonable Accommodation) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby added as follows:

4.19.100. Reasonable Accommodation.

D. Purpose of subsection. The purpose of this subsection is to provide a procedure to request reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing under the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (collectively, the “Fair Housing Laws”) in the application of zoning laws, building codes, and other land use regulations, policies, and procedures.

E. Applicability.

1. A request for reasonable accommodation may be made by any person with a disability, their representative, or a developer or provider of housing for the disabled, when the application of a zoning law, building code provision, or other land use regulation, policy, or practice denies a person equal access to housing opportunities. A person with a disability is a person who has a physical or mental impairment that limits or substantially limits one or more major life activities, anyone who is regarded as having such impairment, or anyone who has a record of such impairment, as those terms are defined in the Fair Housing Laws.

2. A request for reasonable accommodation may include a modification or exception to the rules, standards, and practices for the siting, development, and/or use of housing or housing related facilities that that is necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to housing. Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be made in the manner prescribed by this subsection and shall be approved only for the benefit of one or more individuals with a disability.

3. Where the improvements or modifications approved through a reasonable accommodation would generally require a variance, a variance shall not be required.

F. Application Requirements.

1. Required submittals. In addition to the application filing requirements established in Section 18 (Applications, Processing, and Fees), the following information shall be provided by the applicant on a form supplied by the Community Development Department:
a. Documentation that the applicant is an individual with a disability, applying on behalf of one or more individuals with a disability, or a developer or provider of housing for one or more individuals with a disability. Documentation may include a letter from a medical doctor or other licensed healthcare professional, a disabled license, or any other appropriate evidence;
b. The specific code section, regulation, policy or practice from which relief is sought and an explanation of why it is preventing, or will prevent, the use and enjoyment of the subject property by one or more individuals with a disability; c. The specific exception or modification requested and an explanation of why it is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability equal access to housing;
d. Verification that the property is or will be the primary residence of the individual(s) for whom the reasonable accommodation is requested; and e. Any other information that the director reasonably concludes is necessary to make the findings required by this subsection, consistent with Fair Housing Laws.

2. Other discretionary permits. If the project for which the request for reasonable accommodation is being made also requires some other discretionary approval, then the applicant shall file the application submittal information together with the application for discretionary approval for concurrent review.

3. Fee. No fee shall be required for a request for reasonable accommodation, but if the project requires another permit, then the prescribed fee shall be paid for all other permits.

G. Authority.

1. Director. Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be reviewed by the director, or designee, unless another discretionary approval is sought for which the City Council is the reviewing authority.

2. City Council. Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be reviewed by the City Council when they are submitted for concurrent review with another discretionary land use application for which the City Council is the reviewing authority.

H. Proceedings.

1. Director’s action. For requests reviewed by the director, the director shall issue a written determination within 30 days of the date of receipt of a complete application.

2. City Council action. For requests reviewed by the City Council, the processing procedures of the discretionary land use permit shall govern the joint processing of both the request for reasonable accommodation and the discretionary land use permit.

3. The reviewing authority’s written decision shall set forth the findings in accordance with paragraph F (Findings), any conditions of approval, and notice of the right to appeal, if applicable.

4. Conditions of approval. The reviewing authority may impose any conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary to ensure that the reasonable accommodation complies with the findings required by this subsection.

5. Alternative reasonable accommodations. The reviewing authority may approve alternative reasonable accommodations that provide an equivalent level of benefit to the individual(s) with disabilities.

6. Appeals. If the director does not grant the reasonable accommodation request, or if the applicant disagrees with any conditions imposed on the granting of the reasonable accommodation, the applicant may file an appeal to the City Council in compliance with Section 27 (Appeals) including that the appeal be submitted in writing before 5:00 p.m. of the fourteenth (14th) day following the date the decision was rendered by the director. Decisions on reasonable accommodation requests made by the City Council are final.

7. A reasonable accommodation is granted to an individual(s) and shall not run with the land. If the persons for which the accommodation were granted vacate the residence, the reasonable accommodation shall remain in effect only if the director determines that:
a. The modification is physically integrated on the property and cannot feasibly be removed or altered; or
b. The accommodation is necessary to give another disabled individual an equal opportunity to enjoy the dwelling. The director may request the applicant or their successor in interest to the property to provide documentation that subsequent occupants are persons with disabilities. Failure to provide such documentation within thirty (30) days of the date of a written request by the City shall constitute grounds for discontinuance by the City of the previously approved reasonable accommodation.

I. Findings. A request for reasonable accommodation shall be approved, with or without conditions, if the review authority first finds, based upon all the evidence presented, all of the following:

1. The housing which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation will be occupied by one or more individuals with disabilities protected under Fair Housing Laws;

2. The reasonable accommodation is necessary to make housing available to one or more individuals with a disability protected under the Fair Housing Laws;

3. The requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City; and

4. The requested accommodation will not require a fundamental alteration in the nature of the City’s zoning or building laws, policies, and/or procedures.

SECTION 9. Subsection 4.18.040 (Authority for land use and zoning decisions) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

4.18.040. Authority for land use and zoning decisions.

Table 4-1 (Review Authority) identified the city official or authority responsible for reviewing and making decisions on each type of application or land use entitlement required by this zoning ordinance.

TABLE 4-1

REVIEW AUTHORITY
Type of Entitlement or
Decision Applicable Citation Director Council
Adjustments 4.19.050 Approve (1) Appeal
Conditional Use Permits 4.19.070 Recommend (2) Approve
Development Agreements Section 21 Recommend Approve
Design Reviews 4.19.060 Recommend Approve
Director’s Reviews 4.19.030 Approve (3) Appeal (4)
General Plan
Amendments Section 28 Recommend Approve
Home Occupation Permits 4.19.060 Issue Appeal
Interpretations 1.02.020 Issue Appeal
Reasonable
Accommodation 4.19.100 Approve (5) Appeal
Sign Permits Section 15 Issue Appeal
Specific Plans Section 20 Recommend Approve
Temporary Use Permits 4.19.040 Approve Appeal
Variances 4.19.080 Recommend Approve
Zoning Clearances 4.19.020 Issue Appeal
Zoning Map Amendments Section 28 Recommend Approve
Zoning Ordinance
Amendments Section 28 Recommend Approve
Notes:
(1) The director may defer action and refer any permit or approval application to the council for final determination. (2) “Recommend” means that the review authority makes a recommendation to a higher review authority; “Appeal” means that the review authority may consider and decide upon appeals to the decision of an earlier review authority, in compliance with section 27 (Appeals).
(3) All decisions of the director are appealable to council, in compliance with section 27 (Appeals). (4) All decisions of the council are final.
(5) When requests for reasonable accommodation are submitted for concurrent review with another discretionary land use application for which the council is the reviewing authority, the council shall also review the request for reasonable accommodation.

SECTION 10. The alphabetical list of definitions in Section 31 (Definitions) of Appendix I (Zoning) of the Cypress Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows, with the all definitions renumerated alphabetically (strikethrough represents deleted language while underline represents added language):

6.31.020. Definitions of specialized terms and phrases.

D. Definitions, “D.”
Density bonuses. A density bonus, as defined by Government Code § 65915 et seq., is an increased residential density of at least twenty-five (25) percent over the maximum authorized density which is granted to an owner/developer of a housing project agreeing to construct a prescribed percentage of affordable very low and/or low income dwelling units pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915-65918.

Dwelling unit, accessory. An attached or detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one (1) or more persons on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same lot as the single-family or multi-family dwelling is or will be situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes:

1. An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code; and

2. A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

Dwelling unit, junior accessory. A unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family dwelling. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure.

G. Definitions, “G.”
Granny unit. A dwelling unit, either attached to or detached from, a primary residence on a parcel that is zoned for a single-family residence, that is intended for the sole occupancy of one or two (2) adult persons who are sixty-two (62) years of age or over, consistent with Government Code Section 65852.1, as amended from time to time.

The area of floor space of an attached granny unit shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the existing living area. The area of the floor space of a detached granny unit shall not exceed one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet.

S. Definitions, “S.”
Second dwelling unit. A second permanent dwelling unit that is attached to or detached from an existing single-family residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons, as defined in Government Code Section 65852.2(i)(4), as it exists or as it may be amended from time to time. The second dwelling unit shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel that the existing unit is situated. A second dwelling unit may be an efficiency unit, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1, as amended, or a manufactured home, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18007, as amended. (See subsection 3.17.200 (Second dwelling units).)
SECTION 11. CEQA. In accordance with Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, adoption of this Ordinance is exempt in that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. The adoption of the proposed ordinance is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The ordinance is limited to establishing procedures and standards for accessory dwelling units and density bonuses pursuant to State law. Reasonable accommodation procedures established are in compliance with federal and State fair housing laws. No new construction is proposed.

SECTION 12. Severability. Should any provision of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, that determination shall have no effect on any other provision of this Ordinance or the application of this Ordinance to any other person or circumstance and, to that end, the provisions hereof are severable.

The City Council of the City of Cypress declares that it would have adopted all the provisions of this Ordinance that remain valid if any provisions of this Ordinance are declared invalid.

SECTION 13. Effective date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from its adoption.

SECTION 14. Certification. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law in that regard.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cypress at a regular meeting held on the ___ day of __________, 2022.

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
ATTEST:

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
I, ALISHA FARNELL, City Clerk of the City of Cypress, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 23rd day of May, 2022, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
PL-5 Rev. 2011

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: Office of Planning and Research FROM: City of Cypress 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 5275 Orange Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95814 Cypress, CA 90630
X County Clerk-Recorder
Public Services Division Filing Fee Exempt per Govt. Code Section 6103 P.O. Box 238
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Project Title
Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 12 – Density Bonus; Subsection 3.17.200 – Second Dwelling Units; and Subsection 4.19.100 – Reasonable Accommodation.

Project Location - Specific
City-wide
Project Location - City
Cypress
Project Location - County
Orange
Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project A City-initiated amendment to the text of the Cypress Municipal Code, Appendix I – Zoning, to be consistent with related State housing laws as follows: (1) Repealing Section 12 (“Density Bonus”) and replacing it with a new Section 12 (“Density Bonus”) to comply with current State density bonus regulations (Government Code Sections 65915-65918); (2) Repealing Subsection 3.17.200 (“Second dwelling units”) and replacing it with a new Subsection 3.17.200 (“Accessory dwelling units”) to comply with Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22; and (3) Creating a new Subsection

4.19.100 (“Reasonable Accommodation”) to establish procedures to request reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. No new construction is proposed as part of this action.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project
City of Cypress
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project (Applicant’s Name and Address) City of Cypress, Planning Division, 5275 Orange Avenue, Cypress, CA 90630 Exempt Status: (Check One)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1);15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3);15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number.

X General Rule (Sec. 15061 [b] [3])
Reasons why project is exempt:

It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this ordinance amendment may cause a significant effect on the environment, since the amendment is general in nature, limited to establishing procedures and standards, and would not preclude the review and application of the CEQA Guidelines for specific future residential projects.

Lead Agency Contact Person
Alicia Velasco, Planning Director
Area Code
(714)
Telephone Number
229-6720
If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes X No ________
_________________________________ __________________________ ______________ Date Received for Filing at OPR Signature Date
Planning Director_____
Title
Signed by Lead Agency
Signed by Applicant
CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 8.

FROM: Douglas Dancs, Director of Public Works
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Approve a Task Order for Public Works Construction Management and Inspection Services

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a Task Order to Ardurra, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $100,000 to perform public works construction management and inspection services for the period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023.

DISCUSSION
It is recommended the City Council award an on-call contract on June 27 for construction management and inspection services to Ardurra Inc. for street, signals, facilities, permits, project management, and engineering support projects. In conjunction with the approval of the on-call contract, this task order will ensure Public Works adequately manages and inspects various construction activities during FY 2022-23. It is forecasted approximately 54 inspection hours per month will be necessary for minor development projects and work related to encroachment permits such as checking traffic control, inspecting utility projects, and other miscellaneous work within the public street right-of-way.

BUDGET IMPACT
Sufficient amounts are included in the FY 2022-23 General Fund Budget for the construction permit inspection services associated with this task order. The amount of the task order is based on estimates for the upcoming fiscal year and City Council approval of additional task orders may be necessary if the volume of construction management and inspection services exceeds anticipated levels. However, all costs associated with these contract services are fully reimbursed to the City through the receipt of inspection and permit fee revenue collected for right-of-way construction activities.

LEGAL REVIEW
None required.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
Task Order
Task Order
On Call Contract Date 6/27/2022
Contract Approved
by Council Yes
Consultant Ardurra Inc.

Project
Public Works Construction Management and Inspection
Services
Amount $100,000 Reimbursable Yes
Service
Public Works Construction Management and Inspection
Services
Hourly Rates Rates as specified in the On-Call Contract.

Schedule As needed or assigned by Director.

Reviewed:

Director of Public Works
Approved by City Council on:

Notes

1. All Task Orders must be performed within the budgetary limits established by the Task Order.

2. Provide sufficient back up for hours charged, as required by the Director.

3. At the new fiscal year, a separate task order will be issued for Public Works Construction Management and Inspection Services.

CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 9.

FROM: Douglas Dancs, Director of Public Works
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Approve a Task Order for City Traffic Engineer Services

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a Task Order for an amount not to exceed $163,000 to Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers (LLG) to provide FY 2022-23 City Traffic Engineer Services.

DISCUSSION
Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers (LLG) has been the on-call consultant providing City Traffic Engineer services since July 2020. The LLG team has extensive experience and the consultant assigned to act as Cypress' City Traffic Engineer has done so since January 2019.

The attached task order to LLG will provide City Traffic Engineer services, advise the Traffic Commission, review capital and private development projects, and perform other tasks as assigned during FY 2022-23. The estimated annual cost of these services is $163,000.

BUDGET IMPACT
Sufficient amounts are included in the FY 2022-23 budget for the recommended task order.

LEGAL REVIEW
None required.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
Task Order
Task Order
On Call Contract Date 7/13/2020
Contract Approved
by Council Yes
Consultant Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers (LLG)
Project City Traffic Engineering Services
Amount $163,000 Reimbursable No
Service City Traffic Engineering Services
Hourly Rates
Contract Traffic Engineer rate of $198 per hour. Other rates as specified in the On-Call Contract.

Schedule As needed or assigned by Director.

Reviewed:

Director of Public Works
Approved by City Council on:

Notes

1. All Task Orders must be performed within the budgetary limits established by the Task Order.

2. Provide sufficient back up for hours charged, as required by the Director.

3. At the new fiscal year, a separate task order will be issued for City Traffic Engineering Services.

CITY OF CYPRESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
City Council Regular 10.

FROM: Douglas Dancs, Director of Public Works
DATE: 06/27/2022
SUBJECT: Award a Contract for Community Center HVAC, Project 289

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve Plans and Specifications for Community Center Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC), Project 289; and

2. Award a contract to Bon Air, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, for $678,000, and authorize a contingency of $75,000; and

3. Approve a Task Order for Construction Inspection Services to Ardurra Inc. for $67,650, and authorize a contingency of $10,150.

DISCUSSION
The HVAC equipment at the Community Center is 15 years old and approaching the end of its useful life. This project will replace the HVAC units, repair necessary ductwork, controls/automation, and other miscellaneous work including roof repairs. Portions of the Community Center will need to close during construction and will be coordinated with Recreation and Community Services. Work is tentatively scheduled for January 2023.

On May 25, the City received four bids for the project with Bon Air Inc. as the low bidder.

Ardurra Inc., the City's new on-call construction management firm recommended for approval on the June 27, will inspect the project. A summary of project award information is attached.

BUDGET IMPACT
The estimated project costs are $830,800 and sufficient amounts are available in the Recreation and Park District's General Fund budget.

LEGAL REVIEW
None required.

APPROVED BY:  Peter Grant, City Manager
Attachments
Award Information and Bid Proposals
Task Order
Project Award Information Checklist
Description of Project:

Replace eight Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning units, provide new controllers, clean and repair ductwork, perform air balancing and associated roof repairs at the Community Center.

Contract Working Days: 45 working days
Orange County Register
Publication Date:

April 28, 2022
Notice Inviting Bids Sent to: The Orange County Register, F.W. Dodge, Reed Construction Data, Construction Bid Board, Southern
California Builders Association, Association General
Contractors of America
Bid Opening Date: May 25, 2022
No. of Bid Packets Purchased: Seven
Bidders Amount

1. Bon Air Inc., Los Angeles, CA $678,000

2. AC Pros Inc., Tarzana, CA $738,250

3. Scorpio Enterprises dba AireMasters Air Conditioning, Santa Fe Springs, CA
$780,600

4. PCC Air Conditioning Inc., Cypress, CA $991,480
Apparent Low Bidder: Bon Air Inc., Los Angeles, CA – $678,000 Median Bid Amount: $759,425
Qualified to Perform Work: Yes. Staff confirmed bid was responsive.

Contractor’s License: Registration with DIR:

Valid at Time of Award: Yes Contractor: Yes
Valid at Time of Bid: Yes Sub-Contractor: Yes
Experience:

The apparent low bidder has performed this type of work for multiple government agencies in Southern California.

Construction
Management/Inspection Firm:

Ardurra
On-Call Contract Date: June 27, 2022
Amount of Task Order: $ 67,650
No.

1. 2.

3. Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289

PROPOSAL BID SHEET

SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS

COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC AND ROOF
PROJECT 289
Proposal Bid Sheet
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM
Contractor Name: 130(1 /},'( [,1c_
Contractor Address: fl3!fo /,,J. �/y�(),'c.__,g}i1J� �,·fe_,30::<, t-,A.J e,q ,otJ69

THE CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF CYPRESS
CALIFORNIA 90630
. rr }
Honorable Councilmembers:
········•···· ·····-············· ············----·----------------- The undersigned principal, after having carefully examined the plans, Specifications and General Provisions for the City of Cypress Project 289, hereby proposes and agrees to furnish all labor, materials, equipment, plant, transportation, services, sales taxes and other costs necessary to complete the entire project in strict conformity with the specifications, general and special provisions, and all addenda therefore as prepared by the Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works Department of the City of Cypress and to corl'lpl�t�. c111.IJ!CJ_r� .. V'!it�i!1_!�� cgri!�.;i�! .. !ir:!1E::. �p�i�.�� .... i_r1 .. t�i� .... F>BQF>Q�f\� .... fc,_t.t�.� .. f<?l!c,_V'!ir1g ... bi�.: ···-····••·•· ·················- BASE BID:

Quantity Unit Items of Work Unit Total (Please Print Unit Prices Written in Words) Price Remove Existing HVAC Equipment and Replace with
$ :S��don ··-.--···'"··--... - ---·-�-�·-·•· .. -·-····--··-·······-········ ······�--- ---··--·-···-·--·---· 1 LS New, (Appendix "C") $5lj2lXJO - ----- ·····-···- - ·-·· · -.� .. ·-· ····· PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof System (Special Provisions)
$ H",ooc
-- •-•-•-•••••-•-••••••••-• •• ••••••-••••••-• •••• ••••·•••••n•••••••••••••• ••••�•••••• ____ ., ____ $ /1',,o� 1 LS
·· ·-·-···-·-·--·-·--····
PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof Deck Sheathing
•···•· ··· •··•········· · • ... -······· •·•········•--.. .......... ..... 1,000 SF (Special Provisions) $ �o $!2.f) 000
-·-····• •<"'"'"'"'"•"•-·· ········- ········ .. -· ··· ······· ··"•······ ······ .... .................................... . ······-······ •.... I PER SF
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID: s __ b_-=1la=..i...._o_0_c_✓ _____ -=--- TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID IN WORDS: __,.,s ..... ,_t,...._b ....... .u ........... "'............ d ,d......,__...,.,S ..... e ..... �..... /e"""'-'» ..... Jy---==ei:....;.,�--±· · _� ✓ ::s:h,p tt.f; Q..11\ J.. 5 • Dollars
(Please Print Total Amount of Bid in WORDS)
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
-
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289
Proposal Bid Sheet
CONTRACT TIME: It is understood and agreed that the time limit for the completion of the above work shall be within FORTY FIVE (45) working days of the commencement date given on the Notice to Proceed, and that required overtime and other costs are a part of the bid as noted above.

All work shall be completed between January 16th 2023 to March 21st 2023. The Cypress Community Center is a heavily used facility with instructional classes and event space available for rent The City has blocked off these dates for construction of this project. Contractor shall make all necessary arrangements and provisions to complete work during this timeframe. Any alternate dates shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. No additional cost or compensation will be allowed for any shipping, materials, labor, or equipment cost increase during the duration of this contract.

BID ADDENDA: Bidders who purchase plans and specifications at the City shall be placed on a bidders list, and shall receive any issued Bid Addenda. Bidders, who obtain plans and specifications from plan rooms or other sources, are responsible to contact the Public Works Department at 714-229-6740, in order to be placed on the Bidders List and receive any issued Addenda. Bidders shall submit a signed copy of all issued Bid Addenda with their bid. Failure to do so, may subject their bid to rejection.

City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project289

PROPOSAL
CITY OF CYPRESS PROJECT 289
The undersigned bidder affirms that he/she:

Proposal
a. Has noted and is fully informed as to the conditions outlined in the liquidated damages provisions of the Specifications.
b. Has satisfied himself/herself by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and such other means that he/she may prefer, as to the actual conditions and requirements of the work, and he/she shall not dispute, complain, or assert at any time after submission of the bid that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the nature and/or amount of work to be done.
c. Is aware that all proposals must be in the office to the City Clerk no later than:

Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM.
d. Is aware that the City of Cypress reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. e. Has submitted with this proposal a certificate showing proof of participation as a signatory to a recognized apprenticeship and/or training program, if required. f. Has attached to this Proposal Cash, or a Cashier's Check or Certified Check in favor of the City of Cypress, in an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total bid, or a Bid Bond for said amount in the form furnished by the City, with the understanding that said security shall be held by the City until the Agreement for doing the work has been entered into that said security shall be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages should the undersigned fail to enter into a contract and furnish the required bonds and insurance within the time specified in the Contract Documents, if awarded the Contract; and the undersigned agrees that in the event of such failure, the actual amount of damages to the City would be impractical and extremely difficult to determine.

Please indicate whether proprietorship,
business name: � Corporation
corporation or partnership and any use of fictitious
□ Partnership □ Proprietorship
1'11+7 2 ;,, "2-d2-1---
DATED: _ ____. ______ ,,_________ _
FIRM NAME: 13on /b'C, frt c -
FIRM ADDREss Q 3/fO w. oly ,.,f''c. 11/✓d ., ,5,.,. .''k 1.0 :?, LA 1 Cit 9ooh Y TELEPHONE: :JI O - 5]5-//1/
SIG�---
Bidder
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289
Proposal
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the representations made hereto are true and correct.

If a partnership, name and signature of at least one General Partner.

If a corporation, names and signatures of President or Vice President, and the Secretary or Assistant Secretary.

N
,:::,.•
A
=
M
=
E
L-'
A
�
N
=
D
-
5_,_l
_,
G-'
N
;.....

A
...:.

T
__.

U
�
R
-
E
....,.
j;
: .__�=-=�-- �---- ..,.JJMA.J J4.A-NfV/tr-ll, �g�,o�J � � Printed Name and Title 7 Signature
NAME AND SIGNATURE:
)':}p--z-JtF&:1?.. S �,.,',,. Printed Name and Titl

NAME AND SIGNA
TU
RE:

Printed Name and Title
Contractor's License No.: 41 2 5 £ J
Expiration Dale: ),> /3 � 2- 7---
7 City of Cypress
Public Works Department
--Sig�
Signature
No.

1. 2.

3. Community Center HVAC and Roof
Pro·ect 289

PROPOSAL BID SHEET

SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS

COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC AND ROOF
PROJECT289
Proposal Bid Sheet
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM
Contractor Name: AC Pros, Inc.

Contractor Address: 18340 Ventura Blvd. #216 Tarzana. CA 91356

THE CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF CYPRESS
CALIFORNIA 90630
Honorable Councilmembers:
-· ·-·· .. ..... ........ . ,.. ... . .. ... . ········-······•··-·-··· The undersigned principal, after having carefully examined the plans. Specifications and General Provisions for the City of Cypress Project 289, hereby proposes and agrees to furnish all labor, materials, equipment, plant, transportation, services, sales taxes and other costs necessary to complete the entire project in strict conformity with the specifications, general and special provisions, and all addenda therefore as prepared by ! the Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works Department of the City of Cypress and to !.�!!1P!€:l_t� .. �II
_���-"-"��-i��-��-9?���c;t time spe�i
_
fied_
i�_this PR_O�0.�_14.L, for th€:l_ folloy.,,i�g bid:

BASE BID:

Quantity Unit Items of Work Unit Total (Please Print Unit Prices Written in Words) Price 1 LS
1 LS
Remove Existing HVAC Equipment and Replace with
··- ·--·-·
New, (Appendix ''C'')
PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof System (Special Provisions)
- ··· ····' ___ , .. . . ··- ····· .. ...... -
$
)Si Bf,() 5'59 880
I
$
.. - ····�··-·······-· ---· -·-----·-··-··· .. . ·-- -· ······ --······ ·· ······-········ ·' , __ - -·· · PER LS [1.,0, ao\) \Z.,6 ,006
1,000 SF
Remove and Replace Roof Deck Sheathing
·······----·-----·-- .-.. - ..
(Special Provisions)
-····---····-·····---····· · . , .. . ...... ... .. ·· ····· ·-··-· ·- ·- .. . .
-- ······- -·- ·- · - --·· ·····-···-· .•. ---· .. -····· . ·· ·-····· ··· ·-· ·-··-· ·· -····
$ 0
) $
--·· ·--·············· .. io,� 25 PER SF
TOTAL AMOUNT oF BASE BID: s_J _____ 3'--b=-+-1 _1J_r-,_o____,aa _o ______ _
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID IN WORDS: -�.L..!Of,_:,:\lc.,.,._t"_--=---=--""-A=--rt_�"----1..-V\.:..:...t,_;;_f-+1--- � �\.- '\Is\ 0")"'-"� \-\\)f\! r Dollars
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
�10
.

Community Center HVAC and Roof
Pro·ect 289
Proposal Bid Sheet
CONTRACT TIME: It is understood and agreed that the time limit for the completion of the above work shall be within FORTY FIVE (45) working days of the commencement date given on the Notice to Proceed, and that required overtime and other costs are a part of the bid as noted above.

All work shall be completed between January 16th 2023 to March 21 st 2023. The Cypress Comm unity Center is a heavily used facility with instructional classes and event space available for rent. The City has blocked off these dates for construction of this project. Contractor shall make all necessary arrangements and provisions to complete work during this timeframe. Any alternate dates shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. No additional cost or compensation will be allowed for any shipping, materials, labor, or equipment cost increase during the duration of this contract.

BID ADDENDA: Bidders who purchase plans and specifications at the City shall be placed on a bidders list, and shall receive any issued Bid Addenda. Bidders, who obtain plans and specifications from plan rooms or other sources, are responsible to contact the Public Works Department at 714-229-6740, in order to be placed on the Bidders List and receive any issued Addenda. Bidders shall submit a signed copy of all issued Bid Addenda with their bid. Failure to do so, may subject their bid to rejection.

City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Proiect289

PROPOSAL
CITY OF CYPRESS PROJECT 289
The undersigned bidder affirms that he/she:

Proposal
a. Has noted and is fully informed as to the conditions outlined in the liquidated damages provisions of the Specifications.
b. Has satisfied himself/herself by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and such other means that he/she may prefer, as to the actual conditions and requirements of the work, and he/she shall not dispute, complain, or assert at any time after submission of the bid that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the nature and/or amount of work to be done.
c. Is aware that all proposals must be in the office to the City Clerk no later than:

Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM.
d. Is aware that the City of Cypress reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. e. Has submitted with this proposal a certificate showing proof of participation as a signatory to a recognized apprenticeship and/or training program, if required. f. Has attached to this Proposal Cash, or a Cashier's Check or Certified Check in favor of the City of Cypress, in an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total bid, or a Bid Bond for said amount in the form furnished by the City, with the understanding that said security shall be held by the City until the Agreement for doing the work has been entered into that said security shall be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages should the undersigned fail to enter into a contract and furnish the required bonds and insurance within the time specified in the Contract Documents, if awarded the Contract; and the undersigned agrees that in the event of such failure, the actual amount of damages to the City would be impractical and extremely difficult to determine.

Please indicate whether proprietorship,
business name: t.& Corporation
corporation or partnership and any use of fictitious
DATED: 15/a4/,Ma r I
FIRM NAME: AC Pros, Inc.
□ Partnership □ Proprietorship
FIRM ADDRESS: 18340 Ventura Blvd. #216 Tarzana, CA 91356 TELEPHONE: (818)342-7767
SIGNATURE:�
Bidder
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Pro·ect 289
Proposal
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the representations made hereto are true and correct.

If a partnership, name and signature of at least one General Partner.

If a corporation, names and signatures of President or Vice President, and the Secretary or Assistant Secretary.

NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Noam Ziv, President & Secretary
Printed Name and Title
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Ron it Ziv, Treasurer
Printed Name and Title
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

RonitZiv, Treasurer
Printed Name and Title � � '- -✓ Signature
Contractor's License No.: ------------ #871281
Expiration Date: ----------- 01/31/2024
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
No.

1. 2.

3. Community Center HVAC and Roof
Proiect289

PROPOSAL BID SHEET

SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS

COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC AND ROOF
PROJECT289
Proposal Bid Sheet
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 , at 3:30 PM
contractor Name: Scorpio Enterprises dba AireMasters Air Conditioning 12556 Mccann Drive Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Contractor Address: _________________ _

THE CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF CYPRESS
CALIFORNIA 90630
Honorable Councilmembers:

The undersigned principal, after having carefully examined the plans, Specifications and General Provisions for the City of Cypress Project 289, hereby proposes and agrees to furnish all labor, materials, equipment, plant, transportation, services, sales taxes and other costs necessary to complete the entire project in strict · conformity with the specifications, general and special provisions, and all addenda therefore as prepared by the Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works Department of the City of Cypress and to / complete all work within the contract time specified in this PROPOSAL, for the following bid:

BASE BID:

Quantity Unit Items of Work Unit Total (Please Print Unit Prices Written in Words) Price Remove Existing HVAC Equipment and Replace with
1 LS New, (Appendix "C") $
$(1/&
,
t PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof System (Special Provisions) I
.. _
1 LS $ $ r�(Jjo
� PER LS I
Remove and Replace Roof Deck Sheathing
1,000 SF (Special Provisions) $ '?',06 $
PERSF �S,ai6
·100
I TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID: $ _______ o _____ _ lPf'-/"Jl"i _lJ.-J=----------- ¢-- TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID IN WORDS: Seven Hu/'ld.llttl Eiq/J/y 1hJ Si}\ hunJ� +Yl6U<SatJ /
Dollars
(Please Print Total Amount of Bid in WORDS)
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
'JrJ - (:/)
('��
�
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289
Proposal Bid Sheet
CONTRACT TIME: It is understood and agreed that the time limit for the completion of the above work shall be within FORTY FIVE (45) working days of the commencement date given on the Notice to Proceed, and that required overtime and other costs are a part of the bid as noted above.

All work shall be completed between January 16th 2023 to March 2pt 2023, The Cypress Community Center is a heavily used facility with instructional classes and event space available for rent The City has blocked off these dates for construction of this project. Contractor shall make all necessary arrangements and provisions to complete work during this timeframe. Any alternate dates shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. No additional cost or compensation will be allowed for any shipping, materials, labor, or equipment cost increase during the duration of this contract.

BID ADDENDA: Bidders who purchase plans and specifications at the City shall be placed on a bidders list, and shall receive any issued Bid Addenda. Bidders, who obtain plans and specifications from plan rooms or other sources, are responsible to contact the Public Works Department at 714-229-6740, in order to be placed on the Bidders List and receive any issued Addenda. Bidders shall submit a signed copy of all issued Bid Addenda with their bid. Failure to do so, may subject their bid to rejection.

City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Proiect
2 89

PROPOSAL
CITY OF CYPRESS PROJECT 289
The undersigned bidder affim,s that he/she:

Proposal
a. Has noted and is fully infom,ed as to the conditions outlined in the liquidated damages provisions of the Specifications.
b. Has satisfied himself/herself by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and such other means that he/she may prefer, as to the actual conditions and requirements of the work, and he/she shall not dispute, complain, or assert at any time after submission of the bid that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the nature and/or amount of work to be done.
c. Is aware that all proposals must be in the office to the City Clerk no later than:

Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM.
d. Is aware that the City of Cypress reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. e. Has submitted with this proposal a certificate showing proof of participation as a signatory to a recognized apprenticeship and/or training program, if required. f. Has attached to this Proposal Cash, or a Cashier's Check or Certified Check in favor of the City of Cypress, in an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total bid, or a Bid Bond for said amount in the form furnished by the City, with the understanding that said security shall be held by the City until the Agreement for doing the work has been entered into that said security shall be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages should the undersigned fail to enter into a contract and furnish the required bonds and insurance within the time specified in the Contract Documents, if awarded the Contract; and the undersigned agrees that in the event of such failure, the actual amount of damages to the City would be impractical and extremely difficult to detem,ine.

Please indicate whether proprietorship, corporation or partnership and any use of fictitious business name: [XI Corporation □ Partnership □ Proprietorship DATED: __ M_ay_2_4
_, _20
_2_2 ________ _
FIRM NAME: Scorpio Enterprises dba AireMasters Air Conditioning FIRM ADDRESS: 1
2 556 McCann Drive Santa Fe Springs, California 90670
TELEPHONE: (56
2 } 946-9464
SIGNATURE: 0�
Bidder
L �Ur
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Proiect 289
Proposal
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the representations made hereto are true and correct.

If a partnership, name and signature of at least one General Partner.

If a corporation, names and signatures of President or Vice President, and the Secretary or Assistant Secretary.

NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Charles Thompson, President
Printed Name and Title
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Linda Thompson, Secretary
Printed Name and Title Signature
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Printed Name and Title Signature
Contractor's License No.: ,..._ ______ _
315631
Expiration Date: __ 7_13_1_12_0_22 ______ _
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
No.

1. 2.

3. Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289

PROPOSAL BID SHEET

SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS

COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC AND ROOF
PROJECT289
Proposal Bid Sheet
Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM
Contractor Name: PPG Air Conditioning, Inc.

Contractor Address: 5950 Lakeshore Drive, Cypress, CA 90630

THE CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF CYPRESS
CALIFORNIA 90630
Honorable Councilmembers:
j The undersigned principal, after having carefully examined the plans, Specifications and General Provisions for the City of Cypress Project 289, hereby proposes and agrees to furnish all labor, materials, equipment, plant, transportation, services, sales taxes and other costs necessary to complete the entire project in strict conformity with the specifications, general and special provisions, and all addenda therefore as prepared by the Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works Department of the City of Cypress and to ! complete all work within the contract time specified in this PROPOSAL, for the following bid:

BASE BID:

Quantity Unit Items of Work Unit Total (Please Print Unit Prices Written in Words) Price Remove Existing HVAC Equipment and Replace with
1 LS New, (Appendix "C") $881,480 $881,480
PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof System (Special Provisions)
1 LS $92,000 $92,000
PER LS
Remove and Replace Roof Deck Sheathing
1,000 SF (Special Provisions) $ 18.00 $18,000
PER SF
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID: $_9_9 ...... 1 __ 48_0 __ .o;;...co ___________ _ TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID IN WORDS: Nine Hundred Ninety One Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Dollars
(Please Print Total Amount of Bid in WORDS)
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project289
Proposal Bid Sheet
CONTRACT TIME: It is understood and agreed that the time limit for the completion of the above work shall be within FORTY FIVE (45) working days of the commencement date given on the Notice to Proceed, and that required overtime and other costs are a part of the bid as noted above.

All work shall be completed between January 16th 2023 to March 21st 2023. The Cypress Community Center is a heavily used facility with instructional classes and event space available for rent. The City has blocked off these dates for construction of this project. Contractor shall make all necessary arrangements and provisions to complete work during this timeframe. Any alternate dates shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. No additional cost or compensation will be allowed for any shipping. materials. labor. or equipment cost increase during the duration of this contract.

BID ADDENDA: Bidders who purchase plans and specifications at the City shall be placed on a bidders list, and shall receive any issued Bid Addenda. Bidders, who obtain plans and specifications from plan rooms or other sources, are responsible to contact the Public Works Department at 714-229-6740, in order to be placed on the Bidders List and receive any issued Addenda. Bidders shall submit a signed copy of all issued Bid Addenda with their bid. Failure to do so, may subject their bid to rejection.

City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC and Roof
Project 289

PROPOSAL
CITY OF CYPRESS PROJECT 289
The undersigned bidder affirms that he/she:

Proposal
a. Has noted and is fully informed as to the conditions outlined in the liquidated damages provisions of the Specifications.
b. Has satisfied himself/herself by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and such other means that he/she may prefer, as to the actual conditions and requirements of the work, and he/she shall not dispute, complain, or assert at any time after submission of the bid that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the nature and/or amount of work to be done.
c. Is aware that all proposals must be in the office to the City Clerk no later than:

Wednesday, May 25, 2022, at 3:30 PM.
d. Is aware that the City of Cypress reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. e. Has submitted with this proposal a certificate showing proof of participation as a signatory to a recognized apprenticeship and/or training program, if required. f. Has attached to this Proposal Cash, or a Cashier's Check or Certified Check in favor of the City of Cypress, in an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total bid, or a Bid Bond for said amount in the form furnished by the City, with the understanding that said security shall be held by the City until the Agreement for doing the work has been entered into that said security shall be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages should the undersigned fail to enter into a contract and furnish the required bonds and insurance within the time specified in the Contract Documents, if awarded the Contract; and the undersigned agrees that in the event of such failure, the actual amount of damages to the City would be impractical and extremely difficult to determine.

Please indicate whether proprietorship, corporation or partnership and any use of fictitious business name: � Corporation □ Partnership □ Proprietorship DATED: 05/25/2022
FIRM NAME: PPC Air Conditioning, Inc.

FIRM ADDRESS: 5950 Lakeshore Drive, Cypress, CA 90630
TELEPHONE: ------------- 714.952.2001
Bidder
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Community Center HVAC ana Roof
Project289
Proposal
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the representations made hereto are true and correct.

If a partnership, name and signature of at least one General Partner.

If a corporation, names and signatures of President or Vice President, and the Secret or Assistant Secretary.

NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Bruce Cook, Jr.

Printed Name and Title Signature
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Brian Buchanan, Vice President
Printed Name and Title
---
Signat
2�c::::::: ure
NAME AND SIGNATURE:

Debora Ryan, Corporate Secretary
Printed Name and Title
Contractor's License No .. .:..: .;;.6=62;;;;..;..;16;..;;5 ____ _ Expiration Date:_1_2_/3_1_/2_0_2
_
2 ______ _
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
Ardurra Group, Inc. 3737 Birch Street, Suite 250, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.428.1500 www.ardurra.com June 20, 2022
Alexandru A. Bangean, PE
Project Manager
City of Cypress
Public Works Department
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, CA 90630
[email protected]
Subject: Proposal to Provide Construction Management and Inspection Services for the Community Center HVAC and Roof, Project 289
Dear Mr. Bangean,
Ardurra Group, Inc. (Ardurra) is pleased to present this proposal to the City of Cypress to provide professional construction management (CM) and inspection services required for the subject project, which is based on our on-call contract being considered by City Council on June 27, 2022.

Project Understanding
Ardurra understands the City is seeking assistance with CM and inspection services to oversee the successful completion of construction activities that have been designed by Engineering-Design-Analysis, Inc. In general, the project includes removal of existing HVAC equipment at the Community Center, installation of new HVAC equipment, and removal and replacement of the roof system where the new HVAC equipment is placed.

CM and inspection services will be provided in accordance with our recently submitted On-Call Construction Management/Engineering Support/Testing and Inspection Services proposal being considered by City Council on June 27, 2022.

The project duration is 45 working days, and the anticipated construction cost is $678,000. The project will start in January 2023. Prior to the commencement of construction, Ardurra will provide a qualified and experienced CM and inspector that are mutually acceptable to the City and Ardurra. All Ardurra team members, with the requisite qualifications and experience, stand ready to commence work on this project immediately subject to a notice to proceed.

City of Cypress
June 20, 2022