Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic CommentsCOMMENTS ATTACHED ABC CHURCH N From: Phil Dunsmore Sent: Fridav, June 16, 2023 9:11 AM To: Cc: Mariah Gasch; Annette Manier Subject: RE: Concern over "amplified sound" at ABC Church Hi Barbara, Confirming the receipt of your e-mail. We will include this in the public comments for the item. Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director CITY OF ATASCADERO Community Development Dept. 6500 Palma Ave., Atascadero CA 93422 Direct (805) 470-3488 1 Office (805) 461-5035 Direct Fax: (805) 470-3489 1 Office Fax (805) 461-7612 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atascadero.org%2F&data=05%7CO1%7Cama nier%40atascadero.org%7C1391427a6c2d42c5138708db6e844d44%7Cfa5Oa07fO4724ddca92935f334316bde%7C0%7CO %7C638225286737198947%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWljoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV21uMzliLCJBTil6lklhaWwi LCJXVC16Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XNgedoiZQ7710xvRjOmtCmd3z3WABjk6FKapluTXjJw%3D&reserved=0 Dedicated to Atascadero's character and safety by helping people plan and build quality projects City Hall is once again fully open to the Public. All services are currently active and we are processing permits and performing inspections. -----Original Message ----- From: Baranek Sent: Friday, June 16, 2023 9:09 AM To: Phil Dunsmore <pdunsmore@atascadero.org> Subject: Concern over "amplified sound" at ABC Church Dear Community Development dept.: Please deny approval for the ABC Church to use amplified sound at their location. We own property at _ Our property is located directly across the creek in back of the ABC Church. Currently, when school is in session, we hear the school bells and announcements several times daily. Sound travels.... Allowing an amplified sound system in addition to this would impact us negatively and be a disturbance. Thank you for your consideration. Barbara Baranek ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. JUN 1 6 2023 A miv /) 22 - W; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT From: Sent: To: Subject: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: C Phil Dunsmore Saturday, June 17, 2023 11:38 AM Mariah Gasch; Annette Manier Fwd: Amplified sound at 6225 Atascadero Avenue -ABC Church From: kcave Date: June 17, 2023 at 10:39:24 AM PDT To: pdunsmore@atascadero.org, pc-comments@atascadero.or._. Subject: Amplified sound at 6225 Atascadero Avenue -ABC Church Agenda Item Number: not listed in your letter concerning Notice of Pub Hearing dated 6-7-23 To: Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director Concerning the proposal for amplified sounds concerning the ABC Church, I am NOT IN FAVOR of this proposed project. #1 If you allow ABC Church to amplify you are opening this up to all the other churches in Atascadero. #2 ABC Church has not listed what they intend to amplify. Sermons? Music? #3 ABC Church has not mentioned when they intend to amplify. Time? Weekdays? Evenings? #4 Our property is located at , and is near the ABC Church. We already hear the "noise" trom Atascadero High School when they amplify their announcements. If ABC Church plans to amplify during the day, sleeping will become a nightmare for those that work at night and must sleep during the day. #5 We must protect our wonderful tenants. They do not need to hear the amplifications from the ABC Church, or others that will take up this practice in the future, if allowed. Kenneth L Cave 1 RECEI JUN 19 2023 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT From: Betsy Cave Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2023 12:31 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Regarding June 20 Hearing of Amplified Sound by ABC Church To Whom It May Concern: I am the owner of 4 homes at Atascadero, CA which my husband and I have owned and rented since 1984. The property is very near the ABC Church. At present, we have 4 families, two of whom have small children and babies. Some of our tenants work night shifts and sleep during the daytime. I feel that the amplified i.e. very loud broadcast of music and/or the spoken word will seriously impact quality of life for our tenants. We do NOT want to lose them due to this potential problem. I wish to give the following reasons for NOT allowing this to take place: 1) The noise would seriously impact quality of sleep and life for our tenants. 2) In the past, noise from the church's playground has been heard and announcements over the AHS loudspeaker can be heard at the property, though the high school is several blocks away from the property. 3) There very possibly could be a conflict with individuals' civil rights, one of which (per the US Constitution) is the right to worship as one wishes. 4) Our potential loss of income and that of the owners at i z , Joe and Barbara Baranek, if tenants moved due to the noise disturbance. Please consider the health and welfare of the people living in residential homes on nearby properties. Thank you. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Cave RECEIVED AMNO V1 - ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. From: Steve Hannig Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 11:48 AM To: Code Enforcement Cc: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Nuisance by neighborhood petition, ABC church Attachments: scan.pdf See attached code violation complaint forms. Per code section 9-14.10, this constitutes a Nuisance by neighborhood petition. Per this code section, the city SHALL serve notice to the property owner to abate said nuisance. In short, EXISTING activities at ABC are already causing a nuisance to adjoining properties. The city shall require ABC to comply with code section 9-14.05, exterior noise standards. cc'd to the Planning Commission, as this pertains to item #3 on the June 20th agenda. Thank you, Steve Hannig ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. The City has not provided the attachments LA From: Dan Ulrich Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 9:18 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Agenda Item #3, Atascadero Bible Church Amplified Sound Members of the Planning Commission: I am writing to express my strong opposition to allowing outdoor amplified sound as described in the meeting agenda packet. I have lived on Santa Ynez Ave. south of ABC for 28 years. There have been numerous occasions in the past when amplified sound (music and voice) has been used for various events at this location. Disrupting and obnoxious are certainly two words that quickly come to mind each time this has occurred. Have any of you spent time in this neighborhood when these events have occurred in the past? Not at the event, but in the neighborhood? Although I understand that the church is in the Public Zone it is also adjacent to a large residential zone and I feel this use would be very incompatible and not consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood. Part of the staff report seems to rationalize additional noise from this use by stating "However, this location is within an area with very high noise exposure from Highway 101 due to traffic noise". I certainly don't see how adding more noise to the area can be justified for any of the neighbors, residential or otherwise. Regarding the Applicant provided noise measurements. I do not profess to be a noise measurement expert by any means nor am I doubting the expertise of the individual who provide this. But why is this set of numbers being used as opposed to that of a neutral unbiased sound expert selected by the City? With the information given in the staff report and a simple search of dBA measuring I found this: Compared with dB, A -weighted measurements underestimate the perceived loudness, annoyance factor, and stress -inducing capability of noises with low frequency components, especially at moderate and high volumes of noise. That certainly doesn't do much to assure me that this won't be a nuisance to the neighborhood. The conditions of approval and mitigation outlined in lines 7-12 of Exhibit A do little to change the outcome of this proposed use. Unwanted, unwelcome and unnecessary added noise in the adjacent neighborhood. I urge you to adopt Resolution B for the reasons outlined in the findings for denial. It is inconsistent with the adjacent residential neighborhood, plain and simple. Sincerely, Dan Ulrich JUN 19 21023 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. COMMENTS ATTACHED RV STORAGE 00 From: Marty Brown _ Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 3:47 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments; Annette Manier Subject: CUP for 6805 Sycamore Road Dear Commissioners, 6805 Sycamore Road, Atascadero, isn't just an address on a map, it is a very significant place in the biosphere and in the hearts of many residents, property owners, hikers, walkers, horseback riders, birdwatchers, beavers, birds, fish, water quality and more. There is something to say for serenity and mental health as well. This beautiful riparian treasure has been assaulted many times from encroaching growth, pollution, homeless encampments, motorbiking, and automobile trespassing and disregard for decades -- we must say NO to more. For decades my family and I have been enjoying the serenity, wildlife and the seasonal flow of the river. Watching the beavers build their dams and acknowledging the good neighbors they are in filtering and conserving our water. We must protect our river and all it holds. Turning this area of paradise into a parking lot will be a detriment to our water, wildlife and the passive enjoyment for future generations. I was down there this morning and if the flag markers are indicative of where this proposed project will be -- it is in the Salinas Riverbed and cuts across the De Anza Trail. Say NO to this RV park plan. It is wrong placement and an affront to every citizen who has experienced the quiet beauty of this sacred, historic foundation of Atascadero. Sincerely, Marty Brown Atascadero RECEIVED JUL 18 2023 �r U��-1-0l0q ie lLrvu� COhIIM!LINITY DEVELOPMENT ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. IBJ From: Lily Begler Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2023 5:36 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: NO BUILDING ON THE SALINAS RIVER Hello, I am writing with major concerns at the prospects of a storage unit facility being built upon our beloved and extremely important Salinas River. This riparian habitat is home to so many creatures. It's biodiversity is what keeps the greater ecosystem healthy. We cannot disrupt the important job of one of our riparian keystone species, the American beaver; who creates habitats for so many other animals that call the river home. They also help filter the water and help to store it in our ground water. And we should all know by now that water is an essential and limited resource that we need to protect at all costs. I am against this building proposal! Lily Begler Of Los Osos ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVEL" JUN 19 202° u5E�21-o►o7 COMMUNITY DEVELQPM-P,"' From: Cameron Gaspord Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2023 9:54 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Use of Salinas River Floodplain Land To whom it may concern, My name is Cameron Gaspord and I am a Master's student in the Environmental Science and Management program at CalPoly. It has recently come to my attention that 6 acres of the Salinas River Floodplain are soon to be converted into storage unit for 267 RVs. I would like to express my concern for the use of this land for this purpose. Building anything within the bounds of a floodplain inherently comes with high risk. A floodplain by definition is going to become flooded- as we saw this past January, the Salinas River is no exception to severe flooding. Any persons or property left within the floodplain during severe weather conditions are likely to be harmed. Furthermore, converting this land into a storage lot has the potential to degrade the riparian zone and pollute the Salinas river system. This would harm vegetation and wildlife in this location and potentially downstream of Atascadero as well. Floodplains provide significant ecosystem services: they are able to capture sediment and debris during flood events, and the vegetation within the riparian zone acts as a carbon sink. The Salinas river is also home to a beaver population which further contributes to these ecosystem services. The beavers were already destabilized due to the January flood events, and land use change at this location may prevent the reestablishment of this population. Ultimately I believe the best use of this land is for it to be left undeveloped. The best use of floodplain land is to contain flooding, and any development atop a floodplain is detrimental to that end. Thank you for your time, Cameron Gaspord ATTENTION: V This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. I JUN 19 2023 u5-, v - 0 10, COMMUNITY NVELOPMENT N From: Jennifer Ho Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2023 9:08 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Concerns Re: 6805 Sycamore Rd Hi there, As a UC California Naturalist who would like to see better health outcomes for future generations, I am writing to oppose Sycamore Rd 6805 Sycamore Rd Atascadero, CA 93422 being turned into an RV storage lot. This 6 acres of the Salinas River floodplain is a biodiverse riparian habitat that is better off left in -tact. Degrading this riparian zone by adding construction/buildings would degrade and pollute this important waterway, which damages the ecology and all that it supports --from wildlife to humans. The Salinas River is a key natural resource that should be protected and bolstered. I urge you to oppose building an RV storage lot here. Instead, please collaborate with the local community to deliberate on better communal uses of this important waterway. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jennifer H. ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECIE11�_ �... . LA X2,1— ©l o -7 >., p{,ii or ;_; -3 From: Michael R. Jencks Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 5:17 PM To: Permit Center Subject: RV Storage Agenda Item Hope this gets through! Thank you for your patience and help. BDF Biodiversity First, Inc. 3650 Gillis Canyon Road Shandon, California 93461 City of Atascadero Planning Commission c/o <tt-commentsgatt rRE- out- July 18, 2023 Meeting RV Storage / Parking Lot for 262 RVs, 6805 Sycamore Road Dear Commissioners: Biodiversity First, Inc. respectfully opposes approval of the proposed RV Storage/Parking Lot for 262 RVs at 6805 Sycamore Road. Reasons for our opposition include potential City liability for damage, attractive nuisance, and environmental damage to the adjacent river and down river property by allowing inadequately secured RV Storage and toxic substances in a floodplain, all issues not satisfactorily identified or mitigated in the Applicant's application. We urge the Commission to deny the application and to refuse to perpetuate the City's past practice of relegating such obtrusive and polluting uses to the floodplain and Salinas River, likely over underflow and threatening other vulnerable floodplain assets. Such use as proposed should be denied, a result rendered even more critically important in an area that may be in consideration for a south county river center and educational facilities. Respectfully submitted, S/ Biodiversity First, Inc., a California-based I RC 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation by Michael R. Jencks, Board Member and Counsel ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. M From: Fran Mason Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 10:00 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Cc: Dorsey Johnston Subject: 6805 Sycamore --VSM Leasing & Rentals As the owner of the ADJACENT property, a 10 year member of a California water board of Directors and paying member of the Atascadero Water Company we/I are unequivocally OPPOSED to the proposed land use. Currently, the problems include a substantial number of homeless who use that land and trespass on the Mason industrial ownership stealing water, breaking and entering, setting campfires and creating an unsanitary situation for the ownership and tenants. CA Water Resources who has enacted new standards on a yearly basis would only condone this land use so proximate to the water wells if it was politically motivated and at the behest of a political favor. The same holds true for the City of Atascadero and current Water board management. I trust the City Community Development Department will assist in denying this land use. The Mason family land use attorney has been included in this email so that our neighboring land, Ca Water Resources- Board and to insure the quality of all of Atascadero's water interests are protected. Frances Mason, MAI MASON - David S Mason, Inc. JUL 17 2023 v15�21—© lo'� s This message is sent for the benefit of or on behalf of a lawyer or Law Firm. This message is intended for the exclusive use -of the individual or entity that is the named addressee, and may contain information that is privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, discard any paper copies and delete all electronic files of this message. 1 I From: Jen Olivares Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 5:40 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: RV Storage Opinion To The City: I disagree with and strongly discourage the construction of the RV storage project on Sycamore Ave. This directly contradicts the promised protection regarding the Salinas River as a "key natural resource that should be protected and bolstered as a regional attraction for tourism, recreation, and education" as stated on page 14 of the 2045 General Plan. As a 4th generation North County resident and a State of California Enthusiast and traveler, I have to encourage the city to consider the long term effects such a project could have on one of the last regions of California largely untouched by rapid expansion and overpopulation. Let people park their RVs in their drive way. If they can't park it at their house, they'll simply need to be able to afford a larger lot to accommodate their luxurious second living option. Don't ruin the natural ecosystem so the upper middle class can evade the perils of purchasing property in the North County. This is not a solution to the homeless crisis in Atascadero, this is a large, very unsticky bandaid on a busted pipe. Thank you for reading my comment. Hoping you'll do the right thing and pause on this project. ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. :4 411111 _A JUN 2 0 2023 G15F-2a --o t o -1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT From: Dylan Pearce Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2023 9:21 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: 6805 Sycamore Rd im Please don't use riparian habitat for storing RVs. There are so many cool critters (including federally and state listed threatened, endangered and sensitive species) that utilize riparian habitat. We don't need more things potentially polluting the Salinas River Thanks ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVED JUN 19 2013 LASS' rL1- 0 'I!,-111WIii 0 From: Meagan Papp Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2023 11:32 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: RV parking in the floodplain is a plain bad idea. hello, I am writing this email in strong opposition to the plan to turn 6 acres of Salinas river floodplain, riparian habitat, into RV parking. I am a California native who has come to know and appreciate our unique and beautiful variety of habitats. While RVs are, in a way, as much a part of the California culture and ecosystem, they do not belong parked in a floodplain. 1. River floodplain habitat should be left as undisturbed as possible in order to preserve the natural spaces we have left in this state, especially those around our precious waterways. 2. Any vehicle can leak, and even though secondary containment can be put in place, accidents can and do always happen. Leaks from this lot would contaminate the Salinas river. 3. Floodplains are liable to.... flood. Unless you're actively trying to flood out these RVs for the insurance money, why would you park them in such a place? I'm confident there are existing lots in your town or county that are already paved and ready to park vehicles on. Wouldn't that be a better place for such a project? Sincerely, Meagan Papp Tulare, CA ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. R'I ' `°. 77 D ;L1 N 1 9 2123 UST 21- 010-1 OORAWNITY DEVELOPMENT From: SLO Beaver Brigade US1=21 —U 107 Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 7:48 AM IrOMM.IINITV X111:11 I)PRAPMT To: Planning Commission Public Comments; Phil Dunsmore Subject: Agenda Item #3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 6805 SYCAMORE ROAD Commissioners and City Officials: This City of Atascadero granted the Proposed RV Storage Project a Categorical Exemption CEQA — Guidelines Section 15304. Given the information the City now has, it must request a CEQA review from the applicant. At the June 20th, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, it was brought to the attention of the Planning Commissioners that there is a bald eagle nest located across the Salinas River from this project site. The location of the Sycamore tree with the nest is here. httpS://gQ0.9VMaPst - -1,xksr1YVdxi9Tv9. The location of the Proposed RV Storage Project is located 400 feet away from this tree. Sycamore Road is located 708 feet away. Hwy 41 is located 1296 feet away. Bald Eagles are listed as endangered species in the State of California, fully protected. (Pg 19 of 30 of State and Federally Endangered and Threatened Animals of California, updated July 2023 htt s:H'nrm.df .ca. q ov/FileHandler.ashx?Document IQ=109405&inline) Bald Eagles are protected under The Bald and r,)Iden Eagle Protection Ac_, The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d), enacted in 1940, and amended several times since, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from "taking" bald or golden eagles, including their parts (including feathers), nests, or eggs. The Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." Regulations further define "disturb" as "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior" (50 CFR 22.6). The National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, pg 9 &12 https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/national-bald-eagle-mana.get it -guidelines Pg 9: To avoid disturbing nesting bald eagles, we recommend (1) keeping a distance between the activity and the nest (distance buffers), (... ) The buffer areas serve to minimize visual and auditory impacts associated with human activities near nest sites. Pg. 12 If there is similar activity closer than 1 mile from the nest and If the activity will be visible from the nest,(the recommended buffer is) 660 feet, or as close as existing tolerated activity of similar scope. Landscape buffers are recommended. The City of Atascadero is the Agency with Discretionary Approval, the Lead Agency, for this project. The City of Atascadero has given a CEQA Exemption Categorical Exemption Class 4: 4. Minor alterations to land. From the CEQA Portal (pg. 5 https://,,,Qaportal,oLg/tp/CEQA%2DExemptions.%2OPaper%202020%20UPG,-,e. pct For all categorical exemptions, it is the responsibility of the Lead Agency to demonstrate and determine that the proposed action falls within an exempt category, and support this determination with factual evidence. In addition, as noted above and further described below, categorical exemptions cannot be used when any of the "Exceptions" described in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply. On Page 6 of the above CEQA Portal: The exceptions are described in Public Resources Code Section 21084(c), (d), and (e) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. These exceptions apply (and therefore a categorical exemption does not apply) where: • The project may have a significant environmental impact due to unusual circumstances; From Page 7 of the above CEQA Portal: The Unusual Circumstances Exception In the California Supreme Court case Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (2015) 60 Cal. 4th 1086, the Supreme Court held that the unusual circumstances exception applies only when it can be shown that, first, unusual circumstances are present and, second, those unusual circumstances lead to a reasonable possibility the project could result in a significant impact. The agency's determination that an unusual circumstance does not apply need only be supported by substantial evidence. However, once the agency has found that an unusual circumstance exists, if there is substantial evidence to support a fair argument that a significant impact might occur as a result of that unusual circumstance, the categorical exemption cannot be used. To summarize the above, the City of Atascadero can not use a categorical exemption because this project may have a significant environmental impact. The "unusual circumstances" is the location of a Bald Eagle nest 400 ft away from this proposed project site. The Bald Eagle is a State Listed, Fully Protected Endangered Species. Disturbing the nest of a State Listed Fully Protected Endangered Species is the' significant environmental impact'. The recommended minimum distance is 660 feet. The City of Atascadero acting as the Agency with Discretionary Approval has the responsibility to comply with all Federal, State and local policies and regulations. Acting in any other way is inviting litigation. The only legal options before the Commission today is to deny the project or require a CEQA Review. I recommend the Planning Commission deny this project. Thanks, Audrey Taub Atascadero Resident (— Audrey Taub Beavers = Water SLO Beaver Brigade IG: @slobeaverbrigade Facebook Group: titti2s-.dwww.facebook.com/groups/siobeaverbrigadel From: SLO Beaver Brigade Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 2:40 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Cc: Jaime Hendrickson;jneil@amwc.us Subject: June 20, 2023: Agenda Item 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 6805 SYCAMORE ROAD (CONTINUED FROM 11-15-22) The propose _ RECEIVED . Planning Commissioners and Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC), Jut 2023 Please deny the Sycamore RV Storage request. LA St 2-1 — o1 o `1 -- - -- --.-,QTY DEVELF. ""' Reason 1. Please deny the Sycamore RV Storage Permit on the basis that it doesn't conform to the current General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 1.3 which states, "Enhance the rural character and appearance of the City, including commercial corridors, gateways and public facilities." (Page 40 of General Plan 2025, https://www.atascadero.org/files/CD/General%20PIan/Atascadero%20GP%202025.pa ) Hwy 41 is a current gateway to the City of Atascadero from the East and this property is in the viewshed of Highway 41. At the November 15, 2022 Planning Commissioners meeting it was recommended the applicant provide a Visibility Study with the applicant to stake out the property boundaries. I have been a regular visitor to this site and have not seen any boundaries staked out so that the potential 6 acres of RV's could be visually assessed from the Hwy 41 bridge. This recommendation has not been honored. This Project would negatively affect the eastern gateway by visually impacting the current rural, riparian gateway to the City of Atascadero which goes against our current General Plan 2025. Reason 2. The City of Atascadero is currently in the process of updating their General Plan. This project does not conform with the updated findings of the 2045 General Plan which states, "In addition, the Salinas River has been identified as a key natural resource that should be protected and bolstered as a regional attraction for tourism, recreation, and education." (From page 14 of the Existing Conditions Atlas, Recreation and Open Spaces, Challenges and Emerging Opportunities, httiDs://www.atascaciero2O4b.oro/tiles/managed/uocument/62/AGPU Atlas Revised%20Admin%20Draft 01- 24-23.pdf ) As a resident of the City of Atascadero I have participated in numerous Open Houses regarding the update of the General Plan for 2045. 1 have been encouraged and inspired by the City of Atascadero in their efforts to engage the community in the long-term vision for how Atascadero should grow and change over the coming years and decades. Given all the time, thought, money, energy and input that the City of Atascadero and its residents have already contributed to this updated plan, please deny this project given that it does not address these emerging opportunities. At a minimum, the Planning Commission should postpone this decision until the General Plan 2045 has been completed. Reason 3. The 500 acre property owned by the shareholders of AMWC benefits the City of Atascadero and its residents and should not be chipped away at and leased to companies that are not enhancing our watersheds or water systems. I attended a tour of AMWC's water production facilities in April, 2023 led by AMWC General Manager John Neil. The tour included well, treatment, and Nacimiento Recharge Basin facilities. The section of the Salinas River floodplain owned by AMWC is well-maintained and beautiful with native trees and plants and access points for the public to enter and exit for hiking, mountain biking Wor horseback riding. This large, spacious parcel of AMWC property was reserved in the early 1900's when the Atascadero Colony began and John Neils praised the foresight of E.G. Lewis and his engineers who reserved this acreage for the water company to supply and maintain a water system for the over 30,000 then anticipated residents. AMWC has been able to successfully meet the water supply for this community and to prepare for further growth/droughts by adding in Nacimiento Recharge Basin facilities within this already existing acreage because of the foresight of the founders of AMWC. The founders had their sights set on the long-term health of this watershed and its ability to sustain the then anticipated 30,000 residents, instead of the short-term gain of selling this acreage. Please do not begin the trend of chipping away at this acreage for short-term gains at the expense of longer term health. This project does not enhance, maintain, benefit, our water system or watershed health. Please deny this project. Additional Thought: While this area of concern is currently zoned Industrial Park and the storage of RV vehicles is considered a light industrial use, the possibility of adjusting the zoning along the Salinas River corridor in the updated General Plan 2045 has been expressed at various General Plan Open Houses. Historically, industry has been placed along river corridors to allow for removal of industrial waste via river systems. This long outdated mode of dealing with industrial waste still lingers in our General Plan. Take a moment to imagine entering the City of Atascadero from the east, and instead of meeting 262 stored RVs, you were greeted with a Salinas River Center, educating locals and tourists on the benefits of this watershed, the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary where this river meets the ocean, the wildlife this river supports, the CalPoly research that is currently being conducted in this section of the Salinas River, and more. Imagine the tourism dollars coming into the City from visitors excited to get outside and see what this area has to offer. The City of Atascadero logo is encircled by cattails, a wetland plant. Wouldn't it make sense to support and celebrate our wetland areas that are so integral to this City, in this highly visible location rather than turn it into an eyesore? Let's create the conditions for this reality to occur by denying this project today. Thank you for considering our concerns. Audrey Taub Atascadero Resident AMWC shareholder on behalf of the San Luis Obispo Beaver Brigade 191 Audrey Taub Beavers = Water SLO Beaver Brigade Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.comlgroups/slobeaverbrigade/ City ofAtascadero General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 1.3: Enhance the rural character and appearance of the City, including commercial corridors, gateways and public facilities. Programs: 1. Update and maintain the Appearance Review Manual to include provisions for rural character design features, street trees, landscaping, parking, fencing, screening, and architectural design (except for single family development), with standards tailored to specific areas of the City, including commercial corridors, and gateways such as Highway 101 and Morro Road. 2. Require landscaping and/or screening to buffer non-residential uses from residential areas. 3. Continue to support the Neighborhood Preservation Program. 4. Update and maintain the Sign Ordinance with higher standards for the quality and visual impact of signs. 5. Develop incentives to encourage existing uses to upgrade to contemporary design standards, including frontage and parking lot landscaping, and the screening of loading and service areas. 6. Work with Caltrans to implement a freeway landscape and maintenance plan for the Highway 101 corridor. 7. Develop a program to abate uses solely devoted to outdoor storage. 8. Beautify the City's primary entryways indicated in by creating Civic Gateways. The freeway and other vehicular approaches to Atascadero shall be made more attractive through judicious application of the elements including landscaping, civic monuments, and rural character site development. 9. Continue abatement programs to remove unsafe buildings, and require the cleanup of premises and vacant lots with code violations. Clean-up campaigns and beautification of existing facilities and neighborhoods shall be encouraged. 10. The City will develop standards and undergrounding districts to require the undergrounding of existing utilities within the Urban Core. 11. New utilities will be undergrounded in all proposed subdivisions and development projects. Final Plan Page II -19 June 25, 2002 z w a O z 0 F d w a U W a L v p _. ro C aJ ro Q -L, Q ru ro LJ V ru a) S _I_ - U, U, L_ Q) ro N L L o 1 LL- ru L c p v L rp O ro U Q C)- ro E �Q Q) C L j C c C 0 C > Q ra >> C C � Ol — -p O C ro p rp c - C V) �'"� ro 'Z L a)-IjU ro J ) ro i D rp N Q) L rD L >% Ol C 6 C O N i Q) _ _LIq L vii O O, 'O Q O L L o ,Yn v v v O o Q) � V1 C V1 V) JJ J_ a) E I_ - L 'L a) V1 D L L L Q) L Q L ro ro ro rp C u C C 7D L N L ro O Cl) a) Q) U Y C. C � a) in Q) Q) ro D rp N O i 0) L L ut E -p V p L Jm ru C rLn ro v Q J-0 -p C Q ro .- O L a) O �L L N QJ LA ro ,� U N E ro C Q Q) > L C ut O V > O a) C ro Q) L > v aj U) a) O rLD O ro Q Ln E i =O L> Co — v p rNo � p iri E� > �•O.��L o o L j) Q°> >.c cU- E L Vt � N E N O C d Q U ro o r° �n ro Q ro L c rLo C ro O 'ro � O i N Q1 Q) j L U �O v Q) V a C Q V 7 QJ v U y L OV) U o-Lj li>, �_ QJ � v 0) ;Ll L QJ a) y rp Q� O m E V V �C rip V) ru i Q) L C ro Vt > In a) E C J..J O -p O rn ru C L ru L l!1 ro U I- C L E -O in L L i-0 Q) 0x 0) C p L -0 1 p L C L i; 4 p L v aJ Ln > ro ;, CO N C QJ rD L L L Vl vl Q> O ro o O QJ O OL n `- L- L lL L OV ro C C -O L U ro ' C m U � V�-0 cn o V Q O Lj O� Q) in L ro a N� ro p L V ro C O C C O L= -p D� O p tra c s C U p ro C ro L p E O p (ij '� Z a) v c -o L) of C ro y C `^O V O o Q) Ql 0 'O V rc) - i Q) ro i 'O ro in U) o cCY) v UnLr) Z O Ln Ql O Q) ro L" a) Z Q1 v ru p a) p s v NN V V ru i V LOL V) > ro L Q) LD Ln m ro vi v-0 o o Q) m Q � -O a) L 1J Ql L- ru QJ N L C roo E��� c OV vE row S] vi v a; v w a) Ln O Q1 L L Q Q O N� p O in v 0 0 vi -0 p c E Ln ro L C J Q ro u �O a) roLj N > L c c O — L o a) a) ro Q v rp QJ -p L V Q L QJ T Lf) .O tL L i a C ii Z—>>' L O v V, o L L V .0 C (1) ro L C Q ro V a) V>• O CL E ro C ro Ql O Of v p MU a) Q V' c 7D C v O c ry L u E C O U o QJ > .0 m ut C �_y L JLJ ro Ol ut Ql QJ o > U_ 1.1 Ln C C y C p 0 rra '� O Gam! N j Q v C .0 QJ rp C Q C Q) .L V Q a) C aJ L 0r.c ( ns_ E worn to o f ro � Q E u) u aa)) Ln Q) 0 a) �L c > L O ro ro Ln 01 Y rCo N Q) 0) p- 0-0 C ro V > Ln u `J C O • ro 7 O QJ ru O c. E c E O' o N Q ra o M� L� L raC Ln O >, -O ro p � Q f� V _ p -0 O) c C ' � ra O C Q m L LE {A aJ O 'O X rp aC) —� OL p C m O O O Q� n M 0 0> p Q) U Q C aJ U- � Vi O 4) Q Cl) Q rD L G o O `L V QS p L- 0 3� m ro roo F aL °o 0 O -E5 o O �G a) a) o (1)0c)c ro (1)a) a) �C >? O C O N °1 L C O m o O -O M �-6 -0 M LL O N i Y >, _ u ra U O Q O - : ro V p ro C L v ru C -J 0 0 V ut ' C a) j Q r6 CCO O p O C d {- C Q N p v 0 r C p rco L E L ro > E L .� .� m E �_ ." v p �, L v ai O O~ Q a) Q, E O n N X � L L c x rn _ ro c L �- Iro — m-0 ro V O C a) _- O a- N O O C a) Cl V O C 1 C J OL �- d� N C p� L Ln (n ro (D v O c -p _ >1 i N ro d C C a' ? � '� °' � � ,a � : Q' V) C ru 0) >% ro ru ? cam E L o O. o f ro L - 11 O > L GJ V, `° ro ` lL s 0 O C C Q '— � � o c n Q O rJ.o QJ L= u � M L .E C v QJ ~ o C 'ro lL E O O Q 111 C V N Ln o v a' Lo � L, E' E o >, � L q O a) a °J c 0-0 C a a Q) v ro Ln Q .� °J L E v o> > '� °' D o a '� ro a G! O Q V O i t O v c V O N o V �_ C Q) J M ro O �L CL ro c �n 1._ L ro — 0- V L V � L O O j o rp Ol ? N m u.._ O O y• rC-D rp -c Q- L_ C Q) C r0 O -OLn M C rD L Ql 6 i Ln T O L C L ut r0 O > rp N Q! N N v E Q vi O aJ rLo ,� C L C O_ a) C V o 0 C C u ro 3 > E `° V, o a) O Q) c a) 7 C) v o °) Q o a) c o Q ro E O O ro c c Q 0 O> C O a1 L Q� > Q L p' L Q1 � 00 G. O Ln U I 0-- .ro O N Q U O� 2� � O Q o .— O CO Q CV From: John Zarate Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 7:52 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Salinas River RV Storage vs Beaver Habitat Haku and greetings, I am writing on behalf of our cousins, the Beavers (and other residents), who live and own the land upon which you're wanting to build storage units for 267 RVs. This plan for storage units is not acceptable for destroying habitat which serves so much wildlife and, as a habitat for so much life, provides balance to our lands. Human conveniences will never outweigh the needs of our cousins' nations: The Beavers (and others) are our relatives and without respecting their minimal needs of clean, open land, we will bring ruin upon our own. All in the name of building storage facilities? No. Not acceptable. This Chumash stands against this building plan: Do not proceed. Thank you, John Khus The Northern Chumash Bear Clan and The Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVRED .1m. 2 0 M3 u5�2�-oio� Comments previously submitted from 11-15-22's Planning Commission Meeting e - From: Dug Chisholm Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 12:13 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: 11/15/22 meeting: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 6805 SYCAMORE ROAD SYECEI 1 - To the Planning Commission. us�a►- 171D NOV 1 5 2022 We have been Atascadero residents since 1976, and we have both been outdoor enthusiasts, though we are getting older and are somewhat less active than in years past. I practiced psychiatry from 1977 to 2020, and I have been very active in the Atascadero Land Preservation Society (ALPS), including helping to spearhead the purchase and upgrade the land at the lower entrance to Stadium Park and writing the grant that secured the bulk of funding for the Three Bridges Oak Preserve. My spouse, Mary Alice, has been a nurse during most of those years, including a stint as the school nurse for AUSD. She is currently very active in the ALF Food Pantry (formerly Atascadero Loaves and Fishes). The De Anza trail is one of the hiking opportunities in Atascadero that we have enjoyed. It was brought to our attention that an RV storage facility is planned for 6805 Sycamore. We understand that the zoning can accommodate such use, but we would encourage the Commission to review carefully the potential benefits and detriments that might result. The project would not create any additional jobs, but it would perhaps generate a small amount of tax revenue for the City. It would definitely change the visual experience for people hiking (or driving) on Sycamore. It could affect the safety of hikers walking along Sycamore. If the Planning Commission is going to approve this use, we strongly encourage requiring adequate setback from the street with adequate safe space for a sidewalk or trail. Also, there is a planned 6 foot fence, and the RV's will be much taller than that, so we would also encourage some stringent requirements for landscaping, such as a tall and thick screen of greenery. We apologize for this late submission, but we just learned of this proposed use today. Dugald and Mary Alice Chisholm ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. 2 From: Fred Frank Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2022 3:24 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Item #2: Proposed RV storage adjacent to Salinas river Comments Dear Mr. Dunsmore, I recently saw a small posting by the City about a proposal to allow a RV storage on Atascadero Mutual Water Company property near the Salinas river. I strongly oppose this idea for the following reasons: 1) Storing vehicles near the river on highly permeable soil risks ground water contamination from oil and fuel leakage. It is likely that many of the stored vehicles will be old and poorly maintained. Regular inspection for leakage would be difficult and expensive. 2) A lot full of RVs of various sizes, colors and states of repair would be less than aesthetically pleasing regardless of efforts toward screening. 3) Currently this property is used by many people for walking, bird watching, model airplane and miniature vehicle racing, as well as, dog walking, horse riding, etc. Others like myself, just enjoy the view of our verdant river and an unobstructed view of Pine mountain. 4) Maintenance of this storage operation would be demanding and costly since vegetation will grow under and around the stored vehicles. The use of persistent herbicides near the river is problematic and would likely be opposed by many people. 5) While the city and the water company may share some revenue from this venture. I can see many problems associated with shared management of this operation. 6) Security would be difficult. Effective fencing on this sandy soil is difficult since it is nearly impossible to prevent tunneling beneath in hidden areas. Cameras are likely to be vandalized. 7) Storing RVs could present a fire hazard that would be difficult to deal with if a fire were to occur. 8) Transients may attempt to occupy these RVs and this could lead greater issues and a policing problem in our community. The open space currently provided by this property demands little from the City but is a remarkably valuable asset to an untold number of its citizens. Please deny this proposal. Thank You, Fred Frank NOV 9 2022 USf-21-0i0-1 VM0,111 aTY DE"',R IEMENT ATTENTION: ` This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. I From: Karen Gleason Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 7:47 AM To: City Clerk <cityclerk@atascadero.or > Subject: 6805 Sycamore Road, open space, D' Anza trail. I strongly disagree with making this now open space area a parking lot for RV's. This area is used by so many different people., dog walkers, horse back riders, joggers, hobby plane and cars. I feel this would further destroy the historic D' Anza trail by introducing more motorized vehicles, motorcycles in particular which is already a problem in the Salinas River area. If the trail is rerouted then it will surely be destroyed by motorcycles. This area should be kept open for the public to use and not become an unsightly parking lot for RV's. As an Atascadero Horsemen member, we use this part of the river for trail riding and already have a hard time sharing this space with motorcycles. Motorcycles have access to the river in so many different areas, that it is impossible to keep them out and if we diminish the open space then it becomes a much more hazardous area for motorcycles and equestrians side by side. Let's keep this space open for public access and try to keep motorized vehicles off the D' Anza trail. Thank you, Karen Gleason, Salinas River open space enthusiast. RP,7-D NOV 15 2022 USE21-0-10 -1 ICn��nn:aR.l?T4 ,1F471 �rr�UENT �:.::.. H From: Ernest Houston - Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:07 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Public Comment: Regular Meeting 11.15.2022, Agenda Item #2 Attachments: CityofAtascaderoPlanningComm_2022.11.15.pdf Please see attached document, public input from Northern Chumash Tribal Council, pertaining to agenda item #2, regular meeting November 15, 2022. Ernest R. Houston Northern Chumash Tribal Council Tribal Cultural Resource Monitor ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEM� M NOV 15 2022 u5E ZI-C)10-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I sic j� Northern Chumash Tribal Council northern chumash.org chumashsanctuary.org City of Atascadero Planning Commission City Hall Council Chambers 6500 Palma Avenue, 4'' Floor Atascadero, California 93422 Regular Meeting, Tuesday, November 15, 2022 Regarding: Agenda Item 42. Conditional Use Permit at 6805 Sycamore Road CHUMASH HERITAGE National Marine Sanctuar, The Northern Chumash Tribal Council (NCTC) is concerned that the project site area may present the risk of accidental discovery of previously undiscovered cultural artifacts given its proximity to the Salinas River and its riverbank, the high likelihood that pre -colonial native peoples resided in this vicinity, and the relatively undisturbed condition of the site. Therefore, the Northern Chumash Tribal Council requests: 1. An archaeological record search encompassing the project site and the '/z mile area surrounding it, 2. A Phase 1 archaeological survey at the work site, and if needed, an Extended Phase 1 survey, 3. Review of complete information discovered or generated to include maps, grading plans, photography, and reports, 4. On-site consultation with NCTC representatives, 4. If archaeological investigation indicates probability of the presence of cultural artifacts, NCTC will ask that one of our tribal cultural resource monitors be present during soil disturbance/excavation work. Respectfully submitted, Ernest R. Houston Cultural Resource Monitor Northern Chumash Tribal Council For Violet Sage Walker Tribal Chairwoman Northern Chumash Tribal Council ENVIRONMENTAL & LAND—USE CONSULTING EDUCATIONAL SERVICES TEACHING NATURE, NATIVE CULTURES & FARMING PO Box 6533, Los Osos, CA 93412 (805) 356-6149 7 From: Dorsey Johnston Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 3:21 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Cc: Zoe Corral Subject: Agenda Item #2. 11/15/22 proposed RV Storage City of Atascadero, My name is Dorsey Hogue -Johnston and I represent Mason Family Trust along with being one of the owners of the property located at 6905 - 6915 Sycamore Road, located to the south of this proposed project. We are opposed to the project for the following reasons. 1. Environmentally there are many hazards due to storage of these vehicles that will leak oils and fuels into our city water system. 2. This project will attract and encourage more trash and traffic from the homeless. Providing them with many hiding places to set up camp. I see security being an issue. 3. This project will be directly against the back of our buildings and increasing the problems that already occur in this area. Theft, vandalism, and vagrants wandering thru our businesses are a common issue at the Sycamore Industrial Park. In the past we have had gas stolen, mental health issues with the homeless wandering around and water stolen. 4. The area of the proposed project is an area that is used daily by many of our city residents who walk their dogs, get out for daily exercise and fresh air. You also have the community of RC pilots who are down there using that area on a regular basis. 5. The increased traffic this project will generate on Curbaril Road, and Sycamore Roads will be a problem. These roads are not maintained, designed, or set up to handle 200+ RV's coming and going from this area. 6. There is always the enhanced fire potential due to all the combustible materials being in such a tight confined area. The chance for a fire getting out of control and damaging our property is enhanced with this project. We strongly oppose this project. Please vote NO. Thank you for your time, Sincerely, Dorsey Hogue -Johnston Co-owner Mason Family 1993 Trust RECE ED NOV 15 2022 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT M From: Kate Montgomery Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:05 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Agenda #2 To the Atascadero Planning Commission Tuesday November 15, 2021 Concerning the proposed RV storage facility on AMWC property: It's not illegal but it's a terrible, inappropriate idea to use the Salinas River corridor for vehicle storage. We could be working to protect and celebrate this precious and unique landscape. Which many already do on a daily basis in a creative variety of recreational uses. The deAnza trail, in the National Park Service, celebrates this land, describing on the City's website the wildlife and stating "AMWC and the City of Atascadero allow the public to use their properties that front on the Salinas River. Allowable uses include horseback riding, hiking, and bicycling." and "It is AMWC's and the City's desire to maintain these precious riparian corridors so we can all enjoy them for many years to come." No amount of landscaping and fencing can make this project ok. Pollution from the variety of toxic liquids associated with large vehicles just upstream is inevitable. All night lighting of any kind is unacceptable in wildlife areas. 200 RV's will be an eyesore, especially in this natural area where we enjoy and expect a view of native oaks and willows below Pine Mountain. Has the National Park Service been consulted? Is there a way for local citizens to have our input to the NPS, which oversees the deAnza Trail? I have a question. Why was this sweet riverfront property ever designated industrial use in the first place? Who benefits? There are big flat empty lots in town and along the freeway far from sensitive habitat, the river and the mountain. These areas could be fenced and landscaped for RV parking. Many of us were shocked to learn about this project just in the past few days. Hopefully the City will take the time to review everyone's issues and decide not to allow this project. Hopefully more appropriate land use practices will be established at next year's General Plan update. Thank you for reading! Kate Mont2omery ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. NOV 15 2022 uSGzl-�lo-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT V -----Original Message ----- From: Wendy Ogle Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 8:52 AM To: City Clerk < .,tyclerk@ atascaderL, > Subject: Conditional Use Permit at 6805 Sycamore Road To whom it may concern: I am a resident here in Atascadero and very upset about this, I think it should be denied. I am disabled and it's hard to find places for walking that feels like your in nature, if they do this I will no longer be able to go on my walks with nature. We already have plenty storage facilities in town, why are they trying to ruin our riverbed views!?! I wish you could experience the pain I go thru just to have a natural walk in nature and they want to ruin it, please don't pass this. Has there even been any studies of what it may do to our riverbed, why lose our nature to this? Our town is already growing too fast don't make us (your crippled) lose one of our last natural places to walk with nature. I can't walk up our great hills but I love walking the riverbeds and edges. The ADA should be involved with any kind of development along the riverbed and I haven't heard or seen anything about them involved on this. Do our council members even think about what this will do to your constituents with disabilities? Take time and think, don't pass this I want to continue my walks in nature!!! Wendy Ogle RECEI i NOV 15 2022 u5E21- 010-1 COMVU,NITt DEVELOPMENT r, 0 From: Mike Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 12:27 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments R E C E I E nn V Subject: Sycamore RV Storage - PC Meeting 11/15/2022 NOV 15 2022 f t S& ZI - ='A Planning Commissioners and Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC), —11. Please oppose the Sycamore RV Storage project. We need more open space within the city limits, not less. We need less encroachment on the Salinas River basin, not more. This area has historically been used by many people as an outdoor space to enjoy and use. We greatly appreciate AMWC for allowing this use. I am now saddened and dismayed to see the AMWC has changed their mind and decided go forward with this project on their property located within the river basin. How and when did the AMWC decide to proceed with this project? Looking through their meeting minutes for the last 15 months, I see no discussion about this project, therefore no indication to the shareholders that this project was under consideration. If revenue is the driving force for the project, I believe the shareholders would rather have an increase in their water rates. While the city and AMWC may share some revenue from this venture, I believe the project is short sided and once in place the land will forever be damaged. Other reasons I don't endorse this project: - The Salinas River is a critical habitat and pathway for many animals. It is also a riparian area that needs to be protected and helped, not encroached upon. - Storing up to 262 large vehicles near the river on permeable soil seems like it would risk ground water contamination from oil and fuel leakage. Regular inspection for leakage will be required and any leakage would need to have the soil removed and remediated. 1. –This storage lot will be less than aesthetically pleasing regardless of efforts toward screening. 2. - Vegetation maintenance will be required as vegetation will grow under and around the stored 01 vehicles. The use of herbicides near the river is problematic. - Security will be difficult regardless of fencing. Transients will attempt to occupy these RVs. Cameras and lighting will be required. From the City website Trails handbook: Atascadero is located in the heart of the Central Coast, offering a blend of natural beauty and rural lifestyle. Its comfortable climate and atmosphere are influenced by the beautiful Pacific Ocean on the West, and also by the Salinas River and open countrvside to the East. Local scenery includes oak - studded hills, creeks, and scenic vistas of the Santa Lucia Mountains. Atascadero has a rich history, with many recreational opportunities to fit your individual style. This trail guide booklet will give you the inside scoop into some of the best trails that the City of Atascadero has to offer. Enjoy! Anza Trail: This historic trail passes through Atascadero in close proximity to the Salinas River. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company and the City of Atascadero opened segments of the trail for public use. The trail is lined with beautiful oaks and other native vegetation. Trail markers are extremely easy to find and lead you easily along all the trails. This trail consists of abundant wildlife and native vegetation that makes this hike one of a kind. Enjoy the easy trail in the morning or at night for a unique experience. Thank you for your consideration, Mike Orvis ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. F From: Gina Planeta Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 9:24 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Agenda Item #2 - Conditional Use Permit at 6805 Sycamore Rd Dear Planning Commission, I would like to ask that the commission consider making these plans known to the general public before making their decision. This area that is up for possible development is used by many in the community who I think would miss it greatly. I drive this route four times most days to take my daughter to school. On almost every pass I see people. Sometimes it's people walking their dogs. Sometimes it's families walking. Often it's a group of folks who get together to fly their RC planes. The area is used daily. Re-routing a historic trail and taking away riverfront open space for RV storage seems like a very poor trade for the community. It's one of the few spots in town where the river can be easily accessed and easily viewed from the road. It's a tiny bit of scenic space in town. To drive that route daily and see just a wall of fencing and RV's would be a great disappointment. In addition, I don't believe Curbaril and Sycamore are well maintained enough to handle 200+ Rv's coming in and out from their travels. Many of these RV's would have to come from the Curbaril side because of the trestle on Capistrano. The trestle has a clearance of 13' 2", while fifth -wheel trailers are routinely 13' tall. That narrow margin is nail-biting at best for the driver. With the tight, blind turn and no shoulders, RVs and trailers will avoid this route. In the .most recent rain the city had to put out a flooded sign on the roadway before the proposed site. In addition there are a significant number of people who use the area between the end of Curbaril and the industrial part to exercise. Most days I pass two older gentlemen walking, an older couple who use it as their bike route, and today I saw a gentleman taking his ponies for a walk. I truly don't believe this is the best use of that space and I think many of the residents of Atascadero would feel the same way if they knew what was going on. Especially those of us living in this area of town. Thank you so much for your time and consideration, Gina and Briano Planeta ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVE® Nov 14 2022 (k V-0to-1 COMP1,117Y DEVELOPMENT 9 From: Suzy Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:28 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Comment agenda # USE21-0107 November 15, 2022 Planning Commission City of Atascadero Good day, My name is Doug Reynolds. My wife, Suzy, and I have been residents of Atascadero since 1980. We raised two daughters who attended school in Atascadero. The oldest taught English at the high school for 16 years. Suzy and I are avid walkers and one of our routes takes us along Sycamore on the De Anza trail. During COVID, we noticed the trash accumulation along Sycamore. We needed something to keep us busy, so we decided to pick up trash in this area. During the first few months, we gathered enough trash to ask permission of Russ from Classic Coach to use his dumpster for the large bags. Currently, we pick up the litter as needed and are able to take advantage of the "Orange Bag" program in Atascadero to dispose of these bags. We participate in regular river clean up with the local "Beaver Brigade." As you can see, we are actively involved with our community. We are concerned about the detrimental effect of the proposed facility in this area. The facility would dominate the area from 6805 Sycamore to the 41 bridge, eliminating the view of the Salinas river and surrounding areas. A variety of activities would be affected: hiking, biking, dog training, equestrians, and river exploration. Walking would be diverted to the roadside (current speed limit is 40 mph) and separated with a split rail fence. This scenario could be hazardous to anyone that close to the road. Many cars do not currently obey the posted speed limit. We do not feel the economic benefit of this proposed business would offset the negative impact on the beauty of this area. It will not bring new jobs and the tax benefit to the city would be minimal. We are not in favor of this project. Respectfully, Doug and Suzy Reynolds RECE ED NOV 15 2022 use v-010,1 ENT ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. S From: Cleis Slezak > Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 9:07 AM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Meeting ID: 832 5023 8111 Resolution # 2022-071 AB 361 I strongly oppose the planned RV storage facility going in on/near the DeAnza trail in Atascadero. There is no good reason for a commercial establishment going in next to a historic trail. Not only would it be an eyesore but it sets a bad precedent for further development where there should be none. Please vote NO on this proposal. Thank you, Cleis Slezak (resident of the county in Atascadero for 42 years) ATTENTION: Lhis email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RGCEI 0t' EED NOV 15 2022 �USE wo--1 COWUNITY DEVELOPMENT T From: Lori Toft Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 11:01 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: Agenda item #2 The San Batista de Anza trail does not BELONG to Atascadero... it's part of Californias history! That our city administration thinks it can just move the historic trail in order to store 262 RVs? I can't believe anyone thinks this is ok! We should be ashamed! And what a horrible eyesore that facility would be! As a lifelong city resident I am very much opposed to this proposal and hope the planners can make a decision that honors our people, town and history! Thank you. Lori Toft ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVED NOV 1 4 2022 U5F -)-I oto --1 COMA"I,LAITY DEVEF RPM€NT Y From: Cindee Yandow Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 9:25 PM To: Planning Commission Public Comments Subject: 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 6805 SYCAMORE ROAD To whom it may concern, I am writing this email to say I am not in favor of the proposed business at 6805 Sycamore Road for RV Storage. I am the last house on Curbaril Ave, with the riverbed across the street. I drive this road 2xs a day sometimes up to 6. This would be very sad and ugly site to see. There are many reasons this is a bad idea. We shouldn't be ruining a historical trail. It should be left for everyone to enjoy and walk, run, bike, fly remote control airplanes, ect. There is a homeless problem already in the riverbed this will only attract them more which will cause break-ins, even if the area is "secure". I work in the storage industry for Self Storage Management of California, we manage over 50 storage facilities in California with one here in Atascadero (U Store -It Mini Storage). RVs are a huge problem and get broken into often and people try to sneak and live in them. We have very few sites that we allow vehicle storage and that ones we do have onsite residences where we have a live in manager. There were issues at Mike Deans Auto Repair where they use to have RV storage (with —50 RVs) with homeless and breaks ins at 4990 Traffic Way, Atascadero, CA 93422 and that was located on a main road. If they want to open a business like this it should be somewhere else, not here. Thank you, concerned tax payer, home owner, business owner of Atascadero. Cindee Yandow Yandow Realty Group ATTENTION: This email originated from outside the City's network. Use caution when opening links and attachments. RECEIVE® NOV 14 2022 Me a\- 00-1 G 1UNITY DEVELOPMENT WATER COMPANY COMMENTS USE zi - oio-� ITEM 3 RV Storage at 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing & Rentals LLC Atascadero Design Review Committee Staff Report - Community Development Department RV Storage, 6805 Sycamore Road MEETING DATE PROJECT PLANNER APPLICANT CONTACT PLN NO. 7/28/22 Mariah Gasch VSM Leasing & Rentals USE 21-0107 Associate Planner LLC RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends to the DRC: Review Plans for a new business that includes outdoor Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage and direct the applicant to make any modifications to the site as necessary prior to proceeding to the Planning Commission for a review of a Conditional Use Permit. PROJECT GENERAL PLAN ZONING ASSESOR PARCEL SITE ADDRESS DESIGNATION DISTRICT NUMBER(S)AREA 6805 Sycamore Road Industrial (I)/ Industrial 028-121-001 23.24 -acre site Open Space Park (I P)/ 6 -acre lease area (OS) Open Space (OS) /PD 31 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 6 -acre outdoor recreational vehicle (RV) storage yard in the Industrial zone. The site is proposed to be used for the storage of up to 262 RVs on a portion of the site that is currently owned by Atascadero Mutual Water Company in the Industrial zone. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The City ofAtascadero's environmental review process incorporates the requirements in implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. Persons, agencies, or organizations interested in obtaining more information regarding the environmental should contact the Community Development Department. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED BY CONTACTING THE ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT �. - 't Area of storage use: DISCUSSION: Project Description ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC Aerial Map Not a Part The proposed project includes a six -acre outdoor recreational vehicle (RV) storage yard in the Industrial zone. The site is proposed to be used for the storage of up to 262 vehicles outdoors. Outdoor vehicle storage in excess of 10,000 square feet is subject to the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. In order to approve the use, the Commission must make a series of use permit findings. If approved, the project is also subject to conditions of approval. Background The subject site is located on the north side of Sycamore Avenue, adjacent to the Salinas River. The site is owned by Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) and contains an existing fenced construction yard with storage buildings. In 2007, the City Council adopted a zone text change to establish a new site-specific Planned Development #31 Overlay Zone with a corresponding Master Plan of Development. The intent of the zone text change was to allow for a private bicycle motocross (BMX) facility to locate on the property. The BMX facility was never constructed and aside from the existing construction yard, the site has remained vacant. The planned development states that all other uses listed as allowed or conditionally allowed are subject to the requirements of the Zoning Code. . 11 Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.me/planningatascadero I understand the reasoning why they want this but this could invite more encampments being the ITEM 3 taller vegetation provides shade and coverage for V Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. teh encampments. VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC The applicant provided a Iandsc—ape plan proposing new landscaping along the realigned De Anza Trail and Sycamore Road. Staff is recommending a revision to the landscaping plan to focus taller vagetation along the interior fence adjacent to the RV storage lot. This recommendation also includes adding shorter species between the De Anza Trail and Sycamore Road to avoid the trail from becoming a hidden corridor. The applicant's landscape plan did not include landscaping between the existing construction yard onsite and Sycamore Road. Staff is requesting that the landscape plan be extended to include this portion since it is a part of the subject's parcel. This landscaping should be consistent with what is proposed on the opposite side of the driveway. There are six Coast Live Oak trees that will remain onsite and be protected during construction. Minimal landscaping is proposed throughout the RV parking areas. Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC) 9.4-125 requires 5% of the lot in an Industrial zone to be landscaped. The applicant has not provided overall lot coverage of landscaping so this will be verified prior to the Planning Commission hearing. If the proposed landscape plan does not meet the 5% requirement, staff will support an exception due to the industrial nature of the use. Fencing, lighting and security I understand they There is an existing six -foot -tall chain link fence along the a want f try and and around the current construction yard. This chain link fen beautify the area of Sycamore Road. There is also an existing chain link fence alo but it is still an p to the existing parking area for the trail. Staff is recommendingtha industrial area and tin a hidden corridor, the applicant replace the existing chain link f the wooden rail will fence of either metal or wood. The applicant is proposing ne be a maintenance ted chain link fencing around the RV storage lot. AMC 9-4.128 req problem. If the City ted chain link fencing to be screened with evergreen vegetation. Tis going to maintain It to the De Anza Trail will be heavily screened with landscaping then it is a different ing around the rear of the site does not have landscape screening. 1, story. �an exception to this standard due to the industrial nature of the site and its use. The rear property line abuts a tall berm along the Salinas River and the applicant is proposing an infiltration bio swale along the entire fence line. Adding landscaping to this side would extend into proposed RV spaces, potentially creating the need for a site redesign and reducing the number of parking spaces onsite. The applicant is proposing a powered gate that will be keypad controlled. There will be no regular onsite workers. Therefore, the RV storage will be self-service. The submittal shows several new light poles throughout the site with a maximum height of 20 feet tall. Staff is recommending this maximum height be reduced 16 feet for each light pole. This will reduce the light spilling onto adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing lights that dim low levels light until motion is detected. This will reduce negative impact on the surrounding area while providing security for the business. They are also proposing the installation of five new security cameras on five of the proposed lights poles. The applicant has a pre-existing contract with a local security company. They plan to continue using them for this site for 24-hour security coverage. fb.me/planningatascadero Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC Storage Yard Conditions The Industrial zone is the appropriate location for intensive uses such as outdoor storage yards. However, such land uses can be detrimental to the City if not properly designed and adequately maintained. If approved, the use permit to allow a storage yard will run with the land, regardless of the business owner/operator. The accumulation of storage containers, illegal businesses, transient camps, inoperable vehicles, feral animals, and the storage of miscellaneous junk and debris are possible negative impacts brought about by this land use. Conditions of approval and an annual site review are very important to prevent this property from falling into a deteriorated site. Staff is considering the following conditions be added for the Planning Commission review of the use permit: 1. All landscaping, fencing and site improvements shall be maintained in good order. Any dead or non-performing landscape items shall be replaced within 30 days. Any damaged fencing, lighting, or site improvements shall be replaced immediately. 2. No changes to fencing, landscaping, or site improvements may be installed without prior approval by the City. 3. No cargo containers, inoperable vehicles, inoperable boats or inoperable RV's shall be stored on-site. Only currently registered, operable vehicles or RV's may be stored on-site. 4. No storage of vehicles in any location other than in the designated on-site parking areas as identified in the site plan approved by Planning Commission may be stored on any portion of the site. 5. No other land use shall be allowed in conjunction with the RV storage unless specifically approved by the City. 6. No washing of vehicles, RV's or Boats or other equipment may occur on-site. This should be per a dumping of RV waste or water tanks may occur on site at any time. permit conditions o storage, paving, stockpiling, grading, or use of the site shall be allowed within not a subjective Yet of the top of the bank of Atascadero Creek. < Is this correct? review by an ie rlignment of the De Anza Trail shall be consistent with what is proposed. individual. ie tra shall be completed and fully landscaped to the satisfaction of the mmunl y Development Director prior to building permit final. 10.The existing chain link fence adjacent to Sycamore Road and the realigned De Anza Trail shall be replaced with a split rail fence with a maximum height of 4 feet tall. 1.Taller vegetation shall be focused between the RV storage lot and the realigned De Anza Trail. inderstand the dr-. 11 new fencing chain link fencing shall be vinyl coated with a dark neutral color. asoning why they The maximum fence height shall not exceed 6 feet. int this but this • Maximum height of new light poles shall not be taller than 16 feet for each light uld invite more pole. The lights shall be set to dim low level light until motion is detected. icampments • The Use Permit shall be subject to additional review upon receipt of operational complaints. Additional mitigation may be warranted upon verification of recurring sing the taller �getation provides noise or operational disturbances that impact residential properties. ade and verage for teh Icampments. Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.me/planningatascadero ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-01071 VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC Analysis The land use proposed, Outdoor Vehicle and Equipment Storage is a conditionally allowed use in the Industrial Zoning district. Section 9-6.140 of the City's Zoning Regulations provides a set of site design standards for storage yards in addition to the provisions of the use permit (Attachment 4). The applicant is proposing to complete the project in two phases. The first phase consists of 138 RV spaces, a new perimeter fence along the Phase 1 area, site grading with Class II base finish (in Phase 1 areas only), construction of an entrance gate and completion of the required stormwater basin. Phase 2 includes the addition of 124 parking spaces, removal of the dividing fence between the two phases and extension of the new vinyl coated chain link fence adjacent to the Salinas River. The De Anza Trail currently traverses through this property and culminates from a small parking lot along Sycamore Road. Due to this development, the trail will need to be realigned along Sycamore Road. Staff is also adding a condition that the realignment of the De Anza Trail, and the improvements to fencing and landscaping, be completed with Phase 1. ProtDosed Site Plan V= Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.me/planningatascadero ,- ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-01071 VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC DRC Discussion items: 1. Landscaping 2. Fencing, lighting and security 3. Proposed project conditions ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Site Plan Attachment 2: Landscape Plan Attachment 3: Site Photos Attachment 4: AMC 9-6.140 Attachment 5: DRC Notice of Action Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.me/planningatascadero r C d E s u �a r a Q H z W Q a W ❑ Z w a O J W W ❑ H z O U O w in U0 U H a� Q -o Wm N � R Z U� Ho Zr O U m m ❑ w z m O LU m r z O N Q M O w z N O E Lor- = M 00 0) W.S ZM d) U) M Cc CD I 0 -j N CD 0 ITEM 3 RV Storage at 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing & Rentals LLC Attachment 3: Site Photos USE 21-0107 Existing Site (Facing Northwest} r Existing Site (Facing Northeast) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED BY CONTACTING THE ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT http://www.atascadero.oEg 11 ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC View of the site from Sycamore Road Existing construction yard = Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.me/planningatascadero ITEM 3 RV Storage at 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-0107 / VSM Leasing & Rentals LLC De Anza Trail Entrance Location of new automated gate ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED BY CONTACTING THE ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT http://www.atascadero.or ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-01071 VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC Attachment 4: AMC 9-6.140 USE 21-0107 9-6.145 StoraSpe garde. Outdoor storage yards, excluding the storage oi'velueles in a day ase pari:ing lot or garage, arc subject w the pro, isiuns w'dus section. The sturage ol'velucles in a public or commercial parking lot or garage is suprjmt to Section 9@4.1 I4; the storage of wrecked, abandoned or vehi.les being dismanilctl. is subject to Section 9.6.131. in udilition to dins seciwn. (a) Site Design Staldw& (1) Access. There shall Wanly one (;) access poiva to a storage: yard for each three hundred ( 300) feet of street frontage. Such access point is to be a maximum width of Sx e3t_v (20) ttvt and shad b-- pi o% ided with a sold gate or door. (2) 'Screening. A storage ywd except a tcnsporary offing construction yard, is to be sercened from public view on all sides by solid wood, painted metal or masonry fencing. with a minimum height of six i+) feet. All required screening shall be continuously maintainers, in good condition to assure that its intended purpose is accomplished. This requirement maybe use permit approval lSe tion 9•;.112), when t i} `I'hc s�dc of a stvregc wart! aty.us a railnrar3 ngltt-of=wal.; or (ii) `1'h:: sutrour4rtg terrain, ��tisling vegetation intended to remain or other conditions would make fencing ineficetive ur unnecessary for the purpose of screening the storage yard from th, view of public roads. f3) Parking Requirement. None. provided that sufficient usable arra is available to accommodate all eitployce and user parking needs, entirely un -site. (4) Site Surfacing. A storing yard shalt be surfaced with concrete, asphalt paving, crushed rock, or oiler! earth, and be maintained in a dust -free condition. (5) f)!)icePeciditaes. Wlwn no buihfings exist or arra: prom»ed on a storage yaui site, one f 1) commercial coach may be uliliYA fur an oflive, provided that such vehicle is equipped with skirting, and 'rnsiaKed pursuant (o the permit requirements of'rItle So I'this Code (thc Building acrd Conanuetion Oi%hnanee). (b) Operation. Except for cchiclss cr freestanding equipment. materials within a storage yard are not to be stacked ur stored higher than six (6) feet. unless screening requirements have been waived or modified pursuant to subsection js)(2)(ii) of this section, or unless a higher wall or faatee is constructed at the required setback lint under an approved building permit. (Ord. (,14 0 4,'2017; Ord. 55: § 2_ 2010; Ord. 68 § 9.6.1401 1983) 01 Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.melplanningatascadero Attachment 5: DRC Notice of Action USE 21-0107 ITEM 3 RV Storage 6805 Sycamore Rd. USE 21-01071 VSM Leasing and Rentals LLC CITY OF ATASCADERO Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue I Atascadero, CA 93422 1 Phone: (805) 461-5035 1 www.atascadero.org Project #: Use 21-0107 Project Title: RV Storage Lot Planner/ Project Manager: Mariah Gasch DRC Review Date(s): 7/28122 Final Action: 13 DRC Refer to comments above. Conditions & Recommendations: I 1. All landscaping, fencing and site improvements shall be maintained in good order. Any dead or non- performing landscape items shall be replaced within 30 days. Any damaged fencing, lighting, or site improvements shall be replaced immediately. 2. No changes to fencing, landscaping, or site improvements may be installed without prior approval by the City. 3. No cargo containers, inoperable vehicles, inoperable boats or inoperable RV's shall be stored on- site. Only currently registered, operable vehicles or RV's may be stored on-site. 4. No storage of vehicles in any location other than in the designated on-site parking areas as identified in the site plan approved by Planning Commission may be stored on any portion of the site. 5. No other land use shall be allowed in conjunction with the RV storage unless specifically approved by the City. 6. No washing of vehicles, RV's or Boats or other equipment may occur on-site. 7. No dumping of RV waste or water tanks may occur on site at any time. 8. No storage, paving, stockpiling, grading, or use of the site shall be allowed within 30 feet of the top of the bank of Atascadero Creek. 9. The realignment of the De Anza Trail shall be consistent with what is proposed. The trail shall be completed and fully landscaped to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to building permit final. 10. The existing chain link fence adjacent to Sycamore Road and the realigned De Anza Trail shall be replaced with a split rail fence with a maximum height of 4 feet tall. 11. Taller vegetation shall be focused between the RV storage lot and the realigned De Anza Trail. 12. All new fencing chain link fencing shall be vinyl coated with a dark neutral color. The maximum fence height shall not exceed 6 feet. 13. Maximum height of new light poles shall not be taller than 16 feet for each light pole. The lights shall be set to dim low level light until motion is detected. 14. The Use Permit shall be subject to additional review upon receipt of operational complaints. Additional mitigation may be warranted upon verification of recurring noise or operational disturbances that impact residential properties. Y ` , Design Review Committee I City of Atascadero I www.atascadero.org I fb.melplanningatascadero