HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 2022-0016f
OCT 2022
PC RESOLUTION 2022-0016 �
CITY OF ATASCADERO
�gNNiNG
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION �F THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AMND22-0065, TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUILDING ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AND 5
OF TRACT 3085
9015 AND 9020 BOSQUE COURT
MARKS AND ERICKSON
WHEREAS, an application was received from Trevor and Kelli Marks, 9015 Bosque Ct.,
Atascadero, CA 93422, (owner and applicant) and Leif Erickson, 1379 Knoll Rd., Redlands, CA 92373,
(owner and applicant) for an Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No. 2016-0001 and
modification of designated building envelopes; and
WHEREAS, the site has a General Plan Designation of Single -Family Residential (SFR -Y); and
WHEREAS, the property is in the Residential Single -Family (RSF-Y) zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Vesting Tract Map 3085 on
May 17,2016; and
WHEREAS, Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001 was prepared for the project and
certified by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on May 17, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, A&T Arborists (Steve Alvarez) prepared a report analyzing impacts from the
proposed development as compared to mitigation measures and timing listed in the amended MND
and determined that impacts were equal to or less than impacts identified in the amended MND;
and
WHEREAS, to assess potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed
detailed envelopes, City staff prepared an addendum to the MND pursuant to CEQA (herein
referred to as "Addendum"); and
WHEREAS, the Addendum concluded that the proposed amendments would not result in
any new or substantially more severe impacts than disclosed in the original Bosque Court building
envelopes, as amended; and
WHEREAS, Section 21000, et seq., of the Public Recourses Code and Section 15000, et
seq., of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (herein referred to as the "CEQA
Guidelines"), which govern the preparation, content, and processing of environmental impact
reports, have been fully implemented in the preparation of the Bosque Court Subdivision and
Addendum; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject application
was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which hearing evidence, oral
and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said use permit; and
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, California, takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Recitals: The above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Public Hearings.
The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project on
October 4, 2022 and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the
public.
SECTION 3. All findings made for the original subdivision remain valid and proposed
amendments are consistent with the previous approval.
SECTION 4. CE A. The previous approval for the subdivision (TR 3085) included building
envelopes as the basis for determining impacts to native trees. As the proposed amendment revised these
identified building envelopes, an addendum was prepared to ensure that conditions and impacts were
analyzed in relation to the previous determination.
After reviewing the facts and analyzing the circumstances, City staff has determined that a new
MND is not required because none of the circumstances described in CEQA Section 21166, as
implemented by CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, would occur. Staff has prepared an addendum
to discuss these issues and the basis for this determination.
SECTION 5. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a regular session
assembled on October 4, 2022, resolved to approve Amendment AMND22-0065, subject to the following:
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT B: MND Addendum
EXHIBIT C: Updated Building Envelopes for Lots 1 and 5
On motion by Commissioner Schmidt, and seconded by Commissioner Hughes, the foregoing resolution
is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Anderson, Carranza, Heath, Hughes, Schmidt, Keen, van den Eikhof (7)
NOES: None (0)
ABSENT: None (0)
ABSTAINED: None
ADOPTED: October 4, 2022
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Jeff v ikhof
Planning Commission Chairpers
ATTEST:
Phil Dunsmore
Planning Commission Secretary
(0)
EXHIBIT A. Conditions of Approval
AM N 022-0065
Conditions of Approval
Timing
AM N D22-0065
Bosque Ct. Building Envelope Amendment
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Per
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Planning Services Conditions
1. All Conditions of Approval set forth by Resolutions PC 2016-0015 and 2016-001.6
Ongoing
shall be adhered to unless specifically amended by this resolution. This approval
relates to Lots 1 and 5 of Tract 3085, as described in the attached exhibits and
located on APN 056-211-054 and -058.
2. The approval of this amendment shall become final.and effective for the purposes of
Ongoing
issuing building permits fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission
approval unless an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of
the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve the
BP
following minor changes to the project that (1) modify the site plan project by less
than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or (3) address a
construction design issue that is not substantive to the Master Plan of Development.
The Planning Commission shall have the final authority to approve any other changes
to the Master Plan of Development and any associated Tentative Maps unless
appealed to the City Council.
4. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Atascadero or its
Ongoing
agents, officers, and employees against any claim or action brought to challenge an
approval by the City, or any of its entities, concerning the construction or use of the
detached accessory structure.
5. Conditions of Approval set forth in Resolutions PC 2016-0015 and 2016-0016 shall
Ongoing
remain true and valid unless otherwise amended by this resolution.
6. Any proposed residential structures and driveways shall be located in the proposed
Ongoing
building envelope as identified in Exhibit C. Revision to COA #9
7. A deed notification shall be recorded prior to issuing building permits for structures
BP / Ongoing
outside the originally approved building envelopes. This deed notification shall
include updated building envelopes and clearly define activities allowed outside
approved envelopes. Revision to COAs #10 and #11
8. Upon recordation of updated building envelopes, the owner of Lot 1 will be required
BP
to provide a letter from the arborist indicating the size and type of tree removed. The
owner shall pay mitigation fees for the tree removed without permit or mitigate by
replanting native trees onsite.
EXHIBIT B: MND Addendum
AMND22-0065
EXHIBIT B
ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2016-0001
10075 Atascadero Ave Subdivision — Bosque Ct.
(Certified by the Planning Commission on May, 15, 2016)
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to analyze and
consider the environmental consequences of decisions to approve development projects
that they exercise discretion over. CEQA achieves this objective by requiring agencies to
prepare Mitigated Negative Declarations (MND's) for projects with the potential to cause
significant impacts on the physical environment. MND's are public documents that
analyze environmental effects related to the planning, construction, and operation of a
project, and indicate ways to reduce or avoid possible environmental damage. An MND
also discloses growth -inducing impacts, effects found not to be significant, significant
cumulative impacts, and significant impacts that cannot be avoided, if any. The purpose
of an MND is to inform. MND's are not policy documents that recommend project approval
or denial.
As a lead agency, the City of Atascadero prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) for the 6 -lot subdivision at 10075 Atascadero Avenue which has been renamed to
Bosque Court, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
(Public Resources Code, section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines
(California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq., as amended). The Planning
Commission certified the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the subdivision at a
public hearing on May 17, 2016. As noted in the MND, the analysis in the MND was at a
"project" level of detail, which anticipated the potential impacts of future development.
Public Resources Code Section 15162 limits the ability of an agency to require an
additional MND, once one has been certified for a project. Section 15162 provides as
follows:
15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations.
(a) When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in
the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1). Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
(2). Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or
negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
(3). New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted,
shows any of the following:
(A). The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B). Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe
than shown in the previous EIR;
(C). Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt
the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D). Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different
from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents
decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The CEQA Guidelines further refine the circumstances under which a supplemental or
subsequent MND may be required. Guidelines Section 15162 provides as follows:
.$15164. Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration.
(a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously
certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions
described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor
technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in
Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration
have occurred.
(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or
attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted
negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to
Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's
required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be
supported by substantial evidence.
In 2016, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Vesting Tract Map 3085 to
subdivide two lots at 10075 and 10085 Atascadero Avenue. This approved a total of 6.71
acres to be subdivided into six (6) smaller lots in the Residential Single -Family (RSF-Y)
zone, which has a minimum lot size of 1 -acre gross area. The lot sizes range in size from
1.0 gross acre to 1.24 gross, acres. The. Tentative Map expired in 2018 and was
reconsidered by the Planning Commission 'in 2020.
The six (6) lots are accessed from a cul-de-sac that was constructed as part of the
subdivision improvement plans. Building envelopes were included on each lot to quantify
the number of native trees that may be removed during construction. It was anticipated
that new residential homes would be placed in the proposed building envelopes to take
advantage of a streamlined environmental review.
As parcels sold off to separate individuals requesting to build homes, a few of the property
owners found their approved building envelopes to be limiting. The sizes and locations of
the envelopes would not allow for their proposed plans. Conditions of several sites have
also changed within the past few years. With drought conditions over the past few years,
various trees onsite have fallen. One tree was also removed in anticipation of building in
the future.
A mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project in 2015. This MND
focused primarily on the impacts that future development may have on the native trees in
the area. Due to changed circumstances, two of the new owners are requesting to amend
their building envelopes to increase usable space on the property. After reviewing the
facts and analyzing the circumstances, City staff has determined that a new MND is not
required because none of the circumstances described in CEQA Section 15162, as
implemented by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, would occur. Staff has prepared an
addendum to discuss these issues and the basis for this determination.
2.0 Native Trees
The certified Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Bosque Court subdivision included
an arborist analysis originally completed in 2015 for the subdivision. This arborist report
analyzed potential impacts to native trees, based on locations of the proposed building
envelopes. At the time of construction permit submittal, each applicant is required to
submit their own updated arborist report based on the impact of their proposed project.
Two property owners in the subdivision are requesting to amend their envelopes. Each
applicant submitted an updated arborist report for their proposed envelopes.
The updated arborist reports concluded the following:
Lot 1: The proposed development will impact two native trees. No trees are anticipated
for removal.
Lot 5: A large oak (tree #11) was uprooted and fell during a storm last year. Construction
within the amended envelope will require the removal of two native oak trees as opposed
to the current envelope's five. The two oak trees required for removal in the amended
envelope also includes the large tree that has already fallen. Therefore, only one live tree
will be required for removal as a result of the amended envelope.
2.1 Application of CEQA Guideline Section 15612
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial
changes proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous
MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects ora substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects as a result of the
Master Plan of Development amendment and revised land use development
scenarios?
No. The City has completed a thorough review of the updated arborist reports. Current
conditions and building envelope revision, fewer trees will be required for removal than
originally anticipated.
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there have been substantial
changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken
which will require major revisions of the previous MND due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects as a result of the expanded building envelopes on Bosque
Court?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there have been substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require
major revisions to the previous MND due to the involvement of new significant impacts or
increases in the severity of previously identified impacts. Changed conditions on the site
and mitigation per the City's Native Tree Ordinance make the proposed changes to the
previously certified MND insignificant.
Is there substantial evidence in the record revealing that there is new information of
substantial importance related to the proposed amendments, which was not known
and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time
the previous MND was certified that shows. (1) the project will have one or more
significant effects not discussed in the MND, (2) significant effects previously shown
will be substantially more severe that shown in the previous MND, (3) mitigation
measure or alternatives previously found to be infeasible would in fact be feasible, or
(4) there are considerably different mitigation measure or alternatives from those
analyzed in the previous MND that would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects?
No, there is no evidence suggesting that there is new information of substantial
importance relating to new significant effects or the severity of previously identified
significant effects, or new alternatives or mitigation measures or the efficacy of previously
considered alternatives or mitigation measures. At the time of the certification of the
original MND, native tree impacts and mitigations were identified based on the trees within
proposed envelopes at the time. Native tree conditions have changed over the years. This
new analysis reveals that no new significant environmental effects would result from the
expansion of building envelopes as proposed. It can be concluded that no new mitigation
measures or alternatives need be analyzed.
3.0 BASIS FOR DECISION TO PREPARE AN ADDENDUM
CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 explains when an addendum to an EIR is required:
(a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a
previously certified MND if some changes or additions are necessary but none
of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a
subsequent MND have occurred.
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be
prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are
necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162
calling for the preparation of a subsequent MND or negative
declaration have occurred.
(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can
be included in or attached to the final MND or adopted negative
declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with
the final MND or adopted negative declaration prior to making
a decision on the project.
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent
EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum
to an EIR, the lead agency's required findings on the project, or
elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by
substantial evidence.
Although the project description has been refined with the submittal of a more
precise development plan, an addendum is appropriate because impacts have been
shown to decrease or say the same from the previously certified MND as amended
and because none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for
preparation of a subsequent MND have occurred.
More specifically, the project will not impact more native trees than anticipated in
the original MND, as they exist on the site today. Furthermore, there have been no
other changes, evidence or new information which would require revisions to the
previous EIR. Because none of the criterion in section 15162 has been met, an
addendum is appropriate.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: 2022 Updated Arborist Reports
Attachment 1: 2022 Updated Arborist Reports
A & T AIR13OMSTS
-Oo BOX 1311 YXUKrrM, CA 934M 18051434-0131
Adyl.2022
Leif Frickson RE-C—ENED
,car *5EMosqueCour t
Ar,ascadem, CA 93422,
Re- Tree Proicction Plan for development iocated at Lot 7,15 EI Bixquc Coin Atascadcio.
C,� 9342_.
'161,:s Trac Protm-tion Plan is ror the location stared above. The dcvc1opmcnt will be
:mPacting IS Wive Imes 14 live oaks (Quercus agri.,lobal' and I. vatley oak tree (Quercus
lobam's. Nu u0wr nativc tmes wJ-1 be importod and 2 trees are being requested {'or
removal,
This developm"t IW a large valley oak (tree At 11) fall ovcr during a starry p
subdbisi(= This event hats m-ade building the proposed he on the apps-ants's
modified envelope sig;iiricantly better than doing go on ibc origiow one because, it vii IJ
110ve ICSS impact on the property ftec",
It is The responsibility of tht ownerlageacy lo proiddc- a copy of this tree prutecOvn plan
to any zad aj I contractors and subconLractom- that work within the drip line of the native
tim, Ir bhi&y reconurended that each contactor sip and acknowledge ihis tree
Prat=:itm Plan.
The trees impaaicd projectby this are numbertgl and id -caged on both the gmding plar,
I
and *W trM protection spreadsboet,
'free Rating Sysirm
A ratft system of I -:0 was used for visuaj 1y e3tabliAiing Oic av= .41 condition of cash
tree on dj-- spreo&hrct. The rating system is defined as Tollows;
Ratisjr_ C290-fift
ID Deceased
I Evidusce of mtesivc pasHkOurcs, wreme disease and is in seven
decline. Pruning from ovczhcad utility lines,
2 May b.- saved with attontion to ch 4 pmalng, inswvpc%t
eradication aad future monhorimg.
3 Some past Wlurcs< -,o= pests or structuraldefece. Umt may be
mitigated by cl= IV proanS.
4 May have had minor past fail s, cxccssivc deadwood or tnittor
structural deftos that can be Tnjt1gattd with pruning,
5 Rclatively heatchy true with little wAmW imucloral und or pest
defects..
6 Healthy tree that probably can be left in its natLral --,Late.
7-9 Have had proper atbonckilt=l pruning and attention or baare Iko
apparent structural defects.
I tt Specimen tragi with pt.-rfw- shape. structure: and fo' !age iii a
pkiwied sciting (i.e. parl,, arboremm).
The [bilowing mitigation maasure&lmethods must be fully understood and followed by
anyortv working %ithin the drip line of any native twe. Arty' ne s.wnclarif vvil
cc .
be pro,,ided by as (Ibc arburists) upon equest.
I Fencing: The proposed fencing shall be sho%m in omen imk on the gra&%
plan. It must be a ftainimurn of 4' high chain link, snow or -%,fety fence staked at the edge
of the drip lime or line u.1crtcroachineiit for eoO tree or group of trees. I lie fL-acc slut -
11 lic
Up bvibirc any constrtictiort or earth moving begins, fbeowner shall Nresponsible for
maintaining wan crcrt fe,-tcc througbout the conmmction period, The uborist(s), upon,
rotifleatiun, will iusuect the ferim placemera onw 0 is crectod. After this tutee, f�nOng
shall not be moved without urborist inspectioreapproval. If the orangc plastic fcneing is
used, a minimum of four zip ties shall he used on each b4tkc to =ure the fence. All
-ffiorhs shall be made tri maximi,v the dicta finer from each saved tree.
2. Soil AcrationMetbodst Sails within the drip line that have bctri compacted
by heavy equipment undfor vonsmicdon activities must be mrurned to their origind state
-idt4rc all %%ijrk is completed. Methods inclutle water jetting, adding org.mucnWet- and
'xmrp small holes with an auger (I W 4=p, 2-Y apart with a 24" wiger) and thu
application of rnWerolc wnourits of nitrogen fertilizer. The arbor isi(s) shall advise.
3. Chip Mulch: All areas within *,hz: drip fine of the trees that caninot be fenced
shall, receive a 4-6" layer of chip mulch to retain moisture, soil sL-actoiv and rcducc the
dflitulb of Soil compaction.
4Trenehing Within Drip 1-ii3e: Ali trenchmp witlibi the drip I i nc of native
trees 10i2di he hand dug, augured or bored (for utilities). All major m)ts shpl I be avoided
whenever possiblv. All cxposW rotas larger dials l" in& =-etersball be clean cut with
sharp ")irkg ti, ols and not left ragged. A. Ma ndatwy meeung heLwtxn the arborists and
grading contractor(s) must take place Oar wwork start.
S. Grading Within The Drip Line: Gradj al; should )lot enctuwh within the drip
line onless mthorirrd, Grading should not dksr-,jpt the wrrnal drainage pattern aruuAd the
trees. Fills should not create a ponding condition and excavations should not. ]cove the
Erce on a rapidly draining mound,
6. Exposed Ro*tst Any cxpotwd roto" :shall he rc,c-ovwed the stone day they
werceXposod. If they cannot, they must be covered witli burlap or another suitable
material and. wcvd dowm 2x PCX day until reburied.
7. Paving Within The Drip Line: Pervious surfacing is prefezred within the
drily lime ol'any native tree. l f p avers: ate required, this areas are outlin&ll on the grad -MI!
plans_ Pavrrs must he interlocking with a minimurn ot` "10%void spare: backftiled with
pea gravel- fabric shali be permeable. The % slope of the driveway r ruy prohibit t
vltginccring Of Patver% fnr this project.
5. Equipment Operation: Vehicles and all heavy equipment 4diall not be
driven under dhc bees. as this will contribute to -oiii cutnpa ction. Aao there is to be tier
parking ofcquipmaen! or per nal vehicles in (hese areas. All was behind fencing ate off
limit-, unless pre -approved by the arbcar st.
9. Existing Surlaceaaa The misting grouted sudace wit & the drily line Of all ;tale
trees shall not be cuk t;lled. trompa tied an panel, finless shown on the grading pLims and
appreived by the tadicirist.
10. Cr+mometion Materials And waste: NU liquid ttr *solid. construction waste
shall bx, 4aumprd on the: ground witiain the drip Brae of any naetivc Irec . The drip line areas
are not for storace sof rnmeerials either.
Lt. Arborist Monitoring; Att axrbutist shall be: present for selected activities
(trees iderdirred can %p€eMAect attdl items bullcted below). The.rnordtar:ng dov* not
nevessarily baavc to be continuous but observational td timet sharing faesc activities. it is
the responsibility of the owner(q) or their dt*igncv to itiform us prior to these events so
wtt can rrrtkia arrangements to be present It is the reslannsibility orthe owner to contract
(prior to construction) a locally licensed and irasttred arborist thaat will deeutnent all
f`Innitorin i1Gtf1tt1C9.
pre-eceits[riu tcon trncc placement
e any utility of daaiciage wenc ping u thin any drip line
All grading and trcrichinf near trees requiring monitoring on )Fac spT=dshcci
O All driveway construction activitics
Ircc remoiel operatio s
IL Fiv-Com0ructkm NlcLfing: An on-site pre -construction mectinp with the
Arborist(s) Owncr(sj, plaxttrting Staff. and the earth n:
native dace. An, tress that may need pruning ler read) tone deararwe shati be pruned
prior to atty grading :activities to avoid ary hra>1ch ttraing.
14. Landw3we; All landscape under Ore drip-Jibe shall be dro aght tolerant or native
va:ietics. Lams Shall be avoided. ,All irrigation trenching shail be routed amend drip
:incl, othemi&e abovc gmtmd strip-irriga;iott.chall be used, Itis the ownee's
respoasibility to notify the landscape cuniractor regarding this rritigsation.
1S. t: tiiity Plac.tmenta All utilities shall be placed dawn the road: driveway and
when p n-sihic outside ofthe drip lines. The arborist shall, blipervisc trcnching within clte
drip line. All trenehts in these areasshall be exposed by air spade or wand )lug with
utilities routed undertuver the roots.
'1 he included sprc:a&'acet _nc:udto troes listew by number, species -vtd m,u:ttplc stcnns if
api livable, diwnm-r and breast height (.t,,'), condition (scale from rvor to cxccltent),
status tavoided, impac:te4, mrnovad, cxcmpt), percent of drip lire impacted, mitigation
-equired l!encing, tyro; pruning„ monitoring): constraction impact (treaching, grading),
rc ommendcd pruning and 41dividtaal tree: dotes,
lf.aE the above mitigation measwres are followed. we feel there will he nig ttalditional
mng-term significant impacts to the rcmaining native trees_
Please let m know if vee can he of any faturr. astistarec ti, -, au for thi s p Ktjctt.
Steven tG..Alvarcz
C'crtif cd Afbcri t 9WC,1511
'�
4fl �
�1
�
Lh .t , j.
W
I Ky s
p
�
E`A
*►i � !Jf
lJ1 �
�
tdF
tai
-+
at
r r
Q C
r
Qr?
8
r
Qr
rQ
rQ- �, ,�0
C
�L
cogPH
CAI
m
� I
>
1
......
_
CTI 0
fn
rn
c
cs
(n
m
to rol
0"
Ln
cr
M
_
I
�
0
UP
tn
6
�aC�,����Q
i}}leri� �U'yd
U/
Lqi
;h
' p�
Iyyp�yi
�
}P}�ryry 11I I
Y/JI
�
_Vh�+y� I_/41�R
�1/
4G)
-v
°1
I
h .b
`�
�
ik#
0
Ol�A
Ild
/h�
4/
6/
\J
�
MrB/
w
�
�
i
1
�z
�
z
8
-n0-n-n0�nr:"M-n-n
�,
v0
m
m
o
zlz
.z
z
z
z
z
�
i
R
C,
00g
MO
Z
z
z
z 2
z'
Z
z
l
zfa m
-ti
Z
z
Z
z
Z
z
Z
z
n1a
WE
g
r�mmmrn
mmrrarr
M
m
w
IZ
z zlz
z zz z
z
z
zlz
z
z
Z
t
r
Z
-n
lzzzzz
c�z9l
zzzR
M
m m M
M -m
C
r,
r awl
m
mn
int r m
M
m
res
I
+� m
�rr
r- ca
Z
—1
LIE
July t, 2022
Lest I El Rosqur Court
Atascadero. Cad 93422 �
Re; Tree Protection Plan for development located at Lot 1 F1 l3osgve Court. At&scadero.
CA 4342^
Thvs `free Protection l?ia;n is for dhe location stated above. 'l"ke develgipmrttt will be
impacting 2 dative oak trees (Quercus rrgr^r;� ha). No othcr cots tmvs will, be impacted,
a n4 ltd uO t4U`o arra. betttg requesters for rctnovaL The owncr is rcquestrng the huddirC
envelopc Tse expanded fax a stwp and AM. If the owiser fnllnws the tree protcc 6 n puzn
the impact will be little to tars irrtpact « fthe nxive tri.
it is the responsib>liity ofthe owmexlagency to provide a copy pt lhis trct pant; coon pian
to any and all contramin and subLamtraLlur,s that work within the drip litre of the native
trees, It is highly roco nmtended thoi cash contrxcter sign and a6mowledge this ince
protection plan.
The gats inzpcted by this pm ect are numbered and irdenfilierl on both the grading plant
and the me-- protection Spreadsheet,
Tm )bring llystetm
A rating cysteal of 1-10 was d OT visstally establishing dw overall condition of each
I= or the sprcRdsbcct. The rating systctrn is defined as follows.
Rating couditiom
1) Decewmd
I ENiden a of nnassive past falluresr extrr me disc= and is in severe
city nc. Pn` M9 from overhead udlity limes.
2 t*iay be saved with attention to class 4 priming. inscet/pest
eradicatiao and Uum monitoring.
x Some pas;i fail urm. some pests lir structural defects than may be
mitigated by class IV pruning.
4 May have had ra nor past failures, excessive deadwood or minus
structuurxl defecis Hutt can be mitigated wtih pra ring,
s ltt: -,ively healthy tree %ith little visual sires ,rol rand ca- pest
defects
6 Healthy uve that prrobayty can be heft in its tumnal t;tate.
7-4 Have had l ToNr arboriculUral. pruning and tdlrne, rjr, or have no
upparunt. structurala-kcts.
1.0 Stiecinten tree ,wilt pvrieet shape, stmcst-tre ranfl fnliagc tri a
prolcct w, ui:ng Iix. hark, drfuncturn. 1.
I lar following mitigation mcasures 1methcsds must be f�utl; under,-tratxi and fotlowcd by
anyone working within the drop 'wine of any native tree. at:y neee#vasry c:lari:ficat cia %"C
ne pruvidlcd by ;is (the arbor ists) upon request.
t Fencing: 'l3ie paropowd feta irrr_ shall be :howl it ortngo ink on the gracing
plan. It must be a minimum or* higfi chain link, snow or saslietwy l'enix staked at the edge
,rf' the drip tine or line of encroachment for cacti tree or group of trees. [ e 'ence 9hal' br
up beforz any conswict on or earth moving begins. The owmer shat he respowsihlc for
arwitaining an erect fence throughout die construction preriml. 'Ilia whorisi(s).. upon
aniification. w il' inspect the fence placement Brace it is ere ied. after this time. fencing
shall not i`,e rnoved uatbout arboristinspcctia:ilaapprova, if the vrarge plastic fara4ing it
+tsc;d .:a minimum of four zip ties shall beused ars each stake to secure the t ecce. All
tifforts shall ;ie madeto maximixe the distance "from each s awdl trim..
2. Soil Aeration Metbods: Soils >a Wiin the drip line •stat have beat compacted
by heavy equipment and'o€ construction activities anus: be returned to their original state
before. a'.1 wLTk is cotnplctLd. Methods include wuterjerting, acdmp. orgaciic manor, and
boring small holes .with an auger (18" deep, 2 Y apart with a 244" auger) and the
application nfmoderate amounts of nitrogen f'cntiliw. The arbonst(s) aril advise.
3. Chip .wiukh: All arras within the drip line of the trces that canmot be feawed
.t}tall recf ibc a 4-611 laycT of chip mulch to retain moisture. soil stmeture and rr&-w. `kc
effects of soil compaction.
4. Trenching Withm Drip Line: fill trenching within the drip lint: of native
irczs shall be band dup, augured or bored (,fbr utilit iri). All; ttlajor netts shall be avcaided
whenever p aisible. Alt txposeci roots largcr than 1" in dimmer shall be clean cut with
vborpz pruning loultc acid not e t raggcd, A Mandatory meeting between the arborisss and
gradirg contractor(s) muss rake place prior to wcrk gtart.
S. Grading Within The Drip iliac: Grading 5houlki not encroach within the trip
line ;xnless autps deo , Gradititg should not disropi tic t7tlrmzll drainage paner_a around the
lreesc pills should not crcalc a ponding cordit on wk! cxcavations alaotsld not hutvc th.c
tree on a rapidly draining mound.
6. Exposed Roots, Any exposed toots shall be rc covered the same day they
were "posed. if they cannot, they must be scnverad with burlap or anot er suitable
inatertat and lwoc l down ix ger day until -c-buried.
7. i"a^ting Within The Orip Lime. l'%xvi ius surfacing is p+-efcTrcd within The
drip rine of tory native tree. 'if pavers we recicir+ed. the areAs are outlined on the g wliny
p34os,, �c backfilled with
pea gravel. Fabric shall he permeabl-r_ Tho'✓a slnpo urthc drive%-ay may prohibit the
engineering of para-crs for this project.
tf. Equipment Operation., Vehiclesand all heAvy equipment shall not oc
driven urder the trees, as this will cp ntribute .o roti compaction Atsu thcrc is to be no
parking of equipment or personal vehicles in there areas. All ares behind fencing arc off
;iniits udess pre-approved by the urbotist_
9. > xistin,g Sul faces: The cxisting ground surface v6 thin the drip line of oil okk
sees shall not be cart, filled, compacted or pared. urdess shown on the grading, plsatis and
approved by the arborisI
10. Construction Materials AndWaste: -No liquid or solid c-orstru4tion waste
shall be dumped on the ground within the drip line of any naiive tree. The drip Jiac areas
Ure rich for stnrage Of rntrteriais either.
11. Arbarist Monituring: An arborist shall be present for sclected activities
(ir;cs identified cm spreadsheet rind items bulkicd below). The monitoring does moi
necessarily havt; to be continuo-m but observational at times during these €ctivitiirs, ft is
the responsibility of the ownerf s) or their designee to inform us prior to these events so
,we can make mrangemcnts to be present. It is tltc responsibility of the o"rr to contract
;prior to constauction) a locally licensed and insured arhorisi that will document ail
Monitoring a".tiviti".
• Pre=constructicon thrice placemmt
9 any tri ity or drainage trcaching widiln any drip line
* All grading and trenching near trees requiring monitorinfi on the spreadsh4ct
a
All drive++.w consirwion activities
w 'free.. removal operations
12. Pr&Constraction 'Meeting: An on-site pre,constructinti meeting %,,I th
Arborist(s), CM-n ifs), Plalming SULFt and the earth moving train shall be requires! £lir
Ws project Prior to tiriat cu culrar 4 , n let ice from the arborist(s) may be requirw3
verifying the healt?rlcond-Ation or all imparatcd trt:cs and providing any ream mcridatiosas
for any additional mitigation, The letter shall verify that the arboristtt,) were on site far
all grading and/or tr acaiag activity that encroached into the drip line of the selected
native trees, and that rill work deme in diese area.,; wam cornpletod to the standards et forth
above-
13. Prtuoifng:: Class t pruning includes deadwood rrmowd along with selective
thinning to lcsson ivind resistance: Class 4 prur ng includes,43'r nw'n reduction pruning;
shalt consist of reduction of tops, sides or irodividual limbs. It trained arborist shall
perfrnm all pruning. No pruning shall take more fto 25% nt't'hc live crovrn of any
native trate. Any leers that may need ismcaing for road liconie c:leirrence shall be pruned
prior to any grading, act vibes to avoid amy branch leering.
M Landscape: All iandscapc under the drill -lira 5holl be droivht w1crant or mtfivc
varieties. Lawns shalt be uvvidc t. All irrigation, trenching shall be routed around drift
lines, otbcrixisc above grosiuddrih►-irrigation :stall 1 n,W. it is the u'tter's
responsibility to notify the landscape co otratr-tor TeWdiog O%is mitigatiOn,
15, V61ity Piac wnt. All utilitivs .gholl ire pla;red down the roadxdrivcvray said
whin possible outside of the drip tines. Tha: arborist shall supervise trenching within tlac
drip line. All trenches is these ar=eas deal] be exposed by air spade or Beard drag WM
utilities routed under/over the ronts-
The i=ludcd spreadsheet includes trees listed by number, species and rrsailtipi.e stems if
applicable, diameter and breast height (4.5), condition (,kale from poor to =cllcut),
status (av oitlod, impaeted, removed, exempt). percent of drip line impacted. midpatiou
required (taw ing, root pruning. monitoring), construction impact (trenching, gradjag),
recon mended pruning and individual tree :antes.
Wall the alxwe mitigalior, measures are followed, we Berl their will be no additional
long-torm significant impacts to the remaining native tal=es.
Please let w. know6wecanAn of any fa are M l ncc tri yo roar this proffit.
Steven G. Alvarez
Certified AAorist PWC 0511
c
40
Co
-4
CFA
CA
ca
#Q
CO
CO
-4 OW
CA
TI,
P,
�o
0
lw
Q I
cl
in
fCiz,
G)
G)
0
o
0
z
1-2
,z
z c
0
0
z
0
Z;
z
G
rr.
No
z
z
an
0
2
2
w
01
A
EXHIBIT Q Updated Building Envelopes for Lots 1 and 5
AMND22-0065
Lot 1
s r.Ina' ,ori "m
�J1uF �I
#-'—.^'mew—.waM+s•�+l _ -
AJU it
I
Updated building envelope E
.:4i -1 �Yi ►:14
Building envelope approved in
PC Resolution 2016-0016
m
Lot 5
' + • *„yam.
I
! T
Building envelope approved in
I # PC Resolution 2016-0016
E I ,
I
I ` < Updated building envelope
I o -DI 5
!� 1
Ji
� 4,-
!
! .1 ! � Ste' ► � '+, 'k ��.
! I
WA
h s
:S'ie": '"gyp ..,,.t•. _