Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 10/10/1991 fU3LIC IEVIEW COPY P A SROM fflT a A G E N D A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING Atascadero Administration Building, 4th Floor 6500 Palma Avenue Thursday, October 10, 1991 7:00 p.m. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Public Comment • 1. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS A. Guest Houses B. Granny Houses 2. SIDEWALK SALES ORDINANCE 3. CREEKWAY MAPPING COMMITTEE REPORT 4. OTHER MATTERS Adjournment 4 CITY COUNCILMAN. COMMISSION MEETING AGEND QATF 10/10/91ITEMII (A) REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: D-3 Via: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 8/13/91 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. 4W File No: Guest Houses SUBJECT: Citizen' s request for zoning changes to better regulate guest houses. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to bring an interim urgency ordinance providing for use permit review of guest houses to the next meeting of the City Council. BACKGROUND: At the July 23rd meeting of the City Council, Mr. Hoyt Chambless and Dennis Garad requested that the City Council strengthen the standards for guest housing to preclude their becoming illegal rental units in the city (see attached communications) . Action of the Council was to request a staff report on this matter. ANALYSIS: Existing regulations for guest housing are attached. Basically, they are considered residential accessory uses and are allowed in all single family zones subject to 1) not containing facilities for cooking of food; 2) complying with setback standards; and 3) sharing of meters with the principal house. By definition, residential accessory uses are supposed to be "clearly incidental and secondary to a residence and does not change the character of the residential use" . However, there is no scale standard as to what represents "accessory" . Staff would agree with the testimony indicating that some of the so called guest houses that are being built, while lacking a kitchen at the time of final inspection, can readily be converted and become permanent rentals without the city' s knowledge. Although the limitation on use defined in the Zoning Ordinance states that "A guest house is not to be used as a dwelling unit for rental" , that is easier said than done. In keeping with the intent of -allow}ng guest houses, it would be reasonable to provide for some type of discretionary review of proposed guest houses to assure compliance with the spirit of the language of the Zoning Ordinance, and provide for a scale of structure which clearly would be a guest. house in character, i.e. , a one bedroom unit. Ongoing activities that could address this problem would be the Housing Element which is scheduled for completion in July, 1992 and, more importantly, the comprehensive rewrite of the Zoning Ordinance which is scheduled as a follow-up to the pending Land Use Element update. The problem with deferring to these processes is that we have been experiencing ongoing requests to build three bedroom "guest houses" which are notprecluded by the city' s current zoning standards. Given this situation, the interim urgency ordinance approach offers the opportunity to modify the standards of the Zoning Ordinance by a four-fifths vote of the Council to regulate such uses while we research this subject as part of the comprehensive rewrite of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff would propose that the interim urgency ordinance contain the following provisions: 1. Conditional use permit - change the use from being an allowed principal use to being only allowed by conditional use permit subject to a Planning Commission hearing. 2. Establish minimum guest house criteria - add to the limitation on use a maximum square footage of 576 square feet (24 by 24 feet - equivalent to a large two car garage) , and a maximum of one bedroom. ALTERNATIVES: The Council could refer the issue for consideration as part of both the Housing Element Update and comprehensive rewrite of the city' s Zoning Regulations. HE:ps Enclosure: Hoyt Chambless ' Communications - 7/16/91 & 7/23/91 to City Council Zoning Ordinance Excerpt - Guest Houses cc: Hoyt Chambless Dennis Garad VED JUL 1 ty91 CITY MGR. July 1s, 1191 Atascadero City Fall 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, Calif. 93422 Attn: Ray Windsor, Room =J7 RE: g=uest douses It is requested that Voest Housing" be placed on the agenda as soon as possible. I would request that = he allowed to speak about the need for better enforcement, re-write rules describing and limited use of "Quest sousing". Limit, "no cooking" in Guest Housing to the same as hotel or motel "no cooking". Thank you for placing __`.is iter on the agenda. Hoy ;, Cham less 420 Carrizo Road. Atascadero, Calif. 93422 305-466-5578 1 July 23, 1991 Atascadero City Council It is requested that "Guest Housing" regulations be up-dated in thirty (30) days. Additional regulations to include, but not limited to: 1. Notify immediate owner of Guest Housing request 2. Change Guest House to read "Guest rooms" 3. Guest rooms to be attached to main building 4. Guest rooms limited to 400 square feet S. Guest rooms, means space intended to be used on temporary lodging of persons without charge 6. Filing notice, when and how long Guest rooms are to be used. 7. Guest rooms to be occupied not more than 60 days per year S. That six (6) un-announced inspection visits per year to determine compliance of regulations 9. Any new regulations regarding "Guest House" be retroactive to include ALL approved Guest housing { i ZONING C? 12 D . Cp ' 6-10 ADOPTED JUNE 27, 1983 9-4. 132 (b) (15) (Sign Regulations) . A commercial vehicle carrying any sign identifying the home occupation and parked on or adjacent to the residential site visible from the public street is included in determining the maximum allowable area of on-site fixed signs. (h) Parking and Traffic: Traffic generated by a home occupation is not to exceed the volume normally expected for a residence in a residential neighborhood. All parking needs of the home occupation are to be met off the street. For purposes of this Section, normal residential traffic volume means up to 10 trips per day. This Subsection does not apply to garage or handcraft sales pursuant to Subsection (f) (1) . 9-6. 106. Residential Accessory -Uses: The standards of this Sub- section apply to the specific types of accessory structures listed. Agricultural accessory structures for the keeping of animals are subject to Section 9-6. 112 (Farm Animal Raising) . (a) Accessory Greenhouse: An accessory greenhouse may occupy up to 500 square feet per dwelling unit or 10% of the site, whichever is smaller. Larger greenhouses are subject to Section 9-6. 116 (Horticultural Specialties) where allowed. (b) Guesthouses: A guesthouse may be established as an accessory use to a residence in the A, RS, LSF or RSF Zone as follows: (1) Limitation on Use: A guesthouse is not to be used for residential occupancy independent from the principal residence. A guest house may contain living and sleeping g spaces, including bathrooms, but shall not contain facilities for the cooking of food. A guest house is not to be used as a dwelling unit for rental. (2) Location: A guesthouse is not to be located within any required setback area. (3) Meters: Separate meters are not allowed for guest houses. (c) Swimming Pools: Including hot tubs, spas, and related equipment, may be located within any required side or r CITY COUNCIL/PLAN. -COMMISSION D�ETINOG/10/91 AGENDJ(B) ORDINANCE NO. 74 TE11-/ 1TEMt AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO PRECLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF SECOND OR COMPANION RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WHEREAS, Section 65852. 2 of the Government Code of the State of California provides a basis for cities to either elect to approve sec- ond or companion residential units within the existing single family residential zoning districts as one means of increasing utilization of housing resources, or adopt an ordinance precluding such units based on specific findings that preclusion of such units might have a lim- iting effect on regional housing opportunities and that inclusion of such units would have specific adverse impacts on the public' s health, safety and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has an adopted Housing Assistance Plan that provides an outline for providing housing to the low and moderate income families of the City and Region and said Plan makes no provisions for second or companion units; and, WHEREAS, Title 9 (Zoning Regulations) of the Atascadero Municipal Code provides for a density bonus through a Conditional Use Permit process for multi-family projects for up to and exceeding 250 of the normal density allowed if units are provided for the targeted income group; and, WHEREAS , the City of Atascadero has approximately 5 ,300 acres of vacant residentially zoned land that is already fully subdivided that could be developed into more than 12, 000 new single and multiple fam- ily residential units in addition to underdeveloped multi-family -lots; and, WHEREAS, the Atascadero General Plan and Zoning Regulations provide for single family residential areas that encourage single fam- ily residential development on large lots in keeping with the City' s fully subdivided state, street pattern and the desired rural atmos- phere of the community ; and, WHEREAS, the Zoning Regulations provide for guesthouses as ac- cessory uses within all single family residential zoning districts. NOWT THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby make the following findings: 1. The adoption of this Ordinance, pursuant to Government Code Section 658522 (c) , precluding second or companion units wit- hin single family residential zoning districts may limit re- 41 gional housing opportunities. _ Ordinance No. 74 l 2. This limitation on regional housing opportunities is justifi- ed by foreseeable adverse effects on the public health, safe- ty and welfare due to the City' s narrow streets, street pat- tern, poor septic suitability and the overall rural atmos- phere of the community. 3. This limitation on regional housing opportunities is to some extent mitigated by the City's commitment to affordable hous- ing in the last three years as exemplified by its approval of 85 units of rental-assisted housing and 10 units subsidized to facilitate "first-time home buyers" . 4. Title 9 (Zoning Regulations) provides for adequate housing incentives in the form of density bonuses and guesthouse pro- visions to provide for the housing needs of the community and the region. 5. The significant amount of vacant land within the City avail- able for residential development can assist in providing for housing needs of the community and the region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby adopt this ordinance precluding the develop- ment of second or companion residential units within single family residential zoning districts. Section 1. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; -shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City and shall cause a copy of this ordinance to be sent to the California De- partment of Housing and Community Development within 60 days of its adoption. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. 2 • AfEETtI'i 'EAIaA""""".--` MEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL/PLAN. COMMISSION ( MEETING AGENDA DAT 10 10/91 rrEmg .? TO: City Council VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director } DATE: August 5, 1991 RE: Sidewalk Sales Enforcement BACKGROUND: Bill Wittmeyer has received a formal complaint regarding sidewalk sales in front of the Old Curiousity Shop at 5905 E1 Camino Real (see attached memorandum) . Although it is clearly against the ordinance, in the past the city has stopped short of "notice of violation" based primarily on the issues of pending sign ordinance revision and the absence of a "formal" complaint. Now with the filing of a formal complaint, this issue is brought to a head. EVALUATION: The reasons for the ordinance' s provision are both aesthetic and pragmatic, i.e. , liability associated with improper use of the public right-of-way. I believe the only way to properly enforce against illegal sidewalk sales is to handle it the same way as banner signs, i.e. , notify all enforcement candidates, and proceed through our normal abatement procedures. Most cities in California regulate the use of public property for private sale and adver- tising of private goods - especially on a permanent basis - for reasons stated above, as well as to control the proliferation of merchandise in commercial zones. ALTERNATIVE: Art Montandon advises that we could develop an ordinance regulating encroachments into the public right-of-way for sidewalk sales. This would not be an encroachment permit in the context of Public Works ' pending ordinance, which relates to driveways and improve- ments in the public right-of-way, but would be for temporary controlled use of sidewalk areas for special event type sales. t- ACTION NEEDED: Staff is hesitant to proceed on this issue in the manner proposed - i.e. , on a City-wide basis - without direction from the City Council. HE:ps Enclosure: Bill Wittmeyer Memorandum: July 25, 1991 cc: Bill Wittmeyer Art Montandon MEMORANDUM DATE: July 25 1991 TO: Henry Engen, Director, Community Development Dept. FROM: Bill Wittmeyer, Compliance Official SUBJECT: Enforcement Policy: Sidewalk Display of Merchandise & Wares The Community Development Department has recently received a written complaint regarding the sidewalk display of merchandise at The Olde Curiosity Shoppee, 5905 El Camino Real [file no. 91-179.002] . I spoke with the individual at that address who stated that it was his belief that such displays were allowed since Coast to Coast Hardware (just three or four stores away), Grisanti's Hardware, and other merchants used the sidewalk for their display. In accordance with Art Montandon's recommendation, I advised the individual that such sales were in violation of the City of Atascadero Zoning Ordinance, and, that it would be referred to the City Council for a clearer policy statement. There appear to be two categories of sidewalk sales: (1) Sale and/or display on public sidewalk (such as the incidents listed in the previous paragraph), (2) Sale and/or display on private sidewalk (R-Mart, Adobe Plaza, Foods- 4-Less Center, etc.) . Currently, the first category is permitted when "Authorized by an encroachment permit. . . ." (Section 9-6.174(b) (21 (ii)) . The second category is permitted in commercial zones when "conducted by the merchants abutting the sidewalk. . . ." (Section 9-6.174(b) (2) (i)) Both categories of sidewalk sales are limited to "no more frequently than one two-day period in every 90 days." (Section 9-6.174(b) (2) (iii)) Research with the Public Works Department indicates that the "encroachment permit" is probably not an appropriate process for regulation of the first category. The encroachment permit process addresses installation of driveways and other physical and permanent encroachments across public right-of-wap; it does not address the City's liability or otherwise appear to address public safety, etc. It is my recommendation that a definite policy be established regarding the enforcement and regulation of this activity. Special concern should be paid to the City's liability exposure in regards to the public right-of-way usage/blockage. encl: Zoning Ordinance excerpt City of Atascadero Zoning Ordinance excervt 9-6.174(b)(2) (i). (ii) , & (iii) (2) Sidewalk sales are allowed in commercial zones when: (i) Conducted by the merchants of shops abutting the sidewalk; and (ii) Authorized by an encroachment permit (if using the public sidewalk); and (iii) Such sales are conducted no more frequently than one two-day period in every 90 days. CITY COUNCILMAN. COMMISSION 1VMEETINQ AGENDA DATE 1� f 1EM# .. 3 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/8/91 From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Creekway Mapping Committee Final Report RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council evaluate the presented base map information and provide policy direction on how to proceed with the creekway planning process. BACKGROUND Planning for the City's creeks originated with E.G. Lewis who advocated resource preservation and protection. His conservation ideals are evidenced throughout his original plan, particularly . through his concept of greenbelts and unique division of creekway reserves. The City's Open Space and Conservation Element reflects the preservation intent behind Lewis' plan by incorporating various principals and policies for preserving natural resources. However, even though most of the creek systems within town are still in a relatively natural condition, there are currently virtually no specific provisions in the Zoning Ordinance for protecting or managing the creekways. The current lack of formal policies affecting natural resource values and recreational opportunities of the creekways have stimulated debate over the City's proper course of future action. The issues involve conflict over property rights, environmental protection, public safety, recreational opportunities and aesthetics of the Community. When Council began the General Plan Update, it became evident that the physical data necessary to formulate a meaningful Creekway Policy was not available in any comprehensible form. Thus, the Creekway Mapping Committee was formed to gather relevant base information for the planners and the decision makers to use to develop a Creekway Management Plan. The Committee was specifically instructed to address analytical data and not to become involved in the development of any creekway policies. The final result of that mapping effort is presented tonight. DISCUSSION The Creekway Mapping Committee has collected base data necessary for making policy decisions including contours, property lines, 100 year flood plain, creek reservation boundaries, roads and bridges and riparian vegetation zone. The maps will be displayed at the Council meeting and are permanently displayed at the Department of Public Works. The maps have been prepared using the computer-driven AUTOCAD program. This program allows the maps to be drawn at virtually any scale. They can be easily modified and updated. In addition, the information is stored in "layers", which allow selected information to be plotted, depending upon the desired use of the map. In summary, the mapping now complete is a powerful planning tool, capable of being continuously reused to display and test any Creekway Planning philosophy proposed. This initial mapping is however only a tool, with inherent limitations. There are still some areas or features that have not been mapped, including: structures/human intrusions into the creek; ownership status; current pools of water; specialized biological features; soil type; social activities; scenic areas; archaeologically sensitive areas; utility crossings; mineral and access easements. As the amount of data collected increases so does the complexity of analysis. With respect to the issue of structures and human intrusions into the creekways staff has collected various data which is now ready to be forwarded to Council, and if adopted, would become an ordinance regulating creekway resources separate from the Zoning Code, yet referencing appropriate land-use sections of the Zoning Code. In spite of the limitations mentioned above, the Creekway Mapping. Committee feels that the Creekway Map, as presently drawn, still contains sufficient information for the City to proceed with creekway planning. In our opinion, the current data bank should allow Council to address the most critical policy issues. However, we recognize that at some point it may be advantageous or even necessary to supplement the data as outlined. Finally, then, it is the Committee's hope that with the mapping data base Council can now more logically and appropriately address the critical issue of creekway setbacks, particularly as it relates to the number of feet to be reserved and on what basis (i.e. which point of the creekbed or riparian area is used to measure from) such a creekway setback can and should be justified. This point of course raises the question of whether or not it is in the city's best interest to institute a minimum setback to be applied equally on any or all parts of the creeks, including those tributaries now abutting private development. } REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: C-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO THROUGH Ray Windsor MEETING DATE: 3/13/90 City Manager FROM: Andrew Takata, Director /,,' Parks Recreation and Zoo Department SUBJECT: CREATION OF A CREEKWAY PLANNING AND MAPPING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Create a technical committee of three (3) Atascadero School District representatives (Roger Zackery, Gene Elsdon, and Paul Mon) and three City staff members (Henry Engen-Community Develo�5ment , Public Works Director, and Andrew Takata-Parks, Recreation and Zoo Director ) . Since this is a technical advisory committee, the City Council may choose only staff members. If it is the Council ' s desire for additional citizen participation, they may appoint other members. BACKGROUND: In order to begin the planning phase of the creekway plan, it is important that a technical committee be formed to map the creekway prior to additional planning. AJT: kv ;creek RESOLUTION NQ. 25-90 - RE-APPOINTING THREE MEMBERS TO THE a BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS Henry Engen gave staff report recommending adoption or Resolution No . 25-?0 reappcinzing the following three members to the Suiiding and Con=struction Appeals Board : Ken Lerno , Specialty Contractor; H. John, Edens, Jr . , General Contractor ; and Jim Rodger , General Public Member. There was no Council or public comments. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey and seconded by Councilman. Shiers to adopt Resolution No . 25-90; passed unanimously by roll call vote. 3. CREATION OF A CREEKWAY PLANNING & MAPPING COMMITTEE Andy Takata cave staff report recommending the creation of a technical committee comprised of three school district rep-esentat i ves and three City staff member=_ tc begin mapping the creek prior to additional planning. He stated that w ± i _e this was a technical advisory committee, the Ci - , Council mav _..1ocse only staff members, but if additional c: ticen participation is Cesired they may appoint other member=_. Mr . Takata er^:ained that the -First area wh,ch the c mmi tee would be looking at was from Lewis Avenue the Hien Sc^col . Mayor !Dexter 1arified that once the mapping is done, then creep.way usa^e w:. 1 _ be a=_ta�_ ished . Councilwoman M=Cke'> suggested that the Council add more members to the committee later on when that issue is addressed. Public Comments : Karen Riggs, 4?25 Arizona, asked the Council how this related to the creek setback issue and stated concern over the length of time a study like this may take. She suggested a building moratorium on the creek with emphasis on the properties currently for sale on Capistrano - The Mayor ruled Ms. Riggs out of order because the usage of the creek was nct being considered , but rather the estaelisnment of a technical committee to merely map the creek . .:can Okeefe, 9935 :old Morro Road East, asked at what point will the public be able to address the setback issue, why the mapping will take precedence over the setback question and how citizens can make input. ; � 1:C3:'?3:9G Page 9 C:.unc. .man Lilley asserted that the creek setback issue mus: be addressed by Council and Sated that he would personally ask that the matter be placed on a +future acenda for consideration later during the individual Determination portion or meeting . He stated that he would like to explore the possibility Of some kine of interim measure, with regard to several of the lots for sales , to insure their develooment does not Cc irreparable dare-age. Ms. Okeefe thanked th_ councilman and expressed hope in seeing this placed on another agenda for future discussion. Mr . Engen clarified that there is a General Plan Amendment that is looking at the setbacks to the creek and that it will be corning to the Planning Commission for public hearing . He state= that this amendment and the mapping of the creekways for linear park future planning purposes will _..ureide with one another . �,ounc ; lwoman Mackev asked the Community Development Director when the amendment would be presented to the Planning Commission tc which he stated that the earliest Cate would be in :ate Ap` Richard Bastian. 62?' Cone,io Roac , asserted that the .. . tiler's are Fbeing held .n the dark :hat creekwa;/ property owners Should lav=_'irst input on creekway cevelcpment arc cppcsed the f_•-mation a mapping committee. r0,� C i reported ,khat he has Seven Lenard Dogger , lJ ..� .as as. as, _ro acres or. Graves Creek Road and opposed the concept of a SO toot setback . Mayer Dexter assured Mr . Dugcer that oublic hearings on that issue would be held and reiterated that the current discussion was to map the area only. Sarah Gronstrand, 7620 Del Ric Read, asked that the Council clear some of the confu=_ion by clarifying for the public why biologists and engineers have been appointed to the Henry Engen responded that currently there is a lack of good .nformaticn on the cr=mkway resource .n the City. He stated that the General Plan calls for open space and protection of the creek and explained that many of the parcels are owned try the City, school district and water company. He added that the purpose of the committee is to begin putting this information together . Mr. Engen stated that two members of the -committee teach natural resources and can help to assess current vegetation and` values present in the creekway parcels. He can t: that a major public analysis with a cross-section of peopIL- appointed to: a Page 10 7 steering committee may later recommend plans that would be appropriate for those areas and reiterated that the proposed General Pian amendment is a separate issue that will be brought to the Planning Commission for generous public input as it looks at cues.ion= with reward .o creek bank/creek parcel setbacks etc . Councilwoman Mackey asked the Community Development Director tc clarify again the exa_t portion the creek that would be studied . Mr . Engen, responded that the first priority is the area from the :apistranc bridge to the High school. because the parcels there are owned by the City and the school district . .P.ichard Bastian proclaimed that outside influences are coming into the community witn plans of developing the creeks . He stated that he did not think. the Council was being up-front witn the public . Larry Sherwin., 2"'55 Campo Road , recapped that he and others read asked the Cauncil to take a 2-col: at the _reek and map the area, to protect those areas of the creeks that need it and lea•:e --Pen those that do not . He thanked tn.e Co::nc_ l for estab.lisninc the committee and beg nn_r _ the study cf the creek . _g..s a -esse -:.,ie Council once again and to +a hoped the Council WOL.Ip keep separate the issues cf setba_k and access as the stuCy is conducted . MOTION: 3y Councilmar: Lilley and seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to approve the creation of the Creek-way Planning and Mapping Committee. Councilwoman Borgeson asked to discuss the motion before the vote. Ms. 3orgeson sta_ea t~at the public has every right tc know what the Council is dcine and should ask questions if they are confused. She expressed concern that the committee to map the creek wi _ . be doing so while the proposed General Plan Amendment a 50 foot creek setback may be gc _ng to bubiLc hearing de-ore the Planning Commission as early as Agri ? ?c. i090. She stated that she personally could not go alat,g w; -.n a specific 50 Toot setback . Mayor Dexter asked for a voice vote on the motion to approve; which passed unanimously. ' CC3;;3!9G �- Page ii . . . .... . .................... - - REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting Date: 12/11/90 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: 6:00 STUDY SESSIG THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT• Creekway Mapping Committee RECOMMENDATION• Review the creekway maps presented at the meeting and provide the Committee with instructions on how to proceed. BACKGROUND• On March 13, 1990 the City Council appointed a technical committee consisting of three Atascadero School District representatives and three City staff members. The specific charge of the Creekway Committee was to produce maps of appropriate drainage courses which would serve as support data for creekway policy. The Committee was instructed not to become involved in the development of any creekway policies. DISCUSSION• The Committee has prepared creekway maps for Atascadero Creek from the Junior High School to San Gabriel Road. Information provided on the maps consist of: topographic contours, creek reservation boundaries, roads and bridges, property lines for adjacent lots, 100-year flood plain limits and the riparian habitat zone. The riparian habitat zone was mapped by members of the committee. Included in the agenda package is additional information which discusses the implications of the riparian zone. Full size prints of the creekway map will be presented at the Council meeting. Staff and the Committee are seeking direction from the Council on how to proceed. OPTIONS• 1. Direct the Committee to map the remaining drainage courses in the same fashion Atascadero Creek was mapped. E 2 . Use the areas mapped to date to focus on policy issues. • 3 . Direct the Committee to make changes to the mapping techniques. y�. Coniferous trees 1 r. i Deciduous I trees 1 � I %ice y./� y 1 ,ii 6:l Shrubs 1 ; Sedges ; 1 and 1 3 rushes Emergents 1 Water 4 Aquatic >. M Riparian Upland Zone , _ Zone Zone Aquatic_ , Figure 3.1.--A generalized stream— or pondside riparian zone with adjacent aquatic and upland zones. Deciduous mesic riparian vegetation (e.g., willows, cottonwoods, alders) grows immediately adjacent to hydric plants in the aquatic zone, and to conifers in the more xeric upland zone. It is this terrestrial, moist—soil riparian zone, whose water is imported from a watercourse or aquifer rather than being provided only by local precipitation, that creates the conditions necessary for development of a riparian system (from Thomas, Maser, and Rodiek 1979a). 3.2 --- Airflow upstream and downstream Distinct vegetative structure �� affects microclimate Water quality, quantity Narrow zone of influence Figure 4.3.--Zone of distinct riparian microclimate within a'. riparian system. Notice that the microclimatic effects can extend beyond the outer limits of deciduous mesic vegetation. birds, bats and other mammals, and even for some reptiles, amphibians, and insects (Stevens et al. 1977; Wauer 1977; Thomas, Maser, and Rodiek 1979a). This phenomenon may have special significance in the Central Valley of California where linear riparian systems traverse the north-south length of the valley, a distance of 450 miles. Many species of land birds use ripar- ian corridors as they are sometimes the only available woodland environment through which the birds may traverse a geographic region while on migrating flights. In the riparian zone they find food and cover which may be unavail- able in adjacent uplands but a few feet away. r 4.6 : :'•'., iii• civ A14 W W W W W W Figure 4.2.--Edge elements in riparian systems. In addition to the edge elements created by vegetation changes in the cross-sectional struc- ture, internal edge elements are created by discontinuities (e.g., open glades , sandbars, oxbows) within the riparian vegetation itself. (Modified from Thomas , Maser, and Rodiek 1979x. ) Corridor Effect It is easy to see how linear riparian systems, with their shade, food' supplies , cover, and water, can become important corridors for the migratory and dispersal movements of wildlife. In some parts of the country, elk and deer consistently use riparian zones as migration corridors between summer and winter ranges, as illustrated in figure 4.4. Riparian corridors provide important migratory and dispersal routes for highly mobile species such as 4.5 RIPARIAN VEGETATION PROVIDES SUPPLIES DETRITUS SHADES ALTERS (MATER v TERRESTRIAL (ENERGY) TOQUALITY AND HABITAT STREAM STREAM QUANTITY CONTROLS CONTROLS PRIMARY STREAM PRODUCTION TEMPERATURE FOOD. REST,AND SOME EGGS FOOD FOR Q LIFE CYCLE SS S QUALITYPACE FOR HIDING FOR LAID ON AQUATIC OF AQUATIC AQUATIC EMERGENT ADULTS FOILAGE INVERTEBRATES INVERT EBRAtES INVERTEBRATES Figure 4.10.--Some of the more important relationships between riparian vegetation and stream components, including aquatic insects. (From Knight and Bottorff 1984). species such as willows and cottonwoods could not reproduce. It also pro— vides important substrates for aquatic insects, and escape and resting cover for many fish species. Organic Input The dead organic matter or detritus (leaves, twigs, branches), and to a lesser extent live invertebrates, from riparian vegetation are important sources of nutrients, especially to headwater streams. Up to 99 percent of the annual energy input, the food base for entire aquatic communities, comes from streamside vegetation in these situations, especially where there is a dense forest canopy (Fisher 1972; Fisher and Likens 1973; Hubbard 1977; Cummins and Spengler 1978; Merritt and Lawson 1979). Annual values range from about 100 gm. per m2 to more than 1000 gm. per m2 (Bray and Gorham 1964; Anderson and Sedell 1979; Knight and Bottorff 1984). I. 4.25 i APPENDIX A Plants Alkalai mariposa Calochortus striatus Amargosa nitrophila Nitrophila mohavensis Ash Meadows gum plant Grindelia fraxino-pratensis Acer macrophyll Bigleaf maple um Black-banded rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus paniculatus Blackberry Rubus ursinus Black cottonwood Populus trichocarpa Black oak Quercus kelloggii Black walnut Juglans hindsii Blue elderberry Sambucus sp. Blue oak ercus douglasii Box elder Acer negundo Buckwheat Eriogonum spp. " Buttonwillow (buttonbush) Cephalanthus occidentalis California bay Umbellularia californica California buckeye Aesculus californica California ditaxis Ditaxis californica California fan palm Washingtonia filifera California scalebroom Lepidospartum squamatus California sycamore Platanus racemosa California wild grape Vitis californica Catclaw Acacia gregii Cheeseweed Hymenoclea salsola Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens Coyote brush Baccharis pilularis consanguinea Creek dogwood Cornus californica Desert almond Prunus fasci_culata H t i s emor i Desert-lavender _�_ .�. Desert willow Chilopsis linearis Elderberry Sambucus caerulea S. mexicana Fig Ficus carica r Fish Slough milk-vetch Astragalus lentiginosus var. piscinensis Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii Hot Springs fimbristylis Fimbristylis spadicea Interior live oak Quercus wislizenii Ironwood Olne a tesota Knapp's brickellia Rrickellia knappiana Los Animas colubrina Colubrina californica Mountain Springs bush lupine Lupinus excubitus var. medius Mugwort Artemisia douglasiana A. suksdorfii Mule fat Baccharis viminea Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia Oregon oak ercusgarryaas. Owens Valley checker mallow Sidalcea covillei A. 1 1 Palo Verde Cercidium floridum Parish's alkali grass Puccinellia parishii Poison oak Rhus diversiloba Ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus sp. Red alder Alnus rubra Red Rock tarweed Hemizonia arida Rose-mallow Hibiscus californicus Sagebrush Artemisia tridentate Salt cedar Tamarix spp. San Bernardino bird's beak Cordylanthus eremicus bernardinus Scrub oak Quercus dumosa Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis Smoketree Dalea spinosa Sodaville milk-vetch Astragalus lentiginosus var. sesquimetralis Spring-loving centaury Centaurium namophilum var. namophilum Squaw baccharis (squaw waterweed) Baccharis sergiloides Tecopa bird's beak Cordylanthus tecopensis Toyon Heteromeles arbutifolia Tree tobacco Nicotiana1$ auca Valley oak Quercus lobata White alder Alnus rhombifolia Wild rose Rosa californica i I A.2 f ., MEETING AGENDA i DATA i/R/Q,1 ITE.M I - Approved as Amended Z/. ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL . MIr LUTES DECEMBER 11 , 1990 Ma ;o Pro-Tem Shiers called the meeting to order- at _:77 p .m. The Pledge of Al leg ia- rce was de=erred unti l after commencemen= o ` to a regular session. ROLL CALL: Sorgeson Present : Counciimembers Shiers,/ Nimme , Dexter and Mayor Lilley (0: 14 p .m. ) Also Present : Muriel Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Dayka , City Clerk Sta?f Present : Ray Windsor, City Manager ; Art Montandon , City Attorney; Mark Toseph , Administrative { Services Di.'ector; Henry Engen, Community • Development Director; Steve DeCame , Cicy Planner; Greg Luke, Public Works Director ; Andy Takata, Director of Parks , Recreation Zoo ; Mike Hicks, Fire Chief and Sud Mc^ale, Police chief CRE=KWAY MAPPING STUDY SESSION Greg Luke, Public Works Director, gave an overview of the staff report using maps to illustrate the areas studied . He pointed out that the :naps provided information on topographic contours , creek reservation boundaries, reads and bridges„ 100-year flood plain, as well as the ri_arian habitat zones. He emphasized that the committee did not map structures (or other human intrusions into the creek ) , ownership status, current pools of water, specialised biological features, soil type, social activities ( trails, picnic area=_ or teen hang-cuts) , scenic . areas , archaeologically significant areas and utility or access easements. Mayor Pro-Tem Shiers indicated that the study session was not a public hearing, but opened the floor for comments. CC'_2/11/90 • Page r Pub' is Commer.t5 : =arch Gronstrand , 762x.' r' De! Rio Road , a=_': i =_ ed the Po- i Mork Director .t. .,escr ibe the Pur pose of :?-.e mapp i!Ig Mr . uke exc �3.ned that i .. was tC 9"ab .e Sta�T a3l .ect and present, data to the Council to be used as a toCi for formalat ng a =ras_k.va/ managing poi :c`/- Mr S . Grcn-stranc statedthat a cion is a ^3tu�o'sl process 3^.C. human activity increases the rate O erosion. the ncted th3. there were corrals and dog runs in the Various creeks .f Atascaderc and asked Mr. Luke if during the snapping process s frac tures of th i s type were noticed and macped . The PL4b 1 c Works Director indicated that the committee wasaware of human activity in the creek, but had not mapped them. Cr, the street in which she lives, Mrs. Grcns:rand explainer' , there is a corral in the creek . She reported that she had contacted ;he Health Department and was told that there was ne th irg they could do . She expressed deep concern for whal, she described as a health menace. (Mayor Lilley arrived and apologized for being late. He exoiained that he was participating in the Hoscice Light Jp a Tree Ceremony. ) Roger =achary, 1500 TraTfic Way, indicated that he was a biology teacher and . a member of the creek mapping committee. He recommended that the Council address identified areas owned by the City, develop those portions of the creek to some extent and incorporate an educational program to enlighten the community on the sensitivity of this valuable resource. Eric Greening, 736:, Valle, referred to a suggestion (made by Councilwoman. 9orgeso n at another Council meeting) to calender the matter of off-road vehicle use in the creek bed and asked if any action had been taken. The City Manager noted that, in response to Councilwoman Horgeson' request, the police chief had submitted a report. He indicated that the report is in the pending agenda file with a notation that the matter parallel or come after a discussion on the creek. He added that the whole issue of mapping the creek was triggered by a request from a planning commissioner to re— establish a fifty—foot setback an the creek and explained that for Council to determine whether this was appropriate, had directed staff to study the creek. CC12/11/90 Page 2 Ccun m oil an Dexter commended Staff for their report and emphasized that without the information, Council could .not Make, app ror^riate policy decisions. Counc_ lwomar. 8orgesen jgreed and expressed concern for Off-road vehicles, dog runs and the like in the creek . She suggested that the Council take acticri to Prohibit such uses. The Md,/Or concurred that it was necessary to regulate the activities that pollute or artificcally alter the creek and asked _staff to address ttrese issues. ye indicated that the mapp ;ng that had been done so far- hao been helpful and was supportive Of, the process beige continued . There was consensus among the Council to continue with the creek mapping and direct staff to draft a creek preserve protection ordinance. The City ma nagee asked Council to clarify the issue of setbacks. Council agreed to defer land use matters relating to the creek until precise parameters are established. The study session was closed at 6:51 p.m. The regular meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman PlimmO . PROCLAMATIONS: Mayor Lilley rear: the proclamation for "SOC Silver Ann i versary MO•ith" , December . 1990 and p-esented it to Hiz Stelncerg , Executive Director- of .he Ec3notnic Opportunity Commission. Ms . Steinberg invited all to the 25th anniversary celebration to be held an December i4, lS90 in San Luis Obispo . CO NCIL COMMENTS: Councilwoman 3orgeson expressed appreciation on behalf of the Council to all members of staff who participated in sending Christmas packages overseas to the troops in. the Middle East in lieu of exchanging gifts. The effort, she reported , was coordinated by Georgia Ramirez. In addition, Councilwoman. Sorgeson announced that she had been appointed to the County :•later Advisory Hoarj and that she would be happy to present reports to the Council an their meetings- Councilman Dexter reported that the next "Pride Dazs" effor_.to CC 12!1 1!90 Page 3 ------------ de-trash Atascadero would be Friday, December 14. rr?r.oe - Manager indicated that the clean-up session would `'a � .d C7rrrr _o at 7:00 a.m, at the fire station and the focus_ would be an the downtown. Mayor Lilley recognized the great work done by 1 Eorr.ie 3 6=�b Wilieins. Bob Sue Brown, as well as others who the Hcsoice Tree Lighting ::er=rncn• nal a Par*icipat•tir_+ jr: 9 9 , d earlier n the evening . COMMUNITY FORUM: Sarah Gronstrand , Co-Cth3irperson of the Friends endue of .he Lake F3✓i l tOn, gave an update n fund-raising eTrort5 . ' he n a_ that she had brc;. h t -c d notea -- g r :5p I ay, the hand-made LaF.e Pa•✓i 1 i Guilt---one of or- th,e many Spic:al pries to be ra=iled � . i an= indicated that she had ti:kets available for purchase. Erika Banner, representing the B. I .A. presented ti a check for s1 ,300 r be � p eser_ed t. a �na,_r- :h o used to provide additional Iiyhz :r.9 for the Ro turd3. !.ar-ry Sherf,in, Campo -%cad spoke out against proposed . andatory garage ccllectice and the servicz being p:-o:• ide the present trash hauler . He complainedu garbage that earlier- in the day , �, W 1-M3 r Disposal 1"..30N :eb nct i: 1 b age can_ i :. h ne i ghbonccoc 3!`d re l ay?3o that , as a resu! t , t rasa was everywhere. - Qn another -n.a t ter, Mr . Sherwin asked the Counc: l wh•.• i - was continuing tc allow sub:7i . isions and condcmintu,n cons tr.."Zt, Cn Curing a ti-e of water rationing. A• CONSENT CALENDAR: t•13:/or L i l l s• r_2ad the Cz;ISer?t r'l l endar as *=I lows : 1 . NOVEMBER 27, 1990 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2. NOVEMBER 29, 1990 CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - OCTOBER 1990 4►. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - OCTOBER 1990 ff. RESOLUTION NO. 126-90 - ADOPTION OF ANNUAL CITY INVESTMENT POLICY CC12/11/90 Page 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY , Gohsmor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME AMPOST OFFICE BOX 47 September 9, 1991 YOUNTVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94599 (707) 944-5500 Mr. Henry Engen, Environmental Coordinator REC`IVEDr Community Development Department S C P } �5�1 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422 Dear Mr. Engen: Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Land Use, Conservation, and Open Space Elements of the General Plan City of Atascadero, San Luis Obispo County Thank you for providing the Department of Fish and Game with an opportunity to review the subject Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) . The project evaluates impacts of full buildout of the City of Atascadero relative to the Draft Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Elements of the General Plan. The Preferred Alternative, compared to the approved 1980 General Plan, would result in a 40 percent area reduction in industrial land, six percent increase in single-family residential, and a decrease in multi- family residential. The DEIR states that policies identified in the Open Space Element will protect open space and natural resources, and, therefore, no additional mitigation is recommended. We have several concerns which we believe should be specifically addressed in the final EIR. The document indicates that no rare or endangered animal species were identified in the City or surrounding area by Natural Diversity Database maps, and that only the one-awned spineflower was identified in the vicinity, but not within the urban reserve line. The Natural Diversity Database also identifies this plant adjacent to Santa Barbara Road in Atascadero. It also identifies Brewer's spineflower (Federal candidate 2) , Santa Margarita manzanita (Federal candidate 2) , and Cuesta pass checkerbloom (Federal candidate 2, State rare) in the vicinity. The Natural Diversity. Database cannot be considered a complete inventory of all localities of rare, threatened, or endangered species. For this reason, we normally recommend that biologists conduct surveys of the area in question, to ensure that information is complete. In this case, there are a number of species which occur in the Atascadero area which should have been identified in the document. A number of sensitive birds have been documented in riparian vegetation in the area, including nesting yellow warblers (California Species of Special Concern (CSC)] and yellow-breasted chat (CSC) . Both Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk, listed in Appendix E as present in Atascadero, are riparian dependent Species of Special Concern. Purple martin (CSC) nest in Atascadero, one of the few nesting sites in the county. Long- eared owl (CSC) , coast horned lizard (CSC) , and American badger (CSC) are • known to be in the area, as are southwestern pond turtle (Federal candidate 2) and Atascadero June beetle (Federal candidate 2) . In addition, it is likely that California red-legged frog (Federal Candidate 2) and Hammond's spadefoot Mr. Henry Engen September 9, 1991 Page Two toad (CSC) are in the area as well. We recommend that the document identify the habitat requirements of each of these species and indicate how this habitat will be protected through the Open Space Element of the General Plan. Many of the species listed above are dependent upon healthy riparian corridors in order to survive. Riparian vegetation is the single most important habitat type in the county in terms of wildlife habitat value. The document refers to Open Space policies which address riparian protection, but we do not believe it goes far enough in specifying protective measures. Policy 1. (p. 117) indicates that building setbacks will be established to protect the riparian ecosystems along the Salinas River, Graves, and Atascadero creeks. We recommend that specific setbacks be established from the upland edge of the riparian corridor. For example, within the Coastal Zone in this county, rural riparian setbacks are 100 feet, urban are 50 feet. Furthermore, riparian vegetation along other, unnamed or smaller creeks may still provide extremely important habitat, and we recommend that protective measures be extended to include these corridors. We are very concerned with the wording of Policy i. of the Draft Open Space Element. This states "Creek reserves shall be preserved for park and recreational use, with appropriate areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment and habitat purposes". This is inappropriate. The goal of the Element should be to maintain creek corridors in their natural state. Excessive use and control of vegetation in corridors is precisely the reason a number of riparian oriented species are now being considered for listing rare or endangered. These areas must be considered first a sanctuary for wildlife, with recreation and other uses secondary if appropriate. State and Federal policies clearly identify the protection, preservation, and enhancement of riparian vegetation as of utmost concern. The Open Space policies should specifically identify wetlands as habitat of great value which should be protected and acquired through easement, where possible. Draining or culverting of wetlands should be prohibited. We are corcerred that any trail development remain well outside the riparian corridors to maintain their intrinsic wildlife value. Recreational use should remain passive and nonintrusive. We strongly discourage use of creek corridors for off-road vehicle use, and recommend that City policy specifically address this. If habitat protection is to be successful, the City must set up standards which are not ambiguous and lead to straight forward application during- the planning process. These should include specific measures for protection of sensitive habitat, creek setbacks, tree removal, etc. We strongly encourage use of concepts like mitigation banking to ensure that piecemeal development does not result in the cumulative loss of i Mr. Henry Engen September 9, 1991 Page Three sensitive habitats. This concept could be applied for mitigation of situations such as the increased culverting of small wetland areas on Highway 41 west of Highway 101. Our staff are available to discuss application of such concepts further. Please forward the final document to our office for further review. If you have questions regarding these comments, please direct them to Ms. Karen Worcester, Fishery Biologist, (805) 772-4122, or Mr. Jim Lidberg, Wildlife Biologist, (805) 528-0782. You may also reach either by writing to Post Office Box 47, Yountville, California 94599. Sincerely, Brian Hunter Regional Manager Region 3 G} r ii •:•r. ,diyr W AM Tl V V W W W W W (JJ Figure 4.2.--Edge elements in riparian systems. In addition to the edge elements created by vegetation changes in the cross-sectional struc- ture, internal edge elements are created by discontinuities (e.g., open glades , sandbars, oxbows) within the riparian vegetation itself. (Modified from Thomas , Maser, and Rodiek 1979a. ) Corridor Effect It is easy to see how linear riparian systems, with their shade, food supplies , cover, and water, can become important corridors for the migratory and dispersal movements of wildlife. In some parts of the country, elk and deer consistently use riparian zones as migration corridors between summer and winter ranges, as illustrated in figure 4.4. Riparian corridors provide important migratory and dispersal routes for highly mobile species such as 4.5 RIPARIAN VEGETATION PROVIDES SUPPLIES DETRITUS SHADES ALTERS WATER TERRESTRIAL (ENERGY) TO STREAM QUALITY AND HABITAT STREAM QUANTITY CONTROLS CONTROLS PRIMARY STREAM PRODUCTION TEMPERATURE [000.REST,AN SOME EGGS F000 FOR GROWTH RATES HABITAT SPACE HIOING FOR LAID ON AQUATIC S LIFE CYCLES S DUALITY FOR EMERGENT ADULTS f01LAGE INVERTEBRATES IN AQUATIC AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES INVERTEBIEATES Figure 4.10.--Some of the more important relationships between riparian vegetation and stream components, including aquatic insects. (From Knight and Bottorff 1984). species such as willows and cottonwoods could not reproduce. It also pro- vides important substrates for aquatic insects, and escape and resting cover for many fish species. Organic Input The dead organic matter or detritus (leaves, twigs, branches), and to a lesser extent live invertebrates, from riparian vegetation are important sources of nutrients, especially to headwater streams. Up to 99 percent of the annual energy input, the food base for entire aquatic communities, comes from streamside vegetation in these situations, especially where there is a dense forest canopy (Fisher 1972; Fisher and Likens 1973; Hubbard 1977; Cummins and Spengler 1978; Merritt and Lawson 1979). Annual values range from about 100 gm. per m2 to more than 1000 gm. per m2 (Bray and Gorham 1964; Anderson and Sedell 1979; Knight and Bottorff 1984). 4.25 I APPENDIX A Plants Alkalai mariposa Calochortus striatus Amargosa nitrophila Nitrophila mohavensis Ash Meadows gum plant Grindelia fraxino-pratensis Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum Black-banded rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus paniculatus Blackberry Rubus ursinus Black cottonwood Populus trichocarpa Black oak Quercus kelloggii Black walnut Juglans hindsii Blue elderberry Sambucus sp. Blue oak Quercus douglasii Box elder Acer negundo Buckwheat Eriogonum spp. Buttonwillow (buttonbush) Cephalanthus occidentalis California bay Umbellularia californica California buckeye Aesculus californica California ditaxis Ditaxis californica California fan palm Washingtonia filifera California scalebroom Lepidospartum squamatus California sycamore Platanus racemosa California wild grape Vitis californica Catclaw Acaciarg egii • Cheeseweed Hymenoclea salsola Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia *.+. Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens Coyote brush Baccharis pilularis consanguinea Creek dogwood Cornus californica Desert almond Prunus fasciculata Desert-lavender Hyptis error i Desert willow Chilopsis linearis Elderberry Sambucus caerulea S. mexicana Fig Ficus carica Fish Slough milk-vetch Astragalus lentiginosus var. piscinensis Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii Hot Springs fimbristylis Fimbristylis spadicea Interior live oak Quercus wislizenii Ironwood Olneya tesota Knapp's brickellia Rrickellia knappiana Los Animas colubrina Colubrina californica Mountain Springs bush lupine Lupinus excubitus var. medius Mugwort Artemisia douglasiana A. suksdorfii Mule fat Baccharis viminea Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia Oregon oak Quercus garryana Owens Valley checker mallow Sidalcea covillei A. 1 Palord V e e Cercidium floridum Parish's alkali grass Puccinellia parishii Poison oak Rhus diversiloba Ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus sp. Red alder Alnus rubra Red Rock tarweed Hemizonia arida Rose-mallow Hibiscus californicus Sagebrush g Artemisia tridentate Salt cedar Tamarix app. San Bernardino bird's beak Cordylanthus eremicus bernardinus Scrub oak Quercus dumosa Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis Smoketree Dalea spinosa Sodaville milk-vetch Astragalus lentiginosus var. sesquimetralis Spring-loving centaury Centaurium namophilum var. namophilum Squaw baccharis (squaw waterweed) Baccharis sergiloides Tecopa bird's beak Cordylanthus tecopensis Toyon Heteromeles arbutifolia Tree tobacco N ,Cot iana glauca Valley oak Quercus lobata White alder Alnus rhombifolia Wild rose Rosa californica IL • A.2 ME`TNG AGE�eA rrE'M j f Approved as Amended 1/• ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL M:`1UTES DECEMBER II , 1990 May7r- ?ro-T_m Shiars _al1Jd the meeting to crde - at 6 :07 p .m. P12dC_9 of Al le-, 'card vas de'9r'ed until aftar =ommencemen` pc t`-+e regular session. ROLL CALL: Borgeson Present : Counciimembers Shiers,/ Nimmo , Dexter and Mayor- Lilley (6: 19 p .m. ) Also Present : Muriel Korba, City Treasurer and Lee D ayka, City Clerk Staff Present : Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Art Montandon. City Attorney; Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Di -e. tor; Henry Engen, C3mmuni ty • Develoomen.t Director ; Steve OeCamp , Cicy Planner; Greg Luke, Public Works Director ; Andy Takata, Director of Parks. Recreation & Zoo ; Mike Hicks, Fire Chief and Hud McKale, Police Ch ie- CREEKWAY MAPPING STUDY SESSION Greg Luke, Public Works Director, gave an overview of the staff report using maps to illustrate the areas studied. He pointed out that the :naps provided information on topographic contours, creek reservation boundaries, roads and bridges, 100-year flood plain, as well as the ri:arian habitat zones. He emphasized that the committee did not map structures (or other human intrusions into the creek ) , ownership status, current pools of water, specialized biological features, soil type, social activities ( trails, picnic areas or teen hang-outs) , scenic areas, archaeologically significant areas and utility or access easements. Mayor Pro-Tem Shiers indicated that the study session was not a Public hearing , but opened the floor for comments. CC12/11/90 • Page '- E ?uo' is Comments : • =arah Gronstrard, 762 Det P_o Roar' , a=_ :ed the Ppb _ :_ '"Jocks Director- 'e aescribe the put-pose of .in = "Bts k wai;i :nappLng t'!r . Luke ex. is . ned that i - was r= 9nab .e Staff to =J 1 .9c t and Present data to the Council to be used as a too : for formulating a creLkway managing policy. Mrs . Grcnstrand stated that a-=Sian is a r?atu.%Il Groc3sa and human activity increases the rate of erosion. She ncted the: there wer3 corrals and dog runs in the various cracks of Atascadero and asked Mr . Luke if during the Inapping process structures of this type were noticed and marred . The Public Works Director indicated that the committee was aware of human activity in the creek , but had not mapped them. On the street in which she lives, Mrs. Gronstrand explained , there is a corral in the creek . She reported that stile had contacted .he Health Department and was told that ther= was nothing they could do . She expressed deep concern for what she described as a health menace. (Mayor Lilley arrived and analogized for being Iate. He explained that he was participating in the Hospice Light Up a Tree Ceremony. ) f Roger Zachary, !SOO Traffic Way, indicated that he was a biologye 3 Y, teacher and . a member of the creek mapping committee. He recommended that the Council address identified areas owned by the City, develop those portions of the creek to some extent and incorporate an educational program to enlighten the community on the sensitivity of this valuable resource. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, referred to a suggestion (made by Councilwoman Sorgeson at another Council meeting) to calender the matter of off-road vehicle use in the creek bed and asked if any action had been taken. The City Manager noted that, in response to Councilwoman Sorgeson' request, the police chief had submitted a report. He indicated that the report is in the pending agenda file with a notation that the matter parallel or come after a discussion on the creek. He added that the whole issue of mapping the creek was triggered by a request from a planning commissioner to re-- establish a fifty-foot setback on the creek and explained that for Council to determine whether this was appropriate, had directed staff to study the creek . CC12/11/90 Page a a • Councilman Dexter commended staff for t, that without the inFormation, Council couepo ld rnotrmaand emphasized Policy decisions, appropriate Counc. lwoman Horgesen agreed and expressed cone ='eh !cles , dog runs and the like in the creek . c ern for off-that the Council take action to e he suggested that o ?. oh ib i ,,l such uses. The mayor concurred that it was necessary activities that poilut= i i_ ally alter thetreguiate tt-L O. 3r t ' f r: staff to address tt,e��e i --• creek and asked that had been f "`1eS' ye indicated that the mapping done s•o ar h3 ] been helpful and was supporti ,/e ar the process beine continued . There was consensus among creek the Council to continue- with the mapping and direct staff to draft a creek preserve protection ordinance. The City .Mandgee asked Council to clarify the issue of setbacks. Council agreed to defer land use matters relating to the creek until precise parameters are established. The study session was closed at 6:51 p.m. The regular meeting •r was called to order at 7:02 p.m. The Pledge of Allegi ll led by Counc i 1 man PI i mmo . an_= was PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Lilley rea,i +_:ne Proclamation for "EOC Silver Anni`rersary .1 Moth" December- -e. 1990 and Executive Direst p rented it to Hi = Steinberg , " or of the Economic Opportunity Commission. Ms. Steinberg invited all to the 25th anniversary celebration to be held On December 14, !990 ir, San Luis Obispo . COUNCIL COMMENTS: Councilwcman Sorgeson expressed appreciatio:z on behalf of the Council to all members of =staff who Christmas � participated in sending packages overs as to the troops in. the Middle East in lieu of exchanging gifts. The effort, she reported , was coordinated by Georgia Ramirez. In addition, :cun.cilweman. Bar eson announce t. appointed to th g d that she had been e County :•later Advisory Hoard and that she would be happy to present reports to the Council cn their meetings. Councilman Dexter reported that the r.er.t "Pride Daze" effort to CCi2rli!90 Page 3 de-trash Atascadero would be Friday, December 14. r�.o Manager indicated that the clean `-1 t 7:00 a.m. at the p 5essior. would Commerce a fire station and the focus would he .n the downtown. Mavor Lilley recogri ed the great o-,ork done by Eann.i= ob Wi r_Kins . Bob ?. Sue 8 3 6_., rows, well as others who participat::c+ jr, the Hospice Tree Lighting :3remcny held earlier in the COMMUNITY FORUMS Sarah Gronstrand , Co-Chairperson of the Friend, of the Lak-e Pavilion, gave 3n update on fund-raising efforts . She n a that she had brought for `is ote p -r ay, the hand-made Lake Favi1ior- aunt---one of the mars Special prizes to be ra= RLPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADSROITE1�t: D-2 Through: Rag Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/8/91 Via: Henry Nngen, Comm. Dev. Director From: ,Steven L. DeCamg,' City Planner S! MCT Resolution permitting temporary sewer hook-up to-5270 San Anselmo., J BACKGROUND:, The attached letter has been received from Diana Bauer who lives at 5270 San Anselmo, and has experienced a leach field failure which', must be rectified. The Bauer property is outside the urban Service' Line and is designated on the General Plan as Suburban Residential and zoned for RS Suburban Residential (2 1/2 to 10 acre minimum lot size) , The Urban Services Line runs down the middle of San Anselmo and sewer service is available to the property. -Howevert the General Plan precludes extension of urban services beyond the Urban Service Line without an amendment to' the 'General Plan., In the case of the Bauers t . h�.s would require the relocation o both the r � h urban Service Line and designation to a different residential land use` appropriate to receiving sewer service, i.e. , high, low, or medium density single family. (The property across the street . is generally planned for High Density Single Family and zoned 'for.LSF- X, 1/2 acre minimum lot size) . The proposed General 'Plan' Update.. which is under review by the Planning Commission, proposes extending the Urban Services Line along San Anselmo to include the frontage presently unserved. Itis `problematic as to what length of time it will take to consider this recommendation and possibly resolve the Bauer Is problem through the course, of the 'overalL update. Related to the cost implications to the Bauers is the, fact that'the Sanitation Code, under Section 7-3.003, requires that buildings connect to the,public sewer within 24 months after the public sewer is' available to them. In this instance- the sewer would become` available were the General Plan Urban Service Line boundary, changed. The Sanitation Code enables the granting. 'of variances as to hook-up time. This situation parallels that of Mr. and Mrs. Don ;Kline who own the parcel next door (5300 San Anselmo) . :In February of 1990, the Council authorized an emergency hook-up of that address'.to resolveR their ;identical. situation. (See attached 2/13/90 Council minutes excerpt.) ACTION REOUE$TED: Adopt Draft Resolution 100-9authorizing aut orizing an emergency sewer hook- ' • . up at 5270 San Anselmo1 and aut'rorize`' the manager to enter into they, attached agreement for said sewer service, SLD:ps Attachments: October Z, 1991 Letter Location -Map Draft Resolution Draft Agreement cc: Diana, Saner r m i iRESOLUTION NO. 100-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL. PERMITTING TEMPORARY SEWER HOOK-UP TO 5270 SAN ANSELMO ROAD WHEREAS, Donald and Diana Bauer, residing at 5270 San Anselmo, have experienced a septic leach field failure on their property resulting in a health hazard; and WHEREAS, said property is located in the Suburban Residential (RS) land use designation in the General Plan and is adjoining--but is beyond--the Urban Services Line; and WHEREAS, the Draft General Plan Update is recommending that the frontage properties on both sides of San Anselmo be included within said Urban Services area; and WHEREAS, processing of either an independent General Plan Amendment or awaiting the results of said General Plan recommenda- tion could not be done in a timely way with respect to the failed system on the Bauer property; and • WHEREAS, the City Council does not wish to see the Bauers incur the costs for a new septic system given the strong likeli- hood that they will be subsequently forced to connect to the sewer system should the General Plan recommendation cited above be enabled; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City Council agrees to permit the Bauers, at their expense, to have a temporary sewer hook-up to 5270 San Anselmo; 2. Establishment of said temporary hook-up into a permanent ser- vice shall be contingent on amendment of the General Plan enabling this action; 3. Said temporary service shall be contingent on the Bauers agreeing, in writing, to immediately disconnect said service and repair said septic system and hold the City harmless should the contemplated General Plan Amendment not be approved. In such event, City shall refund sewer annexation fees and other charges, less administrative costs for providing such service. On motion by , seconded by , the foregoing resolution is hereby approved • on the following roll call vote: RESOLUTION NO. 100-91 Page Two • AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By• ALDEN F, SHIERS, Mayor ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: HENRY ENGEN, Director Community Development • City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Av .. Atascadero . CA 93422 Attn : City Council Members Re: Emergency Sewer Hookup at 5270 San Anselmo This letter is reauestina we be out on the consent calendar of October 8 . 1991 . We need an emergency resolution to allow us to hookup to the city sewer systems . Donald and Diana Bauer of 5270 San Anselmo Road are reauestina this as our septic system has failed on this oronerty and iz� resultina in a health hazard. Our oronerty is adioinina but beyond the Urban Services Line - however . there it a tub into our Pronerty . Our septic tank was numoed on .July 30 . and .gain on Vrotomber 2. 6 . and we were none from September 1 to September 24 . It costs us • $ 105. 00 each time it is pumped. Inaram & Greene Sar, i t of ion Company did the inspection and pumoina and said we nerd a new system as the fiald is olunaed and the tank walls arc had . When the Urban Services Line is moved by adoption of the New General Plan we undoubtedly will be required to hoplun to the city sewer system and any monies spent to put in a new septic system will be money wasted. We are asking that we be allowed an agreement with the City of Atascadero . the same as Don & Joyce Kline at 5300 Son Ans9tmo under Resolution number 17-90 , a copy of which is attached. We also ask that the City of Atascadero accent the sinnature of Diana Bauer only as my husband is employed in Saudi Arabia at this time and to require his signature would hold up issuing a permit and the installation work . Respectfully submitted , Diana Bauer enc: • r , Its oil T If v Op AL Ir Ir I •ori AGREEMENT REGARDING RESOLUTION 100-91 This Agreement is entered into this day of 1991, by and between the City of Atascadero, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Diana Bauer, hereinafter referred to as "Bauer" and made with reference to Resolution No. 100-91. RECITALS WHEREAS, Bauer who resides at 5270 San Anselmo, Atascadero, California has a septic leach field failure on their property resulting in a health hazard; and WHEREAS, said property is located in the Suburban Residential land use designation in the General Plan and is adjoining but beyond the Urban Services Line; and WHEREAS, City has recommended, pursuant to Resolution No.,_ 100-91, that Bauer be permitted to have a temporary sewer hook-up to 5270 San Anselmo to avoid unnecessary costs of making their septic system operable since Bauer desires to hook up to the sewer in the near future. IT IS HEREBY AGREED: 1. That the City does hereby grant to Bauer the right to establish a temporary hook-up of their property at 5270 San Anselmo, Atascadero, California to the City' s sewer system at the sole expense of Bauer. 2. In the event that the City establishes a permanent sewer service for the frontage properties on both sides of San Anselmo within said Urban Services area pursuant to a General Plan Update, the Bauer hookup shall become a per- manent service to the system. 3. During said temporary service hookup, the City does hereby waive the requirement of Bauer to fill, cover up, or in any way eliminate the septic system on the Bauer property until the permanent service is approved. 4. In the event that the contemplated General Plan Amendment is not approved, Bauer agrees to immediately disconnect the sewer service and to repair their septic system to make it operable, and does hereby release the City from any liability with regard to the failure to approve the General Plan Amendment. In such event, the City shall refund to Bauer the sewer annexation fee and other charges less the administrative costs of providing such service. • 5. This Agreement shall bind the parties hereto, their heirs, administrators, successors and assigns. RESOLUTION NO. 100-91 Page Three 6. The invalidity of any provision of this Agreement as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction shall in no way affect the validity of any other provision hereof. 7. This Agreement contains all agreements of the parties with respect to any matter herein. No prior agreement or understanding pertaining to any such matter shall be effective. This Agreement may be modified in writing only signed by the parties in interest at the time of the modification. DATED: BY: DIANA BAUER CITY OF ATASCADERO DATED: BY: • - �.r 4. LETTER FROM DON KLINE REQUESTING EMERGENCY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - Staff request direction Henry Engen gave staff report requesting the Council give direction to respond and gave a number of alternatives . He stated that since the agenda had been circulated , he had come up with one other alternative. Mr . Engen presented draft Resolution No . 17-90 and described it as the most expeditious. Mr . Engen explained that the resolution would ( 1 ) enable the Kline ' s to , at their expense, have a temporary sewer hook-up at 5300 San Anselmo , (2) establish the temporary hook-up to permanent service contingent upon amendment to the General Plan enabling the action and 3) establish that such temporary service be contingent upon the Kline ' s agreement in writing- to immediately disconnect said service and repair said septic system, and hold the City harmless should the contemplated General Plan Amendment not be approved ( in such event , the City would refund the sewer annexation fees and charges appropriate) . ® Brief council comments followed . Mayor Dexter recognized the need for an emergency action. The City Attorney stated that he i had approved the resolution for content earlier in the day. Public Comment : Don Kline, 5300 San Anselmo , thanked the Community Development Director for his efforts and asked the Council for direction in establishing an agreement with the City to revamp the system if the General Plan Amendment did not go through. Mr . Engen suggested that Mr . Kline have his attorney draft an agreement including his proposal for review by the City Attorney. Mr . Kline agreed to his recommendation. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey and seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to approve Resolution 17-90 permitting temporary sewer hook-up to 5300 San Anselmo ; passed unanimously by roll call vote. rNDIV-LDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1 . City Council : A. Committee Reoorts: _ City/School Committee - Mayor Dexter reported that the • CC2/13/90 Page 12 r RxPQM To CITY COUNCIL enaa Item: D-3 CITT OF ATBSCAB=* Al A Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager V I Meet ng :Date: 10/8f91 From: MarkJoseph, Administrative Services Director St =: status of Outside Personnel services Contract with Becker & Bell xcnli01fs Staff is seeking Council direction on the status of the Contract with Becker & bell for Tabor negotiating and other professional personnel services. BOUIiD: The contract with Becker and Sell has been `in effect since March, 1982. In 1989 the contract was .modified 'to allow an ._ hourly rate of $75,00, :for personnel-related services outside the scope of the original contract (e.g , representing the City in, personnel action appeals) . Excepting this adjustment, the cost has been a monthly retainer of '$900.00 plus expecses. With the adoption of multi-year agreements for all units (except Mid Management, which is handled informally) and the fact that no formal negotiations are anticipated until spring, 1993, it is timely to reconsider the status of the contract. ]l1�LYSIB 4 . There are- at least three reasons for terminating our . agreement with Becker & Bell, none- of which should be considered as a lack of confidence in"the firm's qualifications or performadce. The three reasons are set forth below: 1. PeriodicallX going oMt to 'bid for 'profession servicoj i- g9A business'. After almost ten years, it may be worthrhilo to "test the waters". No may not find better rates, but; it may be beneficial to consider, other firms' approaches. t 2. s aff has begun to rely mgrs upon the City Atto , for personnel services. This is particularly the case with discipl-inary, matters. 3, C nsider ble cost savings are available. Insofar as we 'Will .. not. be utilizing labor negotiation services for over 12-14 months, savings of up to $12,000 are possible. in contrast tothese issues, there are certain -advantages to retaining the same firm, for example, stability, 'quicker' responae ' time (in the eventnegotiations are unexpectedly reopened) and the likelihood of higher costs in the long run (the basic retainer has never been raised and provides for-unlimited negotiating time) a:beckerbell I - I REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: D-4 THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtq. Date: 10/8/91 VIA: Henry Engen, Community Development Director FROM: Steven L. DeCamp, City Planner 13 SUBJECT: Downtown Street Identification Signs and Support Poles DIRECTION REQUESTED: 1. Consideration of the Interim Downtown Sign Committee recommendation to purchase and install traditionally designed street identificatiort`signs and poles in the downtown. 2. Calendar endorsement of the design of additional street furniture and street improvements for the downtown. BACKGROUND: A meeting of the Interim Downtown Sign g Committee occurred on Monday, September; 30, 1991, for the purposes of reviewing' the design and cost estimate of downtown street identification signs and support poles. The Committee also reviewed and supported the selection of additional street furniture and a street improvement design for the downtown. ANALYSIS: The downtown street identification signs are composed of a new free-standing:pole, attached new street identification sign blades and existing traffic control signs The post and blades have a 1920's ` appearance and have been designed and chosen to be compatible with the downtown street lights. A conceptual design of the new street identification sign blade and the existing sign blade are shown on Attachment A. The custom sign design is double sided and; will be painted a non-reflective dark green and ivory to match the established theme of the .Downtown :Sign Program. The proposed support pole (see Attachment B) was chosen due to the round base, fluted accents and three inch support pole which will be compatible with the existing street lights. The pole will be painted black to match the period color and existing lamps. The • custom street identification signs will be secured to the pole with special bolts to-prevent vandalism. If the Council accepts the proposed sign design the signs may be ei her purchased separately or in quantity. The attached downtown w specifies the proposedintersections where the sign ,would be apropriate. The following cost estimate of the street identification signs has been prepared for your considerations Prototype Pole . . . . . 298.28 Sign Blade . . 325.00 108 Contingency . _ 60.00 Total Cost . . . ' . . $683.28 for one sign Street Identification Sign Program Poles (21) `. . . . . . 51170.20 (246.20 ea. ) Sign Blades ,(42) , . . 41473.00 (106.50 ea. ) 10% Contingency . . . . 950.00 Total Cost . . . . . . $10,593.20 for 21 signs As an option to receive the substantial cost savings of buying the signs in quantity, at least 12 poles and 25 signs must be purchased at one time (Total Cost $6,166.90 for 12 signs) . - Installation and miscellaneous materials can be provided by the City's street, crew at $100.00 per sign and fitted into their normal work schedule. In addition to the existing street lights and proposed street identification signs there are a number of supplemental 1920`s period street furniture elements which can be considered. The attached Downtown Street Furniture drawing represents- a family of possible elements (existing street light, - proposed street- identification sign and pole, safety bollard, trash receptacle, and wrought iron/wood bench) that can compliment the downtown image. Although the Downtown Master Plan does refer to providing street improvements within the downtown such as special paving and a landscaped median along El Camino Real, it does not provide specific designs nor an implementation schedule. The Community Development and Public Works Departments have been coordinating the feasibility and design of completing a pedestrianorientedstreet improvement plan for the intersection of Palma and Entrada Avenues. With the proposed street furniture and street improvements completed and installed, this central downtown intersection would achieve a complete image of what the downtown character may be in the future. Attachments: A Proposed Street Identification Sign Blade B - Street Furniture C - Downtown Sign _Location Map ST-ID.2/rbm I - �,`•i.+ -�,y` y..,r� -f-�'"�..,��j �'� E rT°•+•f� F.; � � f c � � E ,i-T'_s 1�.�� �"•S.mL' J"-.r+Sf` ,.•v ''rr' ,Jc � L�� � t. jf h-.�r �S �iw' '� 1 ,''► �'s.4 � �1�,"''P C� `4 r ' . .i. sY' •1 R? f..r7 :i,.; � •' rf r_rf'�% •'�; �.w7�• �� �' t i�.r"�.-� � •��� 3E` i.S3 }L1�x}�s ;�4 - ��l �{ *� ��f r,- � +� � � �,�t. l'� .• ..r K-r'..--'�r� � 1 F„_ �h�: �, �,.et�7C.� r• +n�^'wrta'+ k'. 's- h..�{• i»� CITY OF ATA :.,ADERO ATTACHMENT B COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED STREET FURNITURE DEPART-M=VT EXISTING ST. LIGHT, SO A POLE, BOLLARD, TRASH & BEIM I I I lil i II II II PI lil i II I1 1 II I i 1 I- II I 11 IIS rII I(I u I ;. ED 1 � v �I. o . e I i CI 1 j 01 =�_TASCADE ATTACHMENT C COM1�1U�;= DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN SIGN EOCATION MA D E ':'1�1ENT 1 t � � 1 ..1 i. Downtown Boundary P Ma - LEGEND �s Downtown Boundary 0 STREET IDENTIFICATION SIGN LOCATION • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-5 - Through Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/8/91 From: Alicia ,Lara, Personnel Coordinator' SUBJECT: Adoption of Ordinance No. 231, authorizing an amendment to the contract between the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City of Ataseadero.- RECOM1ENDATION: Adopt Ordinance No. 231 on second reading by title only. BACKGROUND: On September 10, 1991, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced subject and approved Ordinance No. 231 on first reading. AL:cw Attachments Ordinance No. 231, with Exhibit - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 231 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AUTHORISING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1 That an amendment to the Contract between the City Council of the City of Atascadero and the Board of Administration California Public Employees, Retirement System is hereby authorized. A co of said amendment is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A", and by such reference made a part hereof. .. Section 2. Authority The Mayor of the City of Atascadero is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City of Atascadero. Section 3. Publication The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the : Government Code; shall certify the ` adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting tobe entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4. Effective Date This ordinance shall go into effect in full force at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage'. On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Council- person , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Ordinance No. 231 Page 2 ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTEST: By. ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney A� Ordinance No. 231 Exhibit "A" 400 Page 1 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT W ��/ BETWEEN THE al BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION s/Ci OF THE y '� PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL O,S, OF THE l� CITY OF ATASCADERO The Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective April 19, 1980, and witnessed March 19, 1980, and as amended effective July 1, 1980, April 30, 1983, January 7, 1984 and July 14, 1990, which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective July 14, 1990, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 13 inclusive: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 60 for local miscellaneous members and age 50 for local safety members. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after April 19, 1980 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); C. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 4. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: i NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS i Ordinance No. 231 PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ON11r Paageb2t .. A.. - 5. This contract shall be a continuation of the benefits of the contract of the Atascadero Fire Protection District, hereinafter referred to as "Former Agency", pursuant to Section 20567.2 of the Government Code, Former Agency having ceased to exist and having been required by law to be succeeded by Public Agency on July 1, 1980. Public Agency, by this contract, assumes the accumulated contributions and assets derived therefrom and liability for prior and current service under Former Agency's contract with respect to the Former Agency's employees. Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1988. a. Service performed for the former agency prior to July 1, 1980 shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the former agency's contract as it was in effect at that time. Service performed after July 1, 1980 shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this contract. For purposes of computing retirement allowances, separate calculations shall be made for service performed under each contract. 6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21251.13 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full). 7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21252.01 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 50 Full). 8. Public Agency elected to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Sections 21380-21387 (1959 Survivor Benefits) including Section 21382.2 (Increased 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local safety members only. b. Sections 21263, 21263.1 and 21263.3 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance)for local miscellaneous members only. 9. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20759, shall not be considered an "employer" for purposes of the Public Employees' Retirement Law. Contributions of the Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20759, and such contributions hereafter made shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20759. 10. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 11. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. Ordinance No. 2..3.- Exhibit 3:Exhibit "A" Page 3 b. A reasonable amount, as fixed b the Boardpayable in y , one.installment as t occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employee of Public Agency, and cost 6f Ithe periodic investigation and valuations required bylaw. 12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment l by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 13. Contributions required of Public Agency and its.employees shall be paid by Public Agency g y to the Retirement System within:fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If'more or less than the correct amount of contributions,is paid for any period, proper,adjustment shall be made in connection-with subsequent'remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions t'equired of any mployee may be.m de by direct payments between the employee and the Board. r b. B. This amendment shall be. eff 'ive on the day of BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION ��~ CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' FSn, NTS-YSTEM OF THE �.� CITY OF ATASCADERO BY BY CHIEF, CO SERVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer PUBLIC E11 * YEES- RETIREMEN SYSTEM v Q Vie' Fitness Date^ Nor 0 Attestt`� Clerk PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT) (Rev. 3/91) I .r; � � im� , • 9:• 6 i 3��. il.. r 6 . . • _ � rad®� '� ♦ -- � ,1�1 ��,, � -,. . 1�' - -- � -� .� ``�. .,� ���7► '�i► �� �,,► t.� �► .,.. ®�► ® �. r - ,� r � � ,� „�, ®� �`,�,�tt! t► jai Vit! nista, :°;'��`�,, r ® � �"�,. �py� err`' �" � `'1�► � .. �._...__ ���� __ �.--_ _,.,,,,,,,n ��.,��-��,,,,�®�� �■® X11� �/,���' __�._�____ _..,,,� ---.� ��s��� . � �►~ --_ ® � ' - �: ��, �_ e���; ��/�y��� 1 t tr® ! � ' ...�.. � r �� _ ` ®,` �, i ® ��� tom.. ii �_.. - _ '�1� � r----Y. �� � �: '� -� r �� z '- I �� �� '. � - r ,� ' ASSESSOR' S MAP LOCATION #7 M � CITY OF ATASCADERO i2 Oa s•�" 6 ,.. yrs r» 3 r 4 6f ^� y;w 3SA -a1,zv 3.cv s pyo 4 r,rit �L 9 A y 7 f 7D N Ts a n 3 $ �{. w ® 1.13 %2 !0 9 8 � gs4'Sa� a Usw••r � C � 1 C1 r ti 13 u OM O v /77 w µ 1p4 s a :a-aa ' a. 163 1 AM 33� : M.Y7-8 3 y41 a 4 r. �Q Oc Hk. !oa/� l o9rr LMAC 29 PN 5-38 � 3d Ar rise.n ✓s r ovs! toS JAC 1rma r3O) 31 � 63 . aro Of S 3 n w Q 47 JfY q.y u•'q. ��Q. ' t 1.Y,AC A +, ' IVA (OL, SSI ar5 � s s-Ay' 3�sS > ? ' a: HIG " �Fn a s .! jVWAY (1Olj .`,mrxf iF I .... _, .2f EL CAM1N0 REAL. AC.3A, 21 CITY OF ATASCAaE�a P921A Assessor's flap 81%.49—Pg ' Cour of<Son Lai$ Obispo,CalaAif. SK 29 116 ;-�� ,ASSESSOR'S MAP . '"+......�, l OCAT I ON: #16 S; s ,70 i 2�a ss. 3aoq�, 8K.29 c �Ja 27 - F R. 4 3 ifs a . +50 2 J; ..��` ter•. R O r 1, �+ P �.t !V CA �r6. � � t dp � ..r M 1 40d.td fp / (,Q�`' �6 ,lf,� ; t+ �'� ���7y.' ,/ �� f f `Z/•]I'f_' V�_ r 91 •� 97 � � �' �/ mss' f � ,,• / / 0 le.AIN 190er 650i3 Y .pow Ru 9=2f � 5 a !8. 6.11 AC. 1 3 g3 rlov THIS ARIA 'S'es Ilk: 2 - ' 1.06Kt ss t.2f 4C • 's" . � t,33AG r► tr.� �•? 06. N"� tror' or ` ✓ rLai �Rw M1Ag BK.34 ° z ( / l • Sl T A AS • �� � � caaERa COLONY �. SAN Curs OBISPO COUNTY CALJmut t August 28, 1991 RE ;3 Henry Engen HenryEnggn„ Director ' Community Development Department 6.500 Palma Avenue r Atascadero CA934e22 - Dear M'r: Engen I am writing as -a member 'o.f the Church that owns r at. 3505-35'75 E1 a mi o 'Re ,propertyC n 1; A. , a k A lot- 2029 -�lock "19 Ata�cadeo Colony A.P.N. 49-'163-33` and�.Y strongly urge- the city plannors , to ,take a closer Kook at this property in, regards -to, the -zoning. You .:Vili find that this parcel is, in an area where most -of the lots are already much smaller than. .: the present t zonirig `calls,, for, that the present zoning hinders proper deveicspment, ,thus reducing needed tax revenue to the city plus the fact that although this parcel has� been annexed "to'the sewer at the expense of former owners.,; the ; y present, zoning, �still prohibits the owners fr4pmLshar_ing equal ' ownership rights as enjoyed by ,neighboring and adjacent property owners. My opinion for more adequate go-ning: A. Commerciale 300'-500' deep (Higher density S.E.R. balance) . -a B." Higher density for 'S.F.R ( 1/2 ac-re),", Sincerely} NOTE TO .PLANNIING COMMISSJON: IDENTICAL LETTERS RECEIVED SROM/ BILL STACY; C.OD;Y, 3025 ' VINE ST. PASO ROBLES . , r CORRESPOWV$SCE [Tho/ iiccompanying letters ,were submitted is support of specific reque�ats for Laud Us'e changes after,the Auqust 20 1991, Planning Cos9 .asion i Enclocur®e:. County's Dept: - of General .Services< - Sept. - 3, :1991 (Area #3b) Jame Uarlene:. �+tatson - Sept. 51 r 1991 Nicholas & Judith Vtauto - Sept'. 9'1*i 1991' (tea,'#20) . kichaell.She r, - Sept. 6i ,1991 (next to, 14b) < Myron-\'S. Hapala ,=9, 19�i Atascad4ro,$drool District = Sept. 111,- 1.99,1 (Area 24} STAFF REPORT CITY OF ATASCADERO For: PlanningCommission Mtg. Date:. 10./29/91. By: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director File No: GP Update ' SUBJECT: Consideration of General Plan Update Draft of proposed Land Use, ' Conservation and Open Space Elements and Draft Environmental Impact Report (continued from August 20th and September 17th, 1991 meetings) . ' RECOMMENDATION: Following completion of public testimony', recommend the attached draft resolution with such amendments to the text and map as the Commission may direct. BACKGROUND: On September 17, 1991, the Planning Commission continued the public • hearing on the General Plan Update Draft and its accompanying EIR to October 29, 1991 . Additional time was needed to allow the environmental consultants to respond to the Department of Fish and Game response to the EIR and also to provide time to consider additional requests for refinements to the Land Use Map that came up at the hearing. EIR: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS: Following the September 17, 1991 meeting, staff incorporated Crawford, Multari and Starr' s (CMS) proposed mitigation measures ' 15, 16, and 17 into the proposed text of the General Plan on Page II-37 9. Mitigation Monitoring. These are attached as added items o, p, and q. Subsequently, we have received the attached ' response to the comments of the Department of Fish and Game from the city' s consultants and additional mitigation monitoring measures and proposed refinements to the Plan text should be considered for inclusion to the EIR and General Plan text. UNRESOLVED MAP CHANGE REQUESTS ' The following summary list reflects land use change issues not specifically decided upon by the Commission. The Commission may wish to recommend additional Land Use Plan Map changes to be ' incorporated in the attached draft resolution, Attachment A. Absent such action, the Land Use Plan Map would remain as originally recommended for these areas: 1 (A) Location #15. San Anselmo/MontereY Road. Kuden. This is the parcel adjacent to AM/PM heretofore recommended for Low Density Single Family Residential. Staff' s Suggestion: The Commission may want to recommend retaining Tourist Commercial on the San Anselmo frontage and Low Density Single Family on the Monterey Road frontage across from existing single family homes. (B) Location #16. San Anselmo/San Palo Road. Kundert/Summers. There has been considerable discussion on this proposal relative to reverting the current commercial designation to Low Density Single Family. Staff's Suggestion: Retain the Kundert property as Tourist Commercial and leave the Summers property as Low Density Single Family. (C) Location 417c. E1 Camino Real/San Jacinto. Mary -Jazwiecki. This property is presently Retail Commercial on the General Plan and the draft plan proposes it for Neighborhood Commercial. The Jazwieckis have been preparing plans for a proposed commercial center at this location. Staff' s Suggestion: ' In view of the investment of time in the development plan that . allows for more than Neighborhood Commercial use, revert to the current plan designation of Retail Commercial. (D) Location #20. Atascadero Avenue/Marchant. Watson/Petition. The petitioners are requesting an increase in density allowed from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family to allow for half acre lots. (E) Location #21&#29. Santa Rosa Road/Frontage Road. Chamberlain/Baldwin. These two parties are also requesting Moderate Density Single Family be changed to a High Density ' Single Family designation to allow for half acre lots. This proposal raises questions of treating two lots as "spots (F) Location #22, #23, & #24. Atascadero Avenue (between San t Gabriel and San Rafael. Hazard/Tomassacci, Erbstoesser, and Hartman. These requests all seek changes from Suburban Residential to ' Moderate Density Single Family Residential and expansion of the Urban Service Line. A case can be made for the Tomassacci request to bring the corner of Atascadero and San Gabriel, , into the same land use category as the other three corners. (G) ---------------2325-2355 E1 Camino Real. Culbertson. This request is for consideration for commercial and multi- ' family land use -from the current Suburban Residential. The General Plan Subcommittee rejected this approach to this area. -10 4 (H) -------------- -8760 Curbaril. Sherer. As reported at the last meeting, this is a request to not revert back to Moderate Density Single Family use from the present designation of Low Density Multi-Family. ------------- (I) Wranglerette Arena. Aragon & Tampico. Mel Smith. . Concern was expressed that the Wranglerette Arena was not being shown as Recreational on the General Plan. Currently ` the General Plan designation is Suburban Single Family; however, zoning on the property is LS (Special Recreation) . Hence, whether the Plan designation is changed to Recreation or left as is would not eliminate the zoning recognition of ' the horse arena use. (J) ---------------3125-27 Ramona Road. LeGras. ' This is a recent request to change the parcel from Suburban Residential to High Density Single Family. This would be "spot" planning; morever, the area is well beyond the Urban Service Line a prerequisite for such a density. (K) City-Wide. An Update to the General Plan, May, 1991, General Plan Subcommittee - Atascadero 2000. This document was provided to the Planning Commission at the September 17th hearing. Without getting into a point-by-point analysis of its suggestions, staff would note that the broad ' thrust of the document runs counter to the direction derived from the community forums and provided by the City Council and Planning Commission to the General Plan Subcommittee. The ' proposals include significant expansion of the Urban Service Area, creation of a major technology park area along the Northeast Quadrant, and increasing residential densities, including 10,000 square foot lots. Except for evaluation of ' the alternative of expansion of the Urban Service Line to cover the Northeast Quadrant by Crawford, Multari, and Starr, the predictably significant environmental effects of these proposals have not been evaluated. ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE: This attachment to the staff report includes letters received after the September 17th hearing.- Two of the letters pertain to unresolved Map Change Request sites. The third contests the proposed change from Multiple Family to Suburban Single Family in the Carrizo Road area. DRAFT RESOLUTION No. -91: Followingthe September p to tuber 17th hearing, .the draft. resolution has been amended pursuant to the Planning Commission' s direction. These ' amendments include: deletion of the minimum 5, 000 square foot lot size requirement for planned developments; changes to the fire service standard from a 5 minute response time to travel time; amendment of mitigation monitoring measure 9 to reflect the EIR' s language speaking of the water source; addition of mitigation monitoring measures o, p, and q, and modification to the Land Use Plan Map to show an adjusted Urban Service Line along San Anselmo. Following public hearings staff will incorporate whatever addi- tional changes the Planning Commission may wish to recommend to the City Council, including possible additional mitigation monitoring measures and General Plan text changes suggested by CMS responding to the Department of Fish and Game. HE:ps Enclosures Crawford, Multari & Starr Communication Re: Fish and Game Department Response t Unresolved Map Change Requests Additional Correspondence Draft Resolution No. -91 Adopting General Plan Update (and certifying EIR as adequate) cc: Crawford, Multari. & Starr (c:\wp51\gp1029.sr) Crawford Multari & Starr October 15, 1991 ' Henry Engen,en, AICP Community Development Director ' City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Henry, ' Enclosed please find our draft response to the Department of Fish and Game's comments on the Draft EIR. I discussed the general approach and content of the response with Karen Wordcheste r of Fish and Game before completing the draft; I then sent her a copy to review. At this point, t we haven't heard from her, and apparently she will be out of the office until the end of next week (the week of October 21st). That means we may not have much time to incorporate any additional comments prior to the Planning Commission meeting on October 29th. I have included the entire revised WildlifeNe etation section of the Draft EIR,along with Appendix • E which has been expanded based on the findings of the wildlife biologist. I wasn't sure whether ' you would want to send along the entire section to the PC, or just the highlights. We hope everything is well with you and your family. If you have any questions, please call Sincerely, David Voran NOTE TO PLANNING COMMISSION: NEW MATERIAL BEGINS WITH ' RESPONSE 09 ' RECEIVE OCT 1 0 1991 /07 City of Atascadero General plan Draft E/R (Insert as Appendix 1) ' Responses to Comments on Draft EIR 1. Joan O'Keefe (letter) The DEIR evaluates and quantifies the cumulative air quality impacts which are likely to result from continued development of the City in accordance with the Draft Land Use Element and concludes that they will likely be significant even after mitigation measures are implemented. Project-specific impacts relating to localized air quality impacts,tree removal, and grading issues from the Highway 41 extension are more appropriately addressed at the project level environmental analysis currently being prepared by ' Caltrans. This analysis is expected to be completed in 1992 and should assess specific impacts and should include alternatives, including alternate routes and the "no-project" alternative. 2. Ray Windsor, City of Atascadero Text on pages 41, 42 and 45 has been corrected. 3. Eric Greening (comments at public hearing) ' Map of 30% slopes has been amended to show areas identified. With regard to transit serviceAhe text has been amended to say " both kinds of transit"service (express and ' non-express) should be provided to satisfy commuter demand." 4. Kenneth Waage (comments at public hearing) Mitigation measure No. 15 has been added which says, The Circulation Element update should address the need for and location of appropriate 'safe school routes' to encourage alternatives to the automobile as the primary mode for transporting children to and from ' school" The City Council has adopted a policy(Resolution No.59-89)which regulates the removal ' of trees within road rights-of-way, and discourages the removal of significant trees when feasible alternatives are available. This ordinance is incorporated by reference into the DES as mitigation, (Refer to comments under Hannauer, below.) 5. Don Hannauer (letter) ' • The DES acknowledges the fiscal problems facing the City, and recommends a number ' / ,. cam City of Atascadero GeneralP ian Draft E/R i of alternatives the City may consider to helpa for needed infrastructure and pay s services in the future. The DEIR also recommends that the ability of the City to fund the necessary improvements and services be closely monitored. Of particular concern is that new development does not out-pace the City's ability to provide the needed infrastructure and services (See Mitigation Measures 2 through 8). The DEIR, based on the analyses contained in the Fiscal Analysis and Economic Base Analysis of the City(prepared by ERA, Inc.), concludes that lands currently designated for commercial and industrial uses is sufficient to accommodate the types of businesses that ' are most suited to the work force and support businesses in Atascadero and that continued development of these"lands will improve the job/housing ratio.- This land has historically been underutilized, meaning that the supply of such land has exceeded the demand. Therefore, increasing the amount of land designated for commercial and industrial uses will not automatically result in more commercial and/or industrial development or an increase in job generation. Since ample commercial and industrial land is available, the DEIR concludes that what may be needed is a more aggressive effort to attract businesses with employment and fiscalcharacteristics that match the needs of Atascadero. for example, among the recommendations in the Fiscal Analysis ' is that areas especially suitable to the most favorable commercial enterprises be reserved. Expansion of the City to acquire "more suitable" industrial land, or land for large-scale '• retail, may be beneficial from a jobs/housing and fiscal standpoint; however other impacts relating to the rural character of the City are less clear. 6. Caltrans (letter) a 'The DEIR concludes that the overall traffic system in the City operates at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS "C" or above) and that peak hour volumes vary with location. Since traffic counts are not available to quantify the existing Levels of Service, this conclusion is based on general observations of peak-.hour traffic volumes and comments from City staff. The absence of more specific data in ' conjunction with the observations of local residents suggest that there may be intersections and/or interchanges that experience peak-hour traffic volumes that approach an unacceptable Level of Service(LOS "D"or below). The update of the Circulation Element, which is expected to begin in the Fall of 1991, will include a comprehensive analysis of the City's streets, intersections and interchanges that will include the collection of traffic counts from key intersections to determine the ' actual operating volumes and recommend improvements in addition to those outlined in the DEIR and in the five year Capital Improvements Plan. The mitigation measures recommended in the DEIR are expected to be sufficient to ' accommodate buildout of the City in accordance with the Draft Land Use Element so long as funding for the recommended improvements is maintained. (See discussion on Fiscal Impacts.) ' b. Page 52 of the DEIR text has been corrected to identify Route 41 west of Highway 101 as an undivided arterial. City of Alascadero General plan , Draft EIR C. Noted. "d. The map of the City road system has been amended to identify major roads in the northwest quadrant of the City. ' e. Park and Ride lots are recommended as traffic and air quality mitigations. The additional information is noted. , f. Mitigation measure No. 16 has been added to include project-specific trip reduction measures including reducing parking spaces, providing transit stops/tumouts, ' providing bike lockers and showers, preferential carpool parking, on-site child care facilities, and others. g. See comments under Hannauer,above. Also, the DEIR references both the Long Range Fiscal Analysis and the Economic Base Analysis prepared by ERA, Inc. Both point out that land availability has not been the constraint on development of ' job-generating land uses. Thus, redesignating additional land for non-residential purposes will not likely improve the jobs/housing balance. Other measures for attracting these land uses are critical in this case and are discussed in the Fiscal ' Analysis and referenced in the DEIR. 7. Air Pollution Control District letter a. The concrete batch plant is currently operating under a valid permit issued by the Air Pollution Control District and must meet the requirements of the District's Rules , and Regulations as well as the requirements of State and Federal clean air laws. Changing the land use designation on this land from industrial to residential does not in itself increase the health risk associated with this source of air pollution. The increase in health risk would occur with the future development of residences in accordance with this change in land use. Therefore, to mitigate the potential incompatibility of land uses resulting from this change in land use, Mitigation ' Measure No. 17 is added which says "The development of residences in the area proposed for residential land use east of Traffic Way shall be prohibited until the concrete batch plant is removed, or until the potential air quality impacts on surrounding properties can be mitigated to an acceptable level." b. (See comments under Hannauer, above.) Making more land available for ' commercial and industrial land uses does not in itself increase commercial and industrial development. This is based on two recently completed reports: The Long Range Fiscal Analysis and the Economic Base Analysis prepared by ERA, Inc. The DEIR concludes that there is sufficient land available in the City to ' improve the jobs/housing ratio. Therefore,the notion of improving the jobs/housing ratio was not dismissed in the DEIR but was discussed in some detail in the Air Quality section and in the Alternatives section. The DEIR states that an, ' appropriate mitigation would,be to develop strategies to attract commercial and , industrial development to the City that will provide jobs and/or the desired goods- 1 I I� City of Atascadero General plan Draft EJR and services residents must travel elsewhere to get. In addition, policies in the Draft LUE slightly reduce the housing development potential in the City, thus helping to improve the jobs/housing ratio. The reference to the basici City form in the DER acknowledges the fact that. Atascadero is a largely residential community with a large percentage of its area devoted to single family residences on large lots. This pattern was established several decades ago, and in fact much of the new development is infill of the existing pattern. The DER notes that to change this pattern to create a more ' "compact" city where significant changes in the use of the automobile are likely to occur, would require in turn a significant increase in density, reduction of much of the large dots and large increases, in population. based on the General Plan update process, including public input and discussions with City staff, appointed officials and elected representatives, major changes to the well established, large lot residential patterns or significant increases in the projected population are not feasible. C. Mixed-use development has been included as a mitigation measure in theAirQuality section. ' d. The totalm a ount of land designated for high density residential use is but oneof many factors affecting the affordability of housing in the City. While the reduction of multi-family development potential could have an adverse impact over the life of the Draft Plan, other factors, including programs contained in the adopted Housing Element, are expected to offset this impact. State law requires that the 1 City adopt policies in the Housing Element that facilitate the construction of housing that is affordable to all income groups. These policies are incorporated by reference into the DER as mitigation. e. Mixed-use development has been included as a mitigation measure. ' f. (No response necessary.) g. Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) related mitigation measures have been included in the DEIR. The City may wish to consider prohibiting backyard burning (or apply better enforcement of current regulations) as a means of further reducing PM,o emissions. ' h. The physical setting description for air quality has been amended to clarify the role of transported pollutants in the air quality of Atascadero. L The discussion relating to PM,o has been expanded based on the data supplied' by the APCD. Mitigation measures contained in the DER that reduce vehicle trips will also help reduce particulate emissions. ' j. (Noted. City of Atascadero General plan Draft E/R k. The definition of "Secondary Impacts"acts has been changed to reflect the comments relating to "primary" and "secondary" air quality impacts. I. The cumulative impacts section has been amended to reference the correct table. ' The discussion of the contribution of neighboring cities to the air quality in Atascadero has been expanded to address the comments relating to emissions transport. 8. John W. McNeil , (Refer to comments under O'Keefe, above.) The DEIR points out that local air quality is a function of the type, quantity and location of emissions, the physical setting and the weather and climate of an area. Maximum ozone concentrations measured throughout the County over the past several years are ' a function of these factors near the monitoring stations used by the APCD and the State to measure ozone. Therefore, localized peak concentrations will vary from place to place and from year to year. , An explanation of the increase in ozone concentrations during the past two years would be attributed to any one or a combination of a variety of factors ranging from those discussed above relating to the physical setting,weather and pollutant sources,to greater than average sunlight and higher daytime temperatures during the winter months as a result of the drought, to stronger than average;temperature inversions during the period. The contribution of SO2 emissions from the San Ardo oil fields to the air quality in Atascadero was not evaluated for two reasons. First, the APCD states that insufficient data exist to determine the extent to which transported emissions contribute to adverse ' air quality in Atascadero. Secondly, the APCD indicates the County is an "attainment" area for sulphur dioxide. The DEIR evaluates the most feasible water source for the City and omits a discussion of sources that are speculative, including Naciemento pipeline, Jack Creek and State water. Each of these alternatives, if considered by the City,will require individual project- specific roject specific environmental analysis to.address the individual and cumulative impacts. The DEIR does include a mitigation, as noted in the letter, which would prohibit development prior to the availability of an identified, reliable water service. , • City of Atascadero General plan Draft E/R 9. California Department of Fish and Game Tetter in response to concerns raised by the Department of Fish and Game, a certified wildlife biologist (Miachael Hanson, PhD.) was retained to provide a more in-depth analysis of rare and endangered animal species, and species designated by the State of California to be Species of Special Concern. This discussion is summarized in Section 4.9 and Appendix E. Additional policies are recommended as mitigation measures 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 as follows: 18. Areas with the potential to support rare, endangered or threatened species, or "Species of Special Concern" should be identified through the City's creek mapping program. 19. All new development in areas where rare endangered or threatened specie s or Species of Special Concern may be present shall prepare a site-specific investigation to determine the presence of such species and to recommend appropriate mitigation measures on a site-specific basis. 20. The habitat requirements of rare, endangered, or threatened species and Species of Special Concern shall be incorporated into the City ofAtascadero environmental review guidelines and made a part of the initial environmental study checklist. 21. Open Space Policy (a.) shall be reworded as follows: Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands and other areas of significant habitat value shall be protected from destruction,overuse, and misuse by the use of zoning, tax incentives, easements, or fee acquisition. 22. The City shall work with the State Department of Fish and Game, the County and other interested agencies,organizations and parties to implement comprehensive creek protection policy and management plan. Such a plan may include the following elements: The identification of areas along creeks to be regulated by the Plan. • Implementation mechanisms, such as minimum setbacks for new development. • The identification of activities that arerohibited in creek areas which may P , y include grading, tree/vegetation removal,culverting,and other activities that ' promote erosion, sedimentation and the degradation of water quality. • The identification of specific criteria for: -- optimum stream channel configuration and capacity - habitat restoration access/trail locations Ci of At City ascadero General plan Draft EIR -- new development 23. Open Space policy Number(i), shall be reworded as follows: 1 Creek reserves shall be preserved for park and recreational use, with appropriate areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment and habitat purposes. Any recreational use of the creeks shall minimize its impact on the habitat value and open space qualities of the creeks In addition, the setting section of Section 4.9 includes a discussion of ongoing efforts by the City to preserve habitat of greatest value within the City, and most notably, within creek corridors. , I JA _ ' 4.9 WildlifeNegetation ' Seftinci The City's location among rolling hills at the southern end of the Salinas Valley provides ' the environment for a diverse animal and plant community. The large rural parcels within the City (generally 0.5 to 10 acres) include significant tree coven and are cut by many streams, providing excellent habitat for a wide variety of mammals, birds, reptiles, and aquatic animals. An inventory of species which may be found in the City is contained in Appendix E. A plant survey prepared for San Luis Obispo County Hoover, 1970 identifies the Ci in P tY ( ) City a middle-Sonoran vegetation zone with significant wooded hillsides. The predominant tree species are oak trees primarily represented by the live oak, the valley or white oak and the blue oak. The scrub oak and the digger pine form the major part of the chaparral community found on the more exposed, southern-facing slopes. The vegetation communities along the stream courses include those species requiring P q 9 consistent underground water or seasonal water sources to sustain them through the and ' summer months. These communities are evidenced by sycamore,willow and cottonwood trees. A listing of the plants found in the Atascadero region is found in Appendix F. Orchards planted with the establishment of the Colony in the middle 1910's are also found in various sizes, conditions and locales throughout the City. A search of the National Diversity Data Base identified one plant as a candidate for"rare" status located east of the City Urban Reserve Line generally east of the Salinas River in Rocky Canyon. The Chorizan rectispina (One-awned Spineflower) was found in the granite/sand habitat of the canyon in 1960. Because of its limited occurrence and ' distribution and small numbers in California, the plant is identified as a candidate species. However, no similar habitat or conditions are likely to be found within the present Urban Reserve Line based on review of aerial photographs and information discussed in the ground water section of this EIR (regarding the Rinconada fault location and existing geology east of the Salinas River). The National Diversity Data Base should not be considered a definitive assessment of the potential presence of all rare, endangered or threatened plant and animal species in an area. There are several herptiles, birds and mammals that may be present at certain times of the year in the City of Atascadero and its vicinity that have been designated as "Species of Special Concern", a designation applied by the State of California to species whose breeding populations may face local, regional or state-wide extinction. Appendix E contains a discussion of these species prepared by a certified wildlife biologist which includes a description of their habitat requirements. Almost all of the species identified as Species of Special Concern are associated with creeks, riparian corridors and/or wetland habitats. Therefore, policies and programs that protect the creeks and associated habitat will be beneficial to the protectionof these` species. The City, in recognition of the importance of the creeks as a habitat resource and as an amenityfor the residents ' of the City, has undertaken a comprehensive creek corridor mapping program with the goal of identifying appropriate land use and design standards to protect the creeks and surrounding habitat. This work is expected to , establish setbacks from the creeks for new development as well as tree removal guidelines and other regulations. Impacts Buildout of the Draft LUE will continue the conversion of undeveloped land, reducing the quantity and quality of wildlife and vegetation habitats within the City Urban Reserve Line to some extent. These effects will be more noticeable in the urban areas along EI Camino Real and the fringe areas adjacent to these higher density development areas. Maintaining large lot, lower residential density development farther from the center of City , will not significantly alter or adversely impact the plant and animal communities present now,provided site design accommodates appropriate open space for habitat maintenance and preservation. Continued infill within the City limits will not significantly alter habitat values in the area. Habitat for common animals is best protected at the regional level through the , preservation of larger tracts of open land, with limited human disruption, outside urban reserve lines in the more rural parts of the County. Continued development within the recognized urban boundaries may help relieve development pressures in more rural lands , where lower densities should be maintained. However, even within the City limits, wildlife habitat exists which can be protected by careful development review. Open or under-developed lands should be fully evaluated as to their resource value. Stream corridors in particular are important habitat areas, even in developed areas. Potentially significant effects may occur where development in, or adjacent to, streams or wetlands destroys riparian vegetation, increases erosion or pollution, or reduces access to the water. The potential loss of habitat for "Species of Special"Concern" or other species considered to be "rare", "endangered" or "threatened" could occur with development along creeks and other areas of significant wildlife value. Mitigation The Draft L ' UE includes the following policies especially relevant to protection of plant and animal habitat: Open Space Policies a. ... sensitive lands shall be protected..: b. Public and private development in close proximity to or over such lands ' shall be carefully evaluated to protect ...- creek reservations and wooded areas ... c. open space easements and dedications shall be obtained through the subdivision and environmental review processes [for] creek reservations, wooded areas ... [and] sensitive areas. lL 1 d. The City shall carefully evaluate uate both public and private protects to encourage the preservation of trees, watersheds [and] natural slopes. f. minimum disruption of native vegetation and watersheds [shall be required] by thoughtful placement of building sites g. Tree covered hills shall be preserved ... h. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected. ; i Creek reserves shall be preserved ... with_appropriate areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment and habitat purposes. ' k. The waterwaysin the e City shall be maintained in a natural state.... ' 1. Building setbacks shall be established by implementing zoning along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek and the Salinas River to insure uninterruptednatural flow of the streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem. M. Land disturbance shall be minimized in proximity to water courses. Conservation Policies I. Adopt a comprehensive tree ordinance ... 1 The General Plan also includes variousImplementation Programs, several of which are relevant to habitat protection. Among these is a policy to direct urban and suburban uses within the urban reserve line and encouraging open space protection beyond. This type of growth management is critical to the long term vitality of significant wildlife habitat in the region. The following policies are recommended to strengthen protection of creek habitat and areas where rare, endangered or threatened plant and animal species and Species of Special Concern may be present: 18. Areas with the potential to support rare, endangered or threatened species, or "Species of Special Concern" should be identified through the City's creek mapping program. 19. All new development in areas where rare, endangered or threatened species or Species of Special Concern may be present shall prepare a site-specific investigation to determine the presence of such species and to recommend appropriate mitigation measures on a site-specific basis. • 20. The habitat requirements of rare, endangered,or threatened species and Species of Special Concern shall be incorporated into the City of Atascadero environmental review guidelines and made apart of the initial environmental study checklist. , 21. Open Space Policy (a.) shall be reworded as follows: Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands and other areas of significant habitat value shall be protected from destruction, overuse, and ' misuse by the use of zoning, tax incentives,"easements, or fee acquisition. 22. The City shall work with the State Department of Fish and Game, the County and other interested agencies,organizations and parties to implement a comprehensive creek protection policy and management plan. Such a plan may include the following elements: The identification of areas along creeks to be regulated by the Plan. • Implementation mechanisms, such as minimum setbacks for new , development. • The identification of activities that are prohibited in creek areas, which may include grading, tree%vegetation removal,culverting,and other activities that Promote erosion, sedimentation and the degradation of water quality. • The identification of specific criteria for.- optimum oroptimum stream channel configuration and capacity -- habitat restoration ' = accessArail locations -- new development 23. Open Space policy Number(i), shall be reworded as follows: Creek reserves shall be preserved for park and recreational use, with appropriate , areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment and habitat purposes. Any recreational use of the creeks shall minimize its impact on the habitat value and open space dualities of the creeks. t Appendix E tSpecies of Special Concern Several species have been designated by the State of California as"Species of Special Concern" ' because their breeding populations may face local,;regional or state-wide extinction. These are species whose numbers or breeding status may not warrant designation as "rare", "threatened or "endangered" by federal and state criteria, but because of declining numbers or'possible ' threats, the species bear careful monitoring to be prevented from slipping into a more critical designation. Species of Special Concern are divided into three categories based on the degree of risk to the breeding population. Highest Priority (HP) species "... face immediate extirpation of their entire California breeding populations if current trends continue...". Second Priority(SP)species"... are definitely on the decline in alarge portion of their range in California, but their populations are still sufficiently substantial that danger is not immediate..." Third Priority (TP) species "... are not in any present danger of extirpation and their populations within most of their range do not appear ' to be declining seriously; however, simply by virtue of their small populations within California, they are vulnerable to extirpation should a threat materialize. (Source: Remsen, J.V., Jr. 1978, Bird Species of Special Concern in California: An Annotated List of Declining or Vulnerable Bird Species, California Department of Fish and Game). The following matrix summarizes the status, habitat requirements, and likelihood of occurrence in Atascadero of Species of Special Concern (and others). J 119 1 c a o aw o � � d r 3 YC R" CL m C C R! H d > c r O L C m �0 7 io m r 0 d = m m CL:53 E � w °' O S CC p m E c. M � C 0 FL a ig we C O00- c N s >, O y m 0 tp m v ` R{ f`0 V Vl E b l3 y C8 m E mm C m L O m O Y 3 aQ U m 3 t` o.c ti 3 Ev � of � s Ot x t0 a„ CO N >. Q? V m � N ... R c is � 0 N O � r C is V C V W N M t0 _ E t0 O _d, cd i0 O i0 V m. m m !0 N m $ m m N 0 0 0 o c� m m mco o v a _m ' m c > g � U U 8 P g E aCD ca U- 78 �� cn E u - a o m E c 78 ~ Em mCL m ' 3 a. m O c Rxccm CL ESE co EcoE = $ $ >, � � co 0 i ►°— r u. 8 E 8 l� r m m 0 °' z2 3 O O O) V1 .� ca ca m � U (D ° y .:'gi p N. m .. m c6 - L cc m C cc U C C ca «.. m cC J 'D m O m m. c0 cc a 0 'L" C' pmt 5`«. 3 ° c L C m y m Cc j �. 'D cc O - p> p) py C m C tell '�O N 3 tN 10 -2 E `" cn s 'C—> � O aic�c =° mcmi 2aEmyo �+ m � mm N > 0 C. mr» tC yO ca p OflC O N m > ca E m� mmd. 0 O y d ; C jm3 'p m p 1102 O)r C V m Y 41 gqUS CD E CD " — cn cc p C m R Y C .m 'O E m S ` N U tL!`l Q� ° �. 5 . 7 s -asCD U N - fC m C -_ 1Q $ x >, m x Gf O ca ym cC 8 iC D O 0 m '2 'Coo' Q° C ° m V w � w L 3 w .�. 0 LL 3 a lL 'm0 O) `O cis Im m C7 'mC O in .N y Q. m O) (� t p L d 'G O p v � _ 3 m m V U U U m m V,. CC QC C I m o ° ° O o o �c O o m � 2 m � m � m � m m a m m m ° o 8 .o .o -�, .o .a .o .o m �-, .o CO d Cl) d cn d a•� O.'c a'c CL*c L a CL*c cn a chi CL cn a u1 a cn a Cl) cn a 1 Co to Gf -� cCy V ca g .� t m U m i7 p v m p QNc cp cp U Q Y Q —IC Q x 3 m c� _ � (n mg o _ m Q m m m ._° `� � � co m msm32 ° ZC/1 Q7CL o c U) J cism Jl V y t U @1 C O W m 2 o c m o -� ism CEO TRc m 3 0 ; � ca o :3 (DluE v_ m � C� aN m� 7 E s p c m -sa, m e C 10 N gNlU moc >G ' �o � .= yax2a mr ' _U ooa3 •yym r E m c o m N t d m eD U o m ,Q c c U Cc c , cc g 8.S o C .� .L O C N .0 m .r N C G f/1 C m 1p C m _ l0 y .O C 0 o � 'C i f4 m > � C y w CM m m t={ 7 •C fJ1 p utni m 7 m " rA y •C CU po C y cti c6 3 Rf tE O. 7 �,.m «. m 7 p c > p 0OQ �ct{{G�� OoO CL 'C a a J cu L J 'a. Q � .�.. � � ZAL C ¢ 5 72 0 Do t U p p Qj _D) , N. (� 8 8 8 8 8 08 RI Ri !0 i0 ca w rQ. m c4 6 6 O O O O p p V p N m m m >, m a m a+ m m R _m >, c vac ac c ac a'c Q.'c m Q.isa cna � a c� a 0) CL U) CL ma LL U) CL R Ccc y Q r C Q m 1 m ca 'p C CD o m 3 R!tz Q- 3 � m � � 3 C 3 � } a Q c� t°- � U, � lie UNRESOLVED MAP CHANGE REQUESTS ENCLOSURES: PLAN MAP: (A) , (B) s (C) , (G) AND (J) PLAN MAP: (D) r (E) r (F) c (H) AND (I) (A) Location #15: San Anselmo Rd./Monterey Rd. Wheeler (KUDEN) (B) Location #16: San Anselmo Rd./San Palo Rundert/Summers (C) Location #17c. E1 Camino Real San Jacinto - / Jazweicki 1 (D) Location #20: Atascadero/Marchant Watson/Petition (E) - Locations #21 & #29 Santa Rosa Rd./Frontage Rd.- " Chamberlin/Baldwin (F) Locations #22, #23 & #24: Atascadero Ave. (Between San Gabriel and San Rafael) - Hazard/Tomassacci Erbstoesser & Hartman (G) New Request: E1 Camino Real - Robert Culbertson (H) New Request Curbaril Michael Sherer (I) New Request: Wranglerette Arena/Aragon & Tampico t Mel Simon (J) New Request: Ramona -- Mary LeGras 1 �oil 7 An- 06 pt 113 21tsi t � r _ d. UNRESOLVED� ESOLVED MAP CHANGE ��, .... .. CITY OF AATASCADERO REQUESTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (D), (E), (F), (H) AND C j ,. DEPARTMENT FAM 1 L; • (NEW) WRANGLERETTE 'ARENA f ARAGON t TAMPICO SIMON ^r ��• �0 s two*r r r• RECREATION \t (H) (NEW) CURBARIL—SHERER �`• '< ) >, `,�?` �� •• INC •. '• � , `� HICH VJ .•�� � DENSITY MULTI ti x (E) 021 & #129) SANTA ROSA/°i''' (D)' (#120) ATAS.'IMARCHANT .._FRONTAGE RD.—CHAMSERLIN/ s .BALDWIN � WATSON/PETITION K (F) (#22, #23. # 24) .;�� •i ; , �; J tATAS CADERO AVE.-HAZARD,TOM— ASSACCI,ERBSTOESSER;HARTMAN ' ^%�1 ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATIONS: e (A) WHEELER (KUDEN) �• ^,• ��, S ` CB) KUNDERT/SUMMERS Va l+ l =� jf • _ I Y r -� 1 LZ .► N • -- PCs1 °'• ow jvj .4.90 rN� ► ,�� 4 .. �.•« ��pp •s N Ar pp f jam .i ! n s v br +r Jun r7 Q • W> fi.©tsr / fp �� O rte•'/ • ool -• O mow.. Q Z cw dW Off a j�``��;`.a;'h o• oa op of ASSESSOR' S MAP lie J 1�1 • W tv ,y E � •''o wy C LOCATION (C) VERH'F-CKIE/ EYEN r A 14k till 41 �p co L= v6 � n p Q ai �• ��`t to �'o.D � r :0,h•'' � �i Z W � .n N � r ain ( 0� o 93% C� (c) t sieve (101 AMH a-16) 1d38 ' 0N1WVJ .. 13 ..<. w _':t':L��V i', � •�: �`11'wviw A..�. :�./ _ i' :.._.�It�r4 i...�n Tr��wr-'7'•R:�L7 � .+n"�.�� "- ,1. l ASSESOR'S MAP LOCATION (0) WATSON/PETITION -►/J7 M e LA y, w f ► �• A�r'i'.w::w Y i ti y v t E6 �1 b •., ♦a 4'1. " q • t ' ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATION: • (E) CHAMBERLIN/BALDWIN / PTAI r yr ATASCADF • ..,:. j U. S. HIGHWAY Y REQ JAN 17290 t NOh?AGS e,t•741 7� t ry r•«�♦ tJ1.so ip 9AO ` 720 % 1w Za-1 j v �flttrls tfr a wa:•�•u'+� .iso) �a,.a '� • Tjp lw{ (eA L .� I w z 'f4'•!•,ylIcaHta w �OSJO t . .S•to.if �E—.�SSE3JOJ1'? aL?CX ! we.a �f ts� 0 2Q wr NtltleER3 lilOirN IN C.RCLJ • ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATIONS : CF) HAZARD TOMASSAC _ - / ERBSTOESSER, HART& 3� r�' err ,��• Q t :. ufZARD 10 70 Woe Q a 1o3A � ��p�ra � ��gvvj► O 017, Alb lot wo • Asa �p7. , � < • • l •� a rte'. -} � �" � �� ti r „or► ( wo ►s ..r arm•••f"' �A� -ice .'�, 1 t t•� a� • 34.10Ira � L " cars FR. 34 9 ap�'1 • � �: , ER 135T0E H,4RTMAN . •a.w ATASC. • SAN ` i ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATION: (G) CULBERTSON 4?tom"ti; , .n }.a �►',--• -, S.Oj.iC 1 Z"y 4p y PAS i Ad a , 13 i i i ► w 14 1 r 2 lit 1,Ds L r NO ,. 24 - % 2Dcr . .c ayr GH Wq Y .3 dahl A6k z � i 232s :~ Pfn. Afascadercr► Colony, R.M. 8k.Ac. 2) •h 19l Ptn. Afas�cade= Colony, R.M. 6k.AC 3, Pg. - �-s•so 131 y ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATION: 1 gze C} a mj o (H) SHERER O � CC z 4 m sz•a� O " `J t y,9.N O " to d y f y a � - •��'' ��� � sem. Q1 �� ^ � � r�•Jar 9-� � h��A s "'' ` Q (,� Q J A r1 Fe'i ((J o sh ca CL N O CC a� F Q o. FA ,O U, \ v S ,�q. _ co 00 � •J1 :`.•��c? � ate/ o .�J� 0.•, 3 � � W Q LJ� V . c Q J i� \ 8r8 Q s Q 0 ui /ooh N . .n7f ;•r6/ w yy 4 J O O O ph y ` T y� 1•p� .� , ` us CC . yWuj y ASSESSOR 'S MAP LOCATION: 16DER0 3s 1 (I) SIMON . • � 55 i .✓� - .. _ `�� RIVER CFS) r=R. 9 a��� : o ` c ' 4D01 � cc\ s - 42 �.z S 3 .� • r 29 �, I j 3C 3 33 3 r i 29 .•. - . . _ pD ARAGON �.t y� ROAD 2� 1-a 23 22 21 20 Ig •;' ' ROA . O 16) j; til 19� ZrC 18s L3 rei, ;80 18. 71, :, AURORA--- - _ ROAD- .. CITY OF ATASCAOERO Assessor's Map 8k. 28, Pg. 40 ` (141 1 t County of Son Luis Obispo, Calif. ASSESSOR'S MAP LOCATION : P TN. Cl'- _Tr>:.�..�..► � (J) LE GRAS EL CAMINO REAL AC3-/94 R.74 /t •2 i PPA 47--T6 2ND y ��3c ��!d 33� �� 3'•�0o r�„��;" .:x J�` w�'�y:irs r :�1,,.4. ., 4 3' 0 3 e 351 .t1 PTI.10 = P?N. 1 202AC. 13 18 0 ,z 2.1 4.81AQ �•a3 222 AG. 19 U. S. HWY. 101 , tSi R.S. 34-99 err osu 50 • r9E PFV. ITa :, .tT 1.43 4( 14 � O• w `o M >07 i ;3100 3m y.0 3►e0 W410 aWO ROA 0 me O O zt00 aei 14.i 1 Z 21• PN•;A;90 av 3,4 �'tOGwO a. x a moo J3 C0 f�94C g 4 1.05.3E ti ti = u 17CFR � `� 190 12 j3 t16AC, FR 18 4 13 1r'Ll � * 212 17 . 19C . R 63a Is �41 )007 C. AC38 Pg. County •of C, R. M. Bk. A C 3, Pg. 19A. (� 24. r r • r r ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE r r r Ron & LaVer ne Brunner (9/30/91) re: 8760 Curbaril (refer to Plan Map Site (H) issue: Sherer) ' Brent N. Bibick (9/30/91) re: 2205 E1 Camino Real (refer to Plan Map Site (G) ; Culbertson) rGiuseppe Lala (10/1/91) re: 5310 Carrizo (protests proposed change from High Density Multi-Family to Suburban Single Family) r r r r r 1 file: 51\1029updt.gp r r 1 r PC 8/20/9.1 ITEM: A. 1 PAGE 1 ' • MINUTES ATAS R CADS O PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Tuesday, August 20, 1991 7:30 p.m. , Atascadero Administration Building ' The regular meeting of the Atascadero Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Luna followed by the- Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL ' Present: Commissioners Waage, Johnson, Kudlac, Highland, Hanauer, Lochridge, and Chairperson Luna Absent: None Staff Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director; ..Pat Shepphard, Administrative Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Commission ' meeting of July 16, 1991 2. Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of August 6, 1991 It was noted that Item A-2 was not ready for consideration. ' MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, , seconded by Commissioner Johnson and carried 7:0 to approve Item A-1 of the Consent Calendar. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS ' 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT: Consideration of General Plan Update Draft of proposed Land Use, Conservation, and Open Space Elements and Draft Environmental Impact Report. Chairperson Luna noted that this meeting will be the first in ' a series of public hearings on three of the seven mandatory elements of the City' s General Plan (Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Elements) . In addition, the draft EIR will be reviewed; as well as proposed refinements to the General Plan draft; General Plan Land Use change requests; and proposed f� / PC 8/20/91 , PAGE 2 basic community goals refinements suggested by the Atascadero • Economic Roundtable. Chairperson Luna emphasized that it is, important that speakers , be specific and speak directly to the issues being considered. Henry Engen, Community Development Director, then presented ' the staff report providing an overview to the General Plan Update which has been a five year process. It was noted that two discretionary elements, the Parks and Recreation Element ' and the Downtown Master Plan Element have been adopted during the past year. Mr. Engen pointed out that for the first time, an implementa- tion section is provided which outlines policies relative to growth management, zoning consistency, subdivision consis- tency, appearance review, environmental review, capital ' . improvement programming, a specific plan target area and redevelopment. Mr. Engen then reviewed those land use change requests that i were and were not considered by the General Plan subcommittee and identified those which had been recommended for change. Mr. Engen introduced Paul Crawford with Crawford, Multari and ' Starr, authors of the EIR, who then proceeded to describe the CEQA mandates involving the EIR public review and comment ' process in conjunction with the General Plan update. Mr.' Crawford pointed out that the purpose of comments for the EIR is not to argue the merits of the project, and that as consultants, he is not in a position to provide advice to the , city on whether particular proposed changes are good or bad ideas. Mr. Crawford then introduced David Moran, Associate As ' with CMS, who emphasized that this hearing will not be the last or only opportunity that people will have to comment on the EIR' s , adequacy; written comments may be submitted through September 9th. With regardto the EIR' s findings, Mr. Moran pointed out that ' potential adverse impact areas (or categories) that could result from implementation of the draft Land Use, Conserva- tion, and Open Space Elements include: circulation, impacts on , public services, fiscal impacts, groundwater impacts, just to name a few. The EIR also discusses mitigation measures which are being recommended to be incorporated into the language of , the draft Land Use and Conservation Elements to mitigate those impacts. Mr. Moran further stated that of the 9 significant impact , areas, 2 were determined to be unavoidable adverse impacts and these deal with air quality and impacts to the public school system. , ' PC 8/20/91 20 1 ' PAGE 3 • Mr. Engen added that there are several policies derived ' p from the EIR that are proposed to be incorporated into the Land Use Element text which relate to mitigation monitoring for all effects of growth. Mr. Engen further stated that the impacts ' identified in the report are proposed to be addressed through the years by the mitigation measures summarized on pages 109 through 113. ' - Public Testimony - David Cole, 8790 Old Santa Rosa Road, stated his opposition to ' general plan request #29 (land use change from residential to tourist commercial at Santa Rosa, Old Santa Rosa, and West Front Street) . He presented a petition (Attachment A) signed ' by area property owners contesting the request, and showed a map of a 1 1/2 block area which noting that there are approxi- mately 40 children living in this neighborhood. One of the major concerns is that Old Santa Rosa Road is a thoroughfare for Santa Rosa Elementary as well as San Gabriel Elementary. Mr. Cole expressed concern that tourist commercial development ' would impact the traffic problems even more so, thereby jeopardizing children' s safety as they walk to school. The crime rate in the area will escalate as well. Mr. Cole spoke '• on current construction projects being built adjacent to the neighborhood (gas station, mini-mart, etc. ) , and presented an article from the Wall Street Journal (Attachment B) which notes that Motel 6 was sixth in the nation for crime ' statistics on budget motels. Mr. Cole then submitted two additional letters from neighbors opposing the request (Attachments C and D) . ' Solange Ballew, 8820 Old Santa Rosa Road, stated she has had first hand experience with problems involving vandalism, vagabonds, trash, traffic, etc. , as she works at the Shell gas station (on West Front) . She added that there are many other areas in the city that could accommodate tourist commercial development, but it is unwelcome in this area. Bill Wallace, 8780 Old Santa Rosa Road, noted his objection to request #29, and added that this proposed land use change is ' contrary to policies referenced in the Economic Roundtable' s 7/31/91 memo relative to preserving the rural atmosphere, residential neighborhoods, providing "elbow room", etc. If a land use change occurs with subsequent development, it would ' drastically change the neighborhood' s character and not leave much elbow room at all. Mr. Wallace also pointed out that there are 19 oak trees on the subject property which provide ' a buffer from Santa Rosa Road. Alan Pepe, 9480 Atascadero Avenue, stated he is a new resident ' in Atascadero, and pleaded with the Commission not to approve this request. He related experiences he had while living in PC 8/20/91 ' PAGE 4 a Pasadena neighborhood wherein a commercial development was , built, and the neighborhood fell victim to crime incidents, • continual trash, kidnapping, etc. ' Dennis Schmidt, 8675 Santa Rosa Road, referenced a letter he submitted opposing the change. He noted that the families in the neighborhood are trying to attain a family atmosphere, and ' this change would change this type of atmosphere. Ann Wilson, 8537 Santa Rosa Road, expressed concern with ' traffic and crime that accompanies a change of zoning and development of this type, which would result in an adverse effect on the neighborhood in general. Mrs. Wilson added that as more commercial tourist projects are built in the southern end of the city, it will detract from the goals the downtown area is trying to achieve. Bill Simons, 8673 Santa Rosa Road, referenced the Santa Rosa , Road freeway overpass noting the numerous accidents which occur with the several blind spots on the bridge. Santa Rosa , Road does not need any more traffic than it already has. Mr. Simons also expressed concern with children' s safety in riding bikes and walking along Santa Rosa Rooad. Donna Wallace, 8780 Old Santa Rosa Road, presented a board ' with pictures that depict the Santa Rosa/Old Santa Rosa neighborhood, noting that this is a tree-lined street no more , than a half block long. She urged the Commission members to visit the neighborhood and added that if development were to occur, the street would basically be divided in half. Mrs. Wallace referenced a letter written by Don Messer regarding ' the proposed change in which he stated that he could build something compatible in the neighborhood. Mrs. Wallace expressed her feeling that the only other compatible land use ' change would be either public or recreation. Ed Ybarra, 8760 Old Santa Rosa Road, stated his opposition to ' the request, adding that the school children' s safety will be jeopardized by the increased traffic. Amelia Ybarra, 8760 Old Santa Rosa Road, commented on her , objection to the land use change noting that the rural atmosphere of Atascadero needs to be protected and preserved. Robbie Fauts, 8820 Old Santa Rosa Road, commented that Mr. , Messer does not care about how developments will affect the neighborhood. ' Margaret Baldwin stated she owns property directly accross from the subject site adding that she could not see how commercial development would benefit the neighborhood. t Alison Hansen, 8674 Santa Rosa Road, and board member for the Santa Rosa PTA, indicated she was very opposed to the proposed , 4,39 PC 8/20/91 PAGE 5 ' land use change and is concerned for the children walking to • and from school as well as the neighborhood children as the ' street is already overburdened. Mrs. Hansen also expressed concern about the possibility of stranger abductions. Heather Higby, 8850 Old Santa Rosa Road, expressed her ' objection to the proposed land use change. Greg Larsen, 8613 Santa Rosa Road, voiced his feelings about the traffic problem and children' s safety on Santa Rosa Road. IIII_, Any type of commercial development on that property would greatly increase the traffic problem between the freeway and Morro Road. ' Patty Soto, 8669 Santa Rosa, noted her main concern with the children' s safety in walking, biking along Santa Rosa Road. Children living on the south end of El Camino Real will have to walk across Santa Rosa to get to either San Gabriel or Santa Rosa Elementary schools. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, expressed sympathy with the neighborhood' s concerns adding that the existing widwalk is a pedestrian killer. He remarked that it is necssary to cross the street twice in the vicinity of the freeway onramps and offramps, which in his opinion, is horrifying. '• Mr. Greening commented that the EIR is generally a useful document, but pointed out that with regard to areas with slopes over 30%, Pine Mountain has been completely left out. ' Another area he felt was omitted includes the Random Oaks area adjacent to E1 Camino Real and the river. Mr. Greening expressed his feelings that Pine Mountain is ' simply not suitable for development as it is an important viewshed for the city and is extremely steep. In addressing the desireability of nodes instead of a strip, ' Mr. Greening felt this sort of change would warrant a corresponding change in transportation policies. He urged ' that monies be found to make E1 Camino Real more amenable to -through traffic. He suggested that the city consider some type of trolley system with stops at one-half mile intervals. ' In addressing the problem of school sites as potential air pollution collecting sites, and with lack of school bus transportation, Mr. Greening suggested the possibility for the city and school district to enter into some kind of cooperative agreement which would allow Dial-A-Ride to run fixed routes that would be accessible to both students and ' other riders. • With regard to drainage, Mr. Greening proposed that drainage areas utilize a type of permeable surface (such as that used ' around oak trees at the Food-4-Less shopping center) . AA 14-o PC / /9 8 20 1 ' PAGE 6 In commenting on the problem of affordable housing and how , this need can be met without expanding the areas of dense, • multi-family projects, Mr. Greening voiced his opinion that a , fresh look needs to be taken on this issue along with the need to look at impacts of increasing density in neighborhoods. With regard to soil stability, Mr. Greening referenced a ' recent lot split approval on the east side of Pine Mountain noting that future residences may be in a potential landslide area. He cautioned that greater care needs to be taken in the ' future on placing homes in areas where expansive problems can arise. In addressing the EIR' s recommendation relative to bus ' express service, Mr. Greening suggested that the word "express" be deleted since it appears that the greatest demand is for service that makes all stops. He felt that until there is a greater frequency of service on a line, each route should make all stops along the line. Margaret Baldwin, 8150 Santa Rosa Road, noted she owns ' property across the street from request #29. She spoke in support of her request (8690/8710 Old Santa Rosa Road - #21 for high density * single family) adding that prior to city incorporation, the county had approved a lot split for the property, but the split was never completed. Mrs. Baldwin • noted that her property is the only large parcel existing in ' this area, and asked for approval of the request. Joan O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, presented a written ' statement (Attachment E) regarding the air quality and impacts that the proposed highway 41 realignment may have. These were not addressed when proposed mitigation recommendations were made. , Marj Mackey, Tunitas resident, agrees with almost everything she read in EIR noting the document is a good one. With ' regard to pages 52 and 53 (Circulation Element), she suggested that this phrase be removed from the General Plan: "All roads should be developed to their full dedicated width. " It was ' her opinion that complying with the above statement would result in the death of many trees, mostly oaks. Mrs. Mackey suggested rewording to read: "Roads should be developed to their full dedicated width where practical and necessary given ' the topography and other physical conditions of the roadway. " She noted concurrence with road extension improvements proposed on page 55. ' Eric Michielssen, 5300 Aguila, stated that he is speaking as a citizen and also as president of Atascadero 2000, and added ' that the organization has been working for about one year on their version of the General Plan update which he said will be . submitted prior to the next meeting. He noted that the EIR /¢/ ' PC 8/20/91 PAGE 7 and draft Land Use Element are both well written, and he would • agree personally with many recommendations. ' Mr. Michielssen stated that the basic scope of the Land Use Element is restrictive in nature in that it does not ' adequately address the lack of a good job/housing balance or the lack of affordable housing in Atascadero. Mr. Michielssen commented that instead of reducing industrial- ly zoned land as suggested in the LUE, the opportunities for this type of development should be increased. He disputed the report' s indication that the city has not been successful in ' attracting new job creations. He discussed areas that would be better suited for industrial uses and spoke about the possibility of a technology park that could be developed adjacent to the proposed auto mall/ry park. Mr. Michielssen noted his objection to the recommendation to downzone RMF/16 property north of Carrizo and east of E1 ' Camino Real stating this would be a tremendous mistake which could severely affect the opportunities for affordable housing. ' In concluding his comments, Mr. Michielssen reiterated it is important to create a more favorable job/housing balance along • with providing more affordable housing in the city. ' O.W. Smith, 11705 Atascadero Avenue, voiced strong objection to a land use change in the Hendrix property adding that the requested change would adversely impact the area and reduce the opportunities for others to buy affordable homes in this area. The property would be better suited for a school or a use that would benefit the community. He stated that it seems ' every time there is a new Council, the city gets a new General Plan. Chairperson Luna pointed out that the General Plan State law mandates that it be updated every 10 years and the Housing Element every 5 years. ' Ron Ayers, 5915 Encino, requested a land use change from Suburban Residential to High Density Single Family (5+ acres on San Anselmo Road - #10) . He noted that the land is ' currently a nonconforming lot at this time and discussed proposed development plans for a cul-de-sac type subdivision which Mr. Ayers felt would be an appropriate use and location ' for this type of neighborhood. Darlene Watson, 8400 Atascadero Avenue, spoke about Item #20 (5 families through petition) who have been caught through the general incorporation and General Plan whereas their property is now one acre minimum lot size; however, the surrounding properties are one-half acre. She urged the Commission to ' include Item #20 for one-half acre zoning. l�? PC 8/20 /91 ' PAGE 8 Robert Smith, 5150 Fresno, spokesman for Pentecostal Church of ' God, stated the church owns property on E1 Camino Real (Item • #7 ) and added that the property was annexed to sewer years ' ago; however, it seems to have been omitted from the Urban Services District. He noted that a majority of properties in the area are considerably smaller (less than one acre) . Mr. , Smith noted that he would be in favor any zoning besides Suburban Single Family as they are precluded from doing anything with the property. Richard Summers, 7536 Morro Road, spoke in support of Mr. Ayers ' request for high density on the 5 acre parcel on San Anselmo since he has been involved with this property for 18 ' years and has seen it in a situation where it was unable to be developed. He added that he is supportive of high density development because it would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. ' Mr. Summers stated that he was surprised to hear that another property which he owns has been requested to be changed from ' Commercial Tourist to Suburban Residential (#16 6005 San Palo) . He noted he was not interested in any land use change for that property. , End of Public Testimony - Chairperson Luna called a recess at 9:05 p.m. ; meeting • reconvened at 9:20 p.m. ' Chairperson Luna commented that the land use change request , that got most of the attention was #29, and affirmed staff ' s recommendation that no change be made. With regard to Pine Mountain, Mr. Engen replied that no , changes have been recommended; the LUE treats it the same as the Parks and Recreation Element. In response to question concerning the Hendrix property, Mr. ' Engen noted that the scale of the project has been outlined as a specific plan area which will need an EIR and detailed ' proposals. However, this area may give an indication to underlying owners that maybe a different density is appropri- ate. In response to question by Commissioner Waage concerning the ' way the sewer runs through the middle of San Anselmo, Mr. Engen explained how the edge of the USL gets into septic ' zoning which is 2 1/2 to 10 acre minimum lot size. By moving the USL, something other than Suburban Residential (2 1/2 acres) is invited for consideration. This particular case , involves the USL being proposed to define where that septic service starts at the rear of lots facing San Anselmo - thus allowing lots on both sides of San Anselmo to receive sewer service. ' PC 8/20/91 ' PAGE 9 • Discussion followed concerning the different densities being requested in this general area (from Low Density to Moderate ' Density to High Density) . Mr. Engen advised that the Planning Commission could require further analysis of that particular request ( #10) . Chairperson Luna noted that if the USL is extended so that that area can have sewer but leave the density as low density ' single family, how will that affect the properties? Mr. Engen explained that the way the line is described in both the existing and proposed General Plan is that line is the break point between Suburban Residential and urban residential. He ' added that there would only be a few parcels at the most that could be created with one acre zoning. The Commission' s consensus was to favor staff' s recommendation. ' With regard to #3 (request by Gordon Davis) , Mr. Engen noted that this request was not reviewed by the General Plan subcommittee, but the scale is such that it should come in as ' an application with a development plan. It was the Commission' s consensus to go with staff ' s ' recommendation on #29 (Old Santa Rosa Road) and let this request come in on its own. Mr. Engen pointed out that this is a dangerous time in a sense for neighborhoods because if '• there is a proposal made either by letter or in the course of hearings, nobody knows about it. Yet it is inherent in the system; every once in a while the whole General Plan is on the table so everything is negotiable and possible. ' Commissioner Kudlac expressed concern with some of the submitted letters because those property owners that could be directly affected by a change would not be aware of it. Discussion continued on this issue. Commissioner Hanauer stated that a real example of the danger is the Summers property on San Palo in that Mr. Summers was not aware of any requested change for the property, along with the fact that the procedure is terrible but is legal. ' Chairperson Luna reminded the Commission that the General Plan Update text and map have been available since April, 1990 with ' the exception of Attachment B. He added that people have certainly had the opportunity to review what is happening. ' Mr. Engen added that the Commission is able to receive comments through the next hearing on September 17, 1991. Commissioner Waage noted that the property involved with request #15 (3955 Monterey Road) is very steep, hilly with a . gully running through it. He stated that he did not see where it would lend itself to tourist commercial without substantial cut and fill. PC 8/20/91 PAGE 10 Mr. Engen clarified that the subcommittee' s recommendation was for single family; however, the Commission has the discretion • to consider any alternative recommendation. Commissioner Hanauer commented that he would not take this ' request seriously since it was generated by an individual who does not own the property nor have an interest in it. ' Chairperson Luna asked Mr. Moran if consideration was given to the interchange itself and how deficient is it. Mr. Moran ' replied that rather than evaluating site specific potential impacts, program level impacts which would likely occur from all these changes was looked at. Mr. Engen offered that #15 is more of a menace to the neigh- ' borhood because it is across the street from a single family residential neighborhood. Request #16 (6005 San Palo) faces , the freeway backing up to housing. Several years ago, the property was rezoned to Commercial Tourist but it does not have sewer so it has not attracted any development which might ' be better supported by having sewer. Mr. Engen added that this item could be reviewed in more detail for the next hearing. After further discussion, it was the Commission' s consensus to ' take a closer look at Item #16. • Commissioner Waage voiced his feelings that the EIR did not r address air quality for a school route program, adding if there was such a safe route program, the school children could walk or ride their bikes to school and would not need to be ' driven, especially in light of the lack of bussing this year. In response to query by Chairperson Luna, Mr. Engen remarked ' that the route to school program is part of the draft work program for the Circulation Element. With regard to school buses, Mr. Engen noted that the school district has won the ' war with Sacramento relative to SB 2557, so the district will be refinancing school buses. However, this issue still does not detract from the need for a safe route to school program. Discussion ensued concerning Mr. Smith' s request #7 (2705-3755 , E1 Camino Real. There was consensus to take a closer look at this item. ' With regard to Request #20 (Watson, et al - Atascadero Avenue/Marchant Avenue) Mr. Engen referenced the Iverson tract subdivision which goes from Atascadero Avenue through to ' Coromar. Mr. Engen added that Mrs. Watson along with several other adjoining property owners feel that the density in the area is such that they would like to be considered for 1/2 ' acre zoning also. • PC 8/20/91 ' PAGE 11 Mr. Engen noted on the map the areas of higher density ( 1/2 acre) which started in the Coromar area, eventually spreading to include the Iverson tract along with some property on Portola. The area for #20 is right on the edge of that. He added that part of the concern at the time when that line was being drawn is where does it stop. The lot sizes in this general area are inconsistent, having many smaller lots mixed in with average and larger size lots. 1 Chairperson Luna mused that the problem is that all of the lots will become high density single family. ' Commissioner Highland pointed out that some of these requests are surrounded on both sides by 1/2 acre lots adding that there is a lack of consistency. ' Commissioner Waage concurred noting that the line could just keep moving for the same reason every time; it is not _ consistent. ' Commissioner Lochridge stated that the applicant appears to be making comparisons with the Iverson project. With that ' project, most, if not all, of the residences will have street frontage along with the addition of a new street into the city. With these requests, the lots could be divided into • smaller lots but with access via flag lots which would be the ' only alternative with some of those lots. Commissioner Johnson concurred adding that he would be hesi- tant to recommend an action. It was the Commission' s consensus to agree with the subcom- mittee' s recommendation. In addressing Mr. Michielssen' s earlier comment on the Housing Element and its acceptability, Mr. Engen commented that HCD was critical of the city' s Housing Element as they care not about E.G. Lewis, topography, 30% slopes and other realities. He added that per State mandate, Atascadero will be preparing a new Housing Element by June, 1992. In addressing Mr. Greening' s statement relative to some of the ' maps not showing 30% slope (Stadium Park, etc. ) , Mr. Engen noted that it probably was an oversight and will be corrected. Commissioner Highland offered that the State geological maps ' which were used did not go down into the center of the City. Mr. Engen stated that Marj Mackey' s comments concerning the ' failure to develop and maintain all roads to their full • rights-of-way are valid points, and this issue will be addressed through the Circulation Element. PC 8/20/91 PAGE 12 , Chairperson Luna, in speaking to Mr. Moran, stated that Mr. Engen has suggested that much of the language on page 109 (EIR) be incorporated into the General Plan which talks about ' mitigation measures in that the infrastructure should basically proceed or coincide with the increase in population and development of the area. He asked if there is any other way of implementing this other than incorporating these as goals into the General Plan. Mr. Moran replied that the mitigation measures that deal with public services and city has a capital improvements program that addresses most of these issues with the exception of schools. So, in essence, there is an implementation program ' right now for these things. Mr. Moran further stated that should the occasion arise that the city does not have the money to implement a particular program, then there will be ' adverse impacts. Thus, thresholds should be established so when that occasion occurs, the city can take steps such as to control growth so as not to exceed the limits of the services. Mr. Crawford added that the most logical lace to put these in ' g P is in the General Plan itself; in the relevant sections dealing with infrastructure and services. An option would be ' to incorporate them as an ordinance but to implement them effectively will require a monitoring program so the city can be aware of where it stands with respect to the thresholds as , new development proposals are reviewed as well as mechanisms to actually consider putting the program changes in place through capital improvements. Mr. Crawford further stated that the new language in the ' General Plan regarding consistency requirements for new developments will be an important linkage between the review ' and development proposals and policies in the General Plan that will require evaluation of the relationship of the development proposal to the threshold and formal decision at ' that point whether a given project or future plan amendment, rezoning, etc. can go forward and be consistent with these policies. Chairperson Luna pointed out that currently in the General Plan, fire response time should not be in excess of five minutes, yet subdivisions have been approved which are 12-15 , minute response times. He questioned the implementation portion of it. Mr. Crawford stated that many of these are discretionary ' decisions and it is up to that decision-making body to evaluate the issue of consistency with policy. The policies with particular types of development approval can certainly also be incorporated into the Subdivision Ordinance as a specific standard that would have to be met in order to approve a new subdivision. Mr. Crawford further commented ' that unless these are implemented as mitigation measures, the JA .-, PC 8/20/91 ' PAGE 13 findings that there will be no significant, unmitigated impacts cannot be made. ' Mr. Moran pointed out that Appendix H of the EIRg ives more in-depth discussion about this concept of threshold and how that might be applied. The thresholds can be established in different ways. ' Commissioner Highland offered that the 5 minute response time being put in the draft General Plan was an item in which the subcommittee could not agree upon. The final decision was to put it in and let it be reviewed and evaluated through public ' input at public hearings. He added that most citizens in Atascadero want a large lot, rural community, but this type of living is basically incompatible with a full range of typical t urban services; the two just cannot go together. He stated that he believes many people are willing to accept this in the community and, therefore, don't expect a five minute response time. ' Commissioner Hanauer commented thateo le know what the P P response times will be through the different areas in ' Atascadero and it is important to be up front with the public. Mr. Engen pointed out that the Fire Department has a map which ' shows 5-minute, 7-minute, 9-minute, etc. response time, and they are supportive of the 5-minute time. The Hunt report speaks about reflex time (which is a new concept) . Mr. Engen stated that the intent of the General Plan language is that ' anything beyond a 5-minute response of an existing station is not entitled to creating new lots, but may build on existing lots. ' Commissioner Highland offered that economic reality must be recognized with regard to substantial outlays of monies to establish additional fire stations, etc. He voiced his ' feelings that the public want this service but they are not willing to pay for it and are not willing to raise taxes to do SO. Commissioner Hanauer noted that in the EIR the consultants conclude that Atascadero should increase single family zoning, ' should cut back on industry (what little we have) , and should cut back on commercial thereby aggravating the already difficult fiscal revenue generating capacity of the city, which will make it even more difficult to meet the demand of ' the increasing services. He expressed concern that Atascadero will be running into a deeper fiscal hole, and noted that mention was not made about looking anywhere around the ' surrounding community wherein viable industrial land could be obtained to create the needed jobs. llL� PC 8/20/91 PAGE 14 ' Chairperson Luna pointed out that the Economic Research Associates report and Fiscal Analysis report have already identified that Atascadero has plenty of industrial and ' commercial land. Discussion continued on this issue between Commissioner Hanauer and Chairperson Luna. Commissioner Lochridge stated that the 5-minute response time ' is a threshold that needs to be developed into the General Plan for emergency service response time, along with other ' thresholds. He concurred with the idea of thresholds as "tools" where the city can feel a little more assured that services will keep up with the pace of growth. At the conclusion of the public hearing, Mr. Engen suggested ' that this matter be continued to the September 17, 1991 meeting. He added that he will try to get all of the ' responses back to the Commission both in the area of specific study areas and the environmental responses. Chairperson Luna thanked the public for attending the meeting ' and providing public testimony and continued the hearing to September 17th. C. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT 1. Planning Commission ' There was nothing to report. 2. Community Development Director ' There was nothing to report. t The meeting adjourned at 10: 10 p.m. MINUTES RECORDED BY: PATRICIA SHEPPHARD, Administrative Secretary MINUTES APPROVED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director , ' PC 9/ 17/91 / 7/91 PAGE 1 MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting ' Tuesday, September 17, 1991 7:30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building ' The regular meeting of the Atascadero Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Luna followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ' ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Highland, Lochridge, Hanauer, Waage, Kudlac, Johnson, and Chairperson Luna Absent: None ' Staff Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief; Pat Shepphard; Adminis- trative Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT ' Mary LeGras, 9191 Tiburon Circle, stated that she was speaking on behalf of her mother in requesting a higher density land use at 3127 Ramona Road. She noted that most of the surrounding neighborhood had been successful in subdividing to smaller lot sizes. Chairperson Luna suggested that Ms. LeGras contact the Planning Division for assistance necessary in achieving this change. ' Mark Chamberlain Los Osos resident asked if . this was the appropriate time in which to speak on his request. Chairperson ' Luna responded that the Planning Commission had received his letter noting that Mr. Chamberlain would be able to address his request during the public testimony portion of the hearing. ' *******ELECTION OF OFFICERS******* At this point, Mr. Engen invited nominations for the office of ' Chairperson. MOTION: By Commissioner Lochridge and seconded by Commissioner ' Waage to nominate Commissioner Luna for a second term as Chairperson. ' Commissioner Lochridge related his two year term as Chairperson noting that he felt more comfortable in this position after the first year. He added that the Commission respects the job ' Chairperson Luna has accomplished and urged total support from the Commission in re-electing Commissioner Luna. The motion carried 6:1 with Commissioner Highland ' abstaining. PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 2 MOTION: Commissioner Kudlac and seconded by Commissioner Loch- , ridge to nominate Commissioner Highland as Vice Chair- person. The motion carried 6:1 with Commissioner High- ' land abstaining. Chairperson Luna thanked the Commission for their confidence in him. ' A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of August 20, 1991 Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, referenced the August 20, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes, Page 5, Paragraph 8 - and offered clarification to his statement: The intent of his statement ' was to divert some of the money now being intended to make E1 Camino Real more amenable to through traffic and use it as seed money to start a trolley system which could promote a ' node system much more than a flow of traffic could. MOTION: By Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Lochridge and carried 7:0 to approve the Consent Calendar with the above modification to the 8/20/91 minutes. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: Consideration of General Plan Update Draft of proposed Land Use, Conservation, and Open Space Elements and Draft Environmental Impact Report. (Continued from ' August 20, 1991 meeting) Chairperson Luna provided an overview of matters to be reviewed and discussed during the course of this hearing and added that a major portion will involve consultant responses to comments concerning the Draft EIR. ' Mr. Engen provided a summation from the August 20th hearing noting that the response time for submitting written comments on the EIR ended on September 9th. At this hearing, the , Commission should make recommendations on land use requests identified as #7 and #16 (for which the Commission had re- quested additional information) , along with other proposed ' changes. The final EIR must then be certified by the City Council before the General Plan can be adopted. At this point, Dave Moran with Crawford, Multari, and Starr, ' recapped the 9 potential'adverse impacts the Draft EIR had identified which could result from implementing the draft Land Use Plan and pointed out the 14 recommended mitigation ' ' PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 3 ' measures. Of the nine potential impacts, only two were • perceived as unavoidable (related to air quality and to impacts on the school system) . Mr. Moran further noted that ' three additional mitigation measures will be included in the draft EIR as a result of addressing comments received on the EIR. Two of the measures relate to circulation issues and one ' relates to an air quality issue. Mr. Moran then summarized the language for measures #15 (school routes to be included in plan) ; #16 (specific trip reduction measures and alternate ' forms of transportation other than cars) ; and #17 (in response to APCD concerning potential air quality impact on surrounding properties (land use change #24] ) . Mr. Moran referenced a letter received from the State Fish and Game Department relating to the discussion on wildlife and vegetation in the EIR and noted that the Department has ' recommended that more analysis be done on potential impacts on endangered plant and animal species that may be present in the city. A biologist has been retained to address this matter and recommend mitigation measures and policies that can be incorporated into the Open Space Element. Mr. Engen added that the letter from Fish and Game was sent at the last minute adding that the department did not respond to the earlier Notice of Preparation. Because of time constraints involved with addressing these outstanding issues, • the Commission will need to continue the proceedings in order to respond to the Department of Fish and Game. Chairperson Luna referenced specific creek setbacks which are discussed in the Fish and Game letter and inquired on the status of the creekway ordinance previously discussed by the Commission last year. ' Mr. Engen responded that the setback ordinance has beenP laced on hold pending a report from the Creekway Mapping Committee ' to the Council. He added that there has been ongoing study activity - the City Council has directed preparation of a creekway protection ordinance, and the Trails Committee that is looking at the total community to develop a proposal that ' could be incorporated into the Circulation Element and inte- grated with the Recreation Element. ' Mr. Engen further stated that a cautious approach is being taken which is one of the reasons the Creekway Mapping Com- mittee mapped riparian vegetation. ' Chairperson Luna referenced recent adopted changes to the Subdivision Ordinance noting that the City Council eliminated a section concerning creekway reservations not being able to ' be used as part of the minimum lot size. Mr. Engen explained • that the Council' s intent was to review the report from the Creekway Mapping Committee prior to acting on that particular ' issue. PC 9/ 17/91 ' PAGE 4 Chairperson Luna referenced APCD' s letter and inquired if a ' possible mitigation measure could involve prohibiting back • yard burning. Mr. Moran explained that the effect would be minimal as it is ' difficult to quantify what the benefit of that might be; but every bit helps. , Acting Fire Chief, Mike McCain, stated that this issue has been back and forth in trying to designate specific days for ' burning, etc. He added that this controversial issue may end up in total elimination of backyard burning. In response to CalTrans I letter, Mr. Moran noted that CalTrans 1 does not have traffic counts to support its conclusions and explained that their comments deals with the fact that Atascadero will be proceeding with a full scale Circulation Element that will quantify the actual levels of service at the intersections. Chairperson Luna referenced the school district' s letter indicating concurrence with land use change #24; however, the APCD has identified a problem with the batch plant out there. Mr. Engen responded that the school district has consulted with the city and a Negative Declaration was granted the project. Discussion ensued relative to ultimate disposition of the property occupied by Southern Pacific Milling. • ' Mr. Engen clarified that "L" (page 82 of the EIR concerning water) has been discussed with the consultants and a phrase will be added for the extraction of water from the deep acquifer or reliable alternate sources. Commissioner Highland expressed strong discontent relative to ' comments made by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) as it was his feeling that this agency intends to establish control of planning for cities, counties, etc. He noted that the APCD gave requirements concerning road widths, backyard burning, affordable housing, type of community. The correspondence alluded to an open threat of regional or state action if the comments were not complied with. , Commissioner Highland spoke about the subcommittee (of which he was a member) that had worked on the draft General Plan noting that at the conclusion of this work, there were 3 areas of disagreement. It was his understanding that these areas under discussion would be settled at the time of public hearing, and that the public would be informed of what those points of disagreement were. It was his feeling that this was not done. One of the items involves the property at San Anselmo Road and Highway 101 with the other one being the prohibiting of lot splits beyond a five minute Fire Department • response time. Fi 2 ' PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 5 ' Mr. Engen clarified that in reciting the• key role of the Y subcommittee, indication was given that where consensus could not be reached, it was determined to leave the disputed issues in the text and let them be resolved in the course of future public hearings. Discussion ensued. Chairperson Luna read the letter from APCD for the audience' s edification (pertaining to primary and secondary air quality impacts) . Mr. Moran, in responding to the APCD' s comments, noted that even with all of the control stragegies in the proposed Clean Air Plan, they still will not meet their target for one particular kind of pollutant (reactive organic compounds) . Commissioner Hanauer recalled a recent project reviewed by the ' Planning Commission wherein the APCD suggested that the buildings be conditioned to provide provision for parking bicycles and showers so the employees could utilize that form ' of transportation. He felt that this suggestion appeared beyond the APCD' s boundary. Commissioner Kudlac concurred with Commissioners Highland and ' Hanauer adding that the APCD has pretty much outstepped their boundaries in several ways. It appears that this state agency is wanting to regulate matters from backyard burning to road issues. Commissioner Kudlac further commented that the cement plant on Traffic Way (industrial zoning) would cause far less pollution than if the property were to be redesignated ' Residential. Mr. Engen reviewed items #7 and #16 that were specifically referred to staff for additional comment at the Commission' s ' last meeting. He then reviewed correspondence in support of specific requests for land changes received after the August 20, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. ' Mr. Engen pointed out two letters were received after the agenda packet was distributed: one from Mark Chamberlain (Attachment A) in support of one-half acre zoning in area #29 ' (Santa Rosa/Old Santa Rosa Road vicinity) ; and one from Robert Culbertson (Attachment B) in support of commercial and multi- family development across from the proposed Factory Outlet project (2325/2327/2355 El Camino Real) . - Public Testimony - ' Jerry Bond stated he represents Atascadero 2000 which has been working on their version of the General Update for more than a year, and presented copies to the Commission and Community Development Director (Attachment C) . He commented that the • APCD samples were taken at one of the most impacted intersec- tions in Atascadero (Traffic Way and Olmeda) due to the ' emissions from diesel trucks traveling to and from this PC 9/ 17/91 , PAGE 6 industrial area. ' Veda Thomas, 10695 Vista Road, stated that she agrees with APCD' s recommendation to stop backyard burning as one measure to help reduce the present air pollution in Atascadero. She then read a prepared statement to this regard (Attachment D) , and presented a petition in opposition to backyard burning ' (Attachment E) . Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, stated that in relation to suggesting the use of a trolley system to encourage nodes rather than strip development, one idea to reduce automobile use is to make it less necessary for people who are making several stops to use their cars to do it. Often these short ' trips involve the same cold starts as a long trip does. With regard to wind direction and air quality, Mr. Greening ' noted that the entire basin (Atascadero, Templeton, and Paso Robles) does share quite a bit of the same air going back and forth. He discussed weather factors which contribute to air pollution. Mr. Greening clarified the geographical difference between Pine Mountain and the Pine Mountain Amphitheater. ' John Kuden, San Luis Obispo, stated he owns a piece of property on San Anselmo and asked for clarification on what intentions are proposed for the property behind the Arco Station, to which Mr. Engen responded. Mr. Kuden asked that his property' s land use designation , remain unchanged until a clear determination is made with regard to means of sewage disposal in that area. Mel Smith referenced the Wranglerette Arena by the Salinas ' River and end of Tampicoandasked why this site is proposed to change from recreation use to residential. He noted that ' this site has been used as an Arena for at least 25 years, and that a residential use is not appropriate nor desired by the Arena participants and others that utilize this land. Mr. Engen remarked that this property should probably be , restored as Public/Recreation as the use seems to be successful and is unlikely to divert to another type of use. John McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista, noted that his comments relate to the consultant' s response to his earlier statements to the Draft EIR concerning air quality and its impact from the San Ardo oil fields north of Atascadero. He expressed his feeling that this use is a major contributor to the air pollution in this basin. ' X55 PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 7 tMr. McNeil explained that ten years ago, in meetings with oil officials, he was apprised that 70-80 tons of pollutants are in the air on a daily basis. Since that time, the number of oil wells has multiplied, so waste materials have also tripled or quadrupled. He expressed his feeling that this omission in the Draft EIR should not have been omitted, and that a study of the movement of the air in this basin should be conducted at some point in time. He debated the draft EIR comment in that the County is an "attainment area" for the state standards for ozone, particulate matter, and sulphur dioxide. If the Draft EIR is incorrect in this statement, then it should be corrected; and if it is an "attainment" area, some serious considerations should be made by addressing the major ' impacts on Atascadero' s air quality. Myron Nalepa, 2400 Monterey Road, spoke to the proposed land use change for the Montessori school site (Monterey Road at intersection of Graves Creek Road) . He urged that the Commission follow staff' s recommendation for the property to ' remain Residential noting that mitigation measures were imposed for this project through the conditional use permit process. To change it to Public or Quasi-Public would open other possible uses which ' probably cannot achieve the mitigation of the use permit. Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, expressed concern relative to ' certain restrictions being imposed by various governmental agencies, and he noted his objection to elimination of backyard burning. ' Chris Anderson, 1705 San Ramon, read a petition (Attachment F) in opposition to the proposed land use change from Residential to Tourist Commercial ( #4-Mulder) . She then read a prepared statement (Attachment G) and noted that the notification process is grossly unfair and not in keeping with the democratic process. In addition, Mrs. Anderson submitted two ' more letters in opposition to this proposed land use change (Attachments H and I) . It was pointed out to Mrs. Anderson by Mr. Engen exactly what ' is proposed for that area. Mark Chamberlain, 701 Los Osos Valley Road, Los Osos, spoke to area #29 (from 8650 to 8850 Old Santa Rosa Road) (Attachment A) in which he is considering purchasing. He asked for con- sideration in changing the current land use from Low Density Single Family to High Density Single Family. Mr. Chamberlain asked for clarification relative to what process he should pursue in changing the existing land use. In clarifying Mr. Chamberlain' s queries, Chairperson Luna i explained that this is the General Plan process which covers ' the entire city, and it is difficult for the neighbors to 15� PC 9/17/91 , PAGE 8 actually be aware of exactly what' s going on unless they attend all of the meetings. He further noted that outside of the General Plan process, a zone change application to accommodate Mr. Chamberlain' s request would be necessary. ' Mary Jazwiecki, property owner at 4711 E1 Camino Real, asked for clarification on the proposed change to Neighborhood ' Commercial from Retail Commercial for this site. She asked that the current designation remain as Retail Commercial adding that considerable costs have been incurred in designs and plans for a new retail commercial building. Mr. Engen acknowledged that concern had been expressed in making the change more restrictive. Chairperson Luna stated , that her request would be considered. Marj Mackey stated that the previous speakers have voiced many comments similar to hers. She echoed agreement with the Department of Fish and Game's recommendations concerning 100 foot creek setbacks for rural riparian areas and 50 feet in urban areas. Citizens have pursued these setbacks for years. , Mrs. Mackey did, however, feel that the Department could be more moderate in noting that recreational use of trails along the creeks are "Inappropriate. " With regard to the air pollution issue, she noted concurrence with most of the consultant comments. Mrs. Mackey concluded her comments by stating that Atascadero would benefit from more frequent, intercity bus transportation and more bicycle routes. Dorothy McNeil referenced the Department of Fish and Game' s comments pertaining to appropriate creek setbacks and read a prepared letter (Attachment J) relative to those issues. She urged- the Planning Commission to continue the public hearing to give the Department of Fish :and Game an opportunity to adequately assess the environmental impacts on the creeks. Commissioner Hanauer emphasized that the creekway mapping ' process was not a diversion as reflected in Mrs. McNeil' s letter, adding that he did not appreciate that comment. Donna Wallace, 8780 Old Santa Rosa Road, referenced Mr. , Chamberlain' s letter requesting 1/2 acre zoning. She expressed frustration with the General Plan process as she wondered how many other requests for different land use changes will be received for this particular area ( #29) . It was her feeling that Mr. Chamberlain' s request seems to be a type of "spot" zoning. Commissioner Highland clarified that these hearings reflect changes in the Land Use Plan and not zoning at this time. The state requires that the General Plan be updated every few years. He added that every property owner has the right to request that the land use designation (for their property) be changed during these types of hearings, and there is no easy ' n PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 9 ' way to change the process. Chairperson Luna added that this is a dangerous time for neighborhoods. Bill Mazzacane, Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, discussed the recommended adoption of the five minute response time standard for the Fire Department, and noted that this is an unrealistic proposal in view of the current average response time being closer to nine minutes. The nine minute time is a reflection of the value Atascadero has historically placed on its ' uncrowded rural lifestyle. He suggested that perhaps the five minute response time could be adopted as a desireable goal rather than an exclusionary standard which, in his opinion, may actually be a growth control measure. In concluding his statements, Mr. Mazzacane stressed that some public debate may be in order to discuss what is an appropriate growth rate for Atascadero. This critical issue should not be decided solely 1 on the basis of an ideal fire response time. Richard Summers, 7536 Morro Road, inquired about the notification process for affected property owners involved with the General Plan Update. Chairperson Luna remarked that notices were published in the newspaper; as well, several hearings and joint Council/Com- mission meetings have been conducted. Mr. Engem added that in this instance, display ads were published in both the Atascadero News and North County Telegram-Tribune a month prior to the August 20th hearing. Cost precludes notification to everyone in the city. Discussion continued. In response to question by Mr. Summers, Mr. Engen replied that the ads indicated locations where maps of the proposed changes were available for review. Mr. Summers expressed his feeling ' that publishing these maps in the newspaper would serve the public well. In addressing item #16 (San Palo) , Mr. Summers noted in ' looking at alternatives, he would be inclined to favor the RSF-Z designation but, at this time, is somewhat ambiguous on what the ideal zoning or uses should be. Cheryle Paglialonga, 11375 Atascadero, voiced her objection to any land use change for the Hendrix property (Santa Barbara, E1 Camino Real and Highway 101) . She noted that by developing the property as commercial will only serve to lengthen an already too long commercial strip continuing to fragment Atascadero. Chairperson Luna pointed out that staff' s recommendation is to keep the land use as it currently exists. ' Bob Brown, 9375 E1 Camino Real, stated he has been an i Atascadero resident for 14 years, adding that he chose to live ' beyond any reasonable distance from a fire department. Mr. PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 10 Brown expressed opposition to the five minute response time , p me adding that this does not belong in the General Plan; it is not compatible with the rural atmosphere that Atascadero enjoys. Mr. Brown further remarked that the proposal presented by Jerry Bond (Atascadero 2000) has a great deal of merit, and 1 urged the Commission to incorporate some of its suggestions into the General Plan to make it a more workable plan. Ron Ayers, 5915 Encino, addressed the change to Urban Reserve Line along west side of San Anselmo noting that perhaps due to a drafting error, the line goes the center of his parcel. Mr. Engen clarified that Mr. Ayers' property is 5 1/2 acres and his request if that the USL be extended to the back of his property which would square off with the Campbell subdivision. Fred Hartman, 10325 Atascadero Avenue, requested that the land ' use designation for his property be changed to i 1/2 acre instead of 2 1/2 acres. He stated that there are 3 property owners with a total of 14 acres that would benefit by such a change, and that only a total of 4 lots could be created. Mr. Hartman stated that some exceptions should be allowed for 1 backyard burning, especially for larger acreage lots. Tom Erbstoesser, 10245 Atascadero Avenue, concurred with Mr. Hartman' s comments adding that he previously transmitted a 01 request to change the land use designation to 1 1/2 acres. He expressed concern that his request may have not been received by the City, and if not, he would like to take this 1 opportunity to make the request. Chairperson Luna advised Mr. Erbstoesser that his request would be considered by the Commission. Karen Riggs, 4395 Arizona, noted her support of the Department 1 PP P of Fish and Game' s suggestion to adopt a 50 foot creek on the . creek, adding that a building setback is the single most 1 important measure in protecting the creek. She asked how many lots might become unbuildable if such a setback was incorporated. 1 Mr. Engen noted that there is no actual count at this time adding that the mapping program has delineated all parcels abutting the creek. 1 Bob Culbertson, property owner at 2325, 2327 and 2355 E1 Camino Real noted a letter he submitted for the Planning 1 Commission' s consideration (Attachment B) , and summarized comments contained in the letter asking for a change from Residential Suburban to a Commercial designation (Retail, 1 Neighborhood, or Tourist) . i 1 1 . rPC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 11 Ken Marks, 9073 Circle Oak Drive, expressed his feeling that the maps in the Planning Division are not accurate and disinformation has generated as a result. He asked that the ' Commission direct staff to prepare a clear and concise report that would benefit a general "lay" person (not in the real estate business, etc. ) . He noted his objection to the five minute response time, and stressed that individuals affected by any land use decisions for the General Plan Update should be notified. ' Joan O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, presented two statements: 1) with regard to Fish and Game (Attachment K) and 2 ) concerning further comments relative to air quality ' (Attachment L) . She expressed concern that the study being prepared by the consultants in response to the Department of Fish and Game comments would not be just a "hurry up" study, adding that this information is critical. Karen Coniglio, 7600 Graves Creek Road, read a• prepared statement in support of the Department of Fish and Game' s ' recommendations for further study (Attachment M) , and added that the Draft EIR is inadequate. Tim O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, read a letter (Attachment N) in support of the suggestions and recommen- dations of the Fish and Game's letter dealing with the necessity to look more closely at the riparian habitat in Atascadero. James Watson, 8400 Atascadero Avenue, spoke in support of a higher density than what currently exists noting that his property, along with four other properties in this area, ars like a little island with a higher density than what the ' neighboring properties around them have. As a worst case scenario, if these properties were allowed to be split, no more than five lots could be created. Mr. Watson further stated that for what it' s worth, this area is within the five minute fire response time. Henry Bernard, 8295 Marchant, concurred with Mr. Watson' s statements in favor of changing the land use designation, and added that a half acre lot is sufficient for a nice home, yard, etc. Darlene Watson pointed out a couple of things referenced in her letter (contained in staff report) . She stated that she was told staff ' s recommendation against considering her parcels as high density was due to: 1) the domino effect and 2 ) flag lots. Mrs. Watson pointed out that the flags have already been established on this property and asked that the Commission take this into consideration. Chairperson Luna noted that the Commission is also in receipt ' of a letter from Nick and Judy Venuto supporting this request. 160 PC 9/17/91 r PAGE 12 Chairperson Luna then read letter- received from Valene Houdyshell and David Brown (Attachment 0) urging the Planning Commission to take action concerning the recommendations made by the Department of Fish and Game. r End of Public Testimony - Chairperson Luna declared a recess at' 10: 10 p.m. ; meeting reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Commissioner Highland requested that the meeting be ended at ' 11: 00 p.m. and if the issues have not been resolved, to continue the hearing. Chairperson Luna stated that ending the meeting at 11:00 p.m. would be okay, but he would like the Commission to resolve as many issues as possible during this hearing. There was Commission consensus to delete ". . . .5,00 square feet, net. " from Page II-10 of draft General Plan (related to PUDs) . There was considerable discussion relative to amending the Urban Service Line in the San Anselmo area (Ron Ayers' request) . There was Commission consensus to include the entire five + acres in the USL, with refinement to be reviewed at the next hearing. ' The Commission reviewed the options available in considering request #7 (Smith - 3505, 3555, and 3575 E1 Camino Real) , and after much discussion, the Commission agreed to recommend that , no change be made. Regarding Page II-21/5th paragraph and II-35/5th paragraph of ' General Plan: Acting Fire Chief Mike McCain commented that he hopes to clarify a somewhat confusing issue concerning response time. He suggested that "response" time be changed , to "travel" time. The Fire Department has been using "average travel time" for many years which is within a five minute area. As Atascadero has grown, travel time has increased. With regard to the nine minute response time, Chief McCain ' stated that the confusion involves the terms "reflex" time, "travel" time and "response" time, and clarified their difference and meaning. He stressed that the Fire re Department is concerned with the length of time it takes to get from the fire station to the emergency, and added it only takes between 4 to 6 minutes for brain damage to occur on medical aids ( 80% of calls involve medical aids) . Chief McCain presented a map which defined response time areas , within Atascadero noting that 90% of the population is covered in five minutes or less (distance from fire station to a certain area) . With future fire stations, the "green" area on ' 161 PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 1.3 the map will be widened thereby serving more of the population within the five minute "travel" time. As the city grows along ' with more fire stations, the Fire Department will strive to ensure that the current level of service continue to remain constant. Discussion followed relative to substituting the word "travel" for "response" . Chief McCain clarified that he is recommending that the level of service that Atascadero "shoot" for as the city grows be a five minute travel time. Discussion and debate took place concerning the difference between the five minute travel time being a goal or an absolute (when contained in the General Plan) . ' MOTION: By Commissioner Lochridge, seconded by Commissioner Kudlac and carried 5:2 (Commissioners Highland and ' Johnson dissenting) to extend the meeting past 11:00 P.M. Commissioner Kudlac argued that it is nonsense to prevent a property owner from dividing his 20 acres because the fire department cannot get there in five minutes. Chairperson Luna noted that if a property owner divides his parcel, the value of that lot has already been doubled. The city has a legal right to expect in return that it will have the ability to mitigate any significant impacts that may result by the newly created lot. He further stated that there are impact fees that will help pay for the fire station. Commissioner Highland pointed out that the impacts cannot be paid for unless one can divide his property; there is not a mechanism for paying those impacts. Mr. Engen advised that development impact fees for fire stations are collected on building permits. Chief McCain added that there is a considerable sum of money collected 1 already for the next fire station. Chairperson Luna stated that this is how a city develops and ' trouble cultivates when subdivisions are allowed without collecting any mitigation fees. Commissioner Johnson concurred adding that the city is in trouble if developments continue to go unchecked without being able to provide the emergency service within a recent period of time. Commissioner Highland stressed that Atascadero is a rural area 1 and, therefore, will not realize all of the services afforded . an urban area. l6 � PC 9/ 17/91 PAGE 14 Commissioner Waage offered that perhaps more fees should be collected from areas outside of the five minute response time. Discussion continued. Commissioner Hanauer stated that to use the issue of fire , response time as a growth control is mechanism is artificial, adding that he would not want to see the Commission or Council fall into that "trap" . He agreed with Commissioner Waage' s suggestion concerning a higher fee being paid in those affected areas. He further stated that property owners are aware of limitations on services, etc. when they decide to live in a certain place. Commissioner Hanauer remarked that it would be good if some kind of system could be developed that provides a crossover between these problems with means to finance additional fire personnel, emergency vehicles, etc. Chief McCain commented that if the issue of additional fire , stations is not addressed where there are 10-15 minute response times, the main hub of the community is also being let down as far as service because the units are outside that area. This issue must be addressed. ' Mr. Engen noted that fees were recently restructured to take into account the urban and rural areas. With regard to public safety for a permit for a residential dwelling, it is $. 113 per square feet if inside the USL, and if outside, it is $.613. Commissioner Lochridge commented that fees are coming directly from building permits and not lot splits and added that it is important to have language in the General Plan to encourage ' safe growth in the city. Commissioner Hanauer relayed an experience with a lot line adjustment that was approved which cost approximately $2600, so there are fees being paid. MOTION: By Chairperson Luna and seconded by Commissioner Lochridge to amend Page II-21/5th paragraph and II- 35/5th paragraph to substitute the word "travel" time when referring to "response" time from an ' existing fire station. The motion carried 4:3 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Lochridge, Johnson, Waage, and Chairperson Luna NOES: Commissioners Hanauer, Kudlac, and Highland ' Mr. Engen requested that the hearing for the General Plan Update be continued to October 29, 1991 (5th Tuesday) , and the Commission concurred. . /6 3 ' PC 9/17/91 PAGE 15 III ' Mr. Engen reported that due to a special meeting being held by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company on September 26, 1991, the joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting will be held on October 10, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. C. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT 1. Planning Commission Chairperson Luna referenced some photographs submitted by Marj Mackey which relate to roads being improved to their full rights-of-way and possibly some of the impacts that that might have. He would like to give the pictures to Mr. Engen to provide an opportunity for the Commission to review them, and then to refer them to the consultants preparing the ' Circulation Element. Commissioner Johnson commented on the alarming numbers of vehicles for sale being clustered at different points throughout the city which tend to look like used-car lots. It looks very tackey. 1 Commissioner Johnson also expressed dislike of the perpetual garage sales each weekend. Discussion followed pertaining enforcement cases on the yard sale locations, etc. 2. Community Development Director Mr. Engen had nothing additional to report. Meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m. MINUTES RECORDED BY: PATRICIA SHEPPHARD, Administrative Secretary MINUTES APPROVED. BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director i i l� ¢ ITEM • A-1 MTG. DATE : 12/3/91 ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION Special Meeting Tuesday, October 29, 1991 7:30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building This special meeting of the Atascadero Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Luna followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Waage, Johnson, Kudlac, Highland, Hanauer, Lochridge, and Chairperson Luna Absent: None Staff Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Pat Shepphard, Administrative Secretary 1 PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of September 17, 1991 ' MOTION: By Commissioner Y Lochrid e, seconded b Commissioner g Johnson and carried 7:0 to approve the Consent Cal- ' endar as presented. i B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: Consideration of General Plan Update Draft of proposed Land Use, Conservation, and Open Space Elements and Draft Environmental Impact Report (Continued from August 20th and September 17th, 1991 meetings) In presenting the staff report, Mr. Engen provided a synopsis on the previous General Plan Update hearings noting that amendments have been made to the draft resolution which is now before the Commission for consideration. He then turned the presentation to David Moran, EIR consultant with Crawford, Multari, and Starr. Mr. Moran highlighted comments received by the Department of Fish and Game in response to the EIR, and noted that since the September 17th hearing,; the consultants have been working with a biologist ' and the Department of Fish and Game to formulate some draft PC 10/29/91 PAGE 2 recommended language for additional General Plan policies to help address the concerns. In addition to the policies, Mr. Mora pointed out that Appendix E has been expanded to include a matrix that discusses the rare and endangered animal species that were identified by Fish and Game. Mr. Moran then read Policies 18 through 23 related to this issue. Mr. Engen then reviewed the list of unresolved map changes es 'con- tained in the staff report. With regard to site "H", Mr. Engen noted a .correcton to be made (should read Moderate Density Single Family rather than High Density Single Family) . ' Commission questions and discussion followed. Chairperson Luna stated he has received several calls about the east side of Pine Mountain where a tentative tract map (27-90) was recently approved and the City received an offer of dedication for , 17.3 acres for parkland open space. The Land Use Map reflects a Residential designation, but wouldn't Public be more appropriate? Mr. Engen concurred that Public would be appropriate which would "mirror" the actual action taken by the Commission and Council. Chairperson Luna referenced the recent joint Council/Commission meeting relative to discussion on an interim creek ordinance and inquired as to the status. Mr. Engen noted that the direction was for staff to formulate two ordinances to be used short of having a comprehensive management plan for the creekways in the City. The first ordinance would be for nuisance control to keep off-road vehicles, dumping of debris, and clear abuse of riparian areas in the City, and the second one would be a 'zoning type amendment which would establish the riparian line that is on the maps which the Council and Commission reviewed at that meeting. This could be a "trip wire" for requiring a type of administrative hearing process before development or grading could take place. In response to question by Chairperson Luna, Mr. Moran explained that a Program EIR is one used to evaluate the impacts of a project that can be characterized as a series or number of different kinds of actions such as the implementation of policies in the General Plan. In the case of the General Plan, a Program EIR evaluates policies and what impacts those policies are likely to have. In the case of mitigation, it would recommend other policies to be included in the Plan so that when developments come along, the cum- ulative or um-ulative :or larger scale impacts are mitigated. - Public Testimony - Livia Kellerman, 5463 Honda, read a statement relative to her con- cern that the Draft General Plan and EIR do not address the goal of keeping minor drainage channels in open space nor does it mention the protection of unnamed and smaller creeks of which there are many in Atascadero (Attachment A) , tU PC 10/29/91 PAGE 3 Donald Hartig, 7205 Carmelita, read a letter (Attachment S) in support of implementing a minimum 50 foot building setback from the creeks. Fred Hartman referenced comments being made to protect birds, _ salamanders, etc. , but it was his feeling that since the chief in- habitants of a city are people, issues should be decided by people for the benefit of people, not the animals. Virginia Powers, 7505 Carmelita, read a statement (Attachment C) advocating the, Department of Fish and Game's recommendation for creek setback requirements of 50 to 100 feet. Lindsey Hampton, 8402 Alta Vista, representing the Atascadero Home- owners Association, read a creekway resolution(Attachment D) which was unanimously adopted by the general membership of the Homeowners Association on October 17, 1991. Ursula Luna, expressed her support for the Department of Fish and Game's recommendation for minimum 50 feet creek setbacks, and could not understand why this recommendation was not incorporated by the consultants into the EIR. She noted concurrence with issues raised by prior speakers, and read a letter (Attachment E) that spoke to a 5 minute travel time. It was pointed out that development out passes the expansion of the fire department, and that cumulative impacts need to be considered and addressed with regard to develop- ment for areas outside of the five minute travel time range. Joan O'Keefe thanked Commission for her input in this process and read a statement (Attachment F) conveying her disappointment with Ithe mitigation measures ( #18-22) proposed by the consultants in response to the Department of Fish and Game's comments relative to creek setbecks. Steve Perlman stated that he represents thero ert owners of 5760 P P y and 5820 Ardilla, and expressed concern that the ability to create an opportunity for the property will be hampered if the land use is changed from the present High Density Multi-Family to Single< Fam- ily. He noted that there are many tools available (precise plan, hillside density standards, etc. ) to assure a compatible develop development on this property at the multi-family level. Mr. Perlman asked that when a development is proposed, that it be reviewed on a site specific basis in order to create the appropri- ate buffers as a transitional use between the high density housing development and the potential for single family. Donald Saueressig, 10735 San Marcos Road, concurred with Mr. Hartman's comment that people are more important in the city, yet if people cannot take care of the wild creatures and maintain their habitat, the peoples' habitat will decline. In addressing creek setbacks, Mr. Saueressig urged the Commission to take strong action and incorporate a minimum 50 foot creek setback. Mr. Saueressig further commented that during the 15 years he lived by the creek, ' there were numerous beaver dams as well as a small run of steelhead 167 PC 10/29/91 9 9 PAGE 4 trout living in the creeks. Within ten years, they were gone. , In addressing the increase in density for various properties, Mr. Sauressig emphasized that Atascadero has limited resources, and as the density increases, the resources become smaller for everyone. He urged that in reviewing the requests for increased density, that the Commission maintain the densities at the lowest possible levels. Mike Sherer stated that he represents the property owner of 2955 Chico Road (approximately three acres) . He objected to the proposed proposed land use designation of Residential Suburban noting that the site presently houses one industrial building and there are plans prepared for another building of approximately 5,000 square feet. If the property changes to RS, the property becomes one residential lot. Mr. Sherer further commented that if the entire 60 acre block of land (in that area ) is changed from Industrial Park to Residential Suburban, the city will lose approximately 30% of industrial park property within the City. Commissioner Hanauer stated that it would be absolute lunacy to take anything away from an industrial possibility in that partic- ular area. Mr. Sherer added that the value of thatro ert as it is now would P P Y be diminished by about 50% if changed to RS. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, pointed out that in geological terms creek bottoms and creek banks are unstable and fast changing which means if there is property of economic value in the creekway areas, . the potential exists for expensive disasters, both emotional and financial. With regard to the creekway mapping, Mr. Greening asked if it would be possible to have the geologic stability of bank areas mapped to'-see which ones are unstable. In lieu of an expen- sive study along the creek, a setback is the preventive medicine. Stephen LaSalle read a statement (Attachment G) in support of ' establishing a minimum 50 foot creek setback. Tim O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, presented a statement (Attachment H) urging that the Draft EIR and General Plan Update be , brought into compliance with the recommendedations of the Depart- ment of Fishand Game in mandating creek setback standards. He noted that the draft EIR is totally inadequate to protect the sensitive riparian ecosystem. John Kuden, property owner of #15 (San Anselmo and Monterey Road) , said he would concur with staff as he was not sure what the best use of the property would be since there is no sewer at this time. He added that the. property would not lend itself to a heavy com- mercial use but did not feel it to be appropriate for a low density ' housing area. PC 10/29/91 PAGE 5 Tom Bench, 7503 Carmelita, referenced the creek setback issue stating that he contacted Andrea Seastrand' s office relative to the Department of Fish and Game' s recommendations for a minimum 50 foot creek setback. Ms. Seastrand's office was surprised that anyone would make such a statement and is investigating. He added that a friend attended a recent meeting in which the head of the Depart- ment of Fish and Game related that under no circumstance would the Department recommend any type of setback as they do not have the money to compensate people for taking away the use of their prop- erty. Mr. Bench further commented that the beavers and fish relocated to a more suitable habitat, they did not die off. In concluding his remarks, Mr. Bench stated that he would be happy to sellhis property to the Homeowners Association if they desired to buy the land and donate it to the City. Kris Hazard, 10060 Atascadero Avenue, addressed items #22, 23, and 24 presented a handout (map) (Attachment I) which showed that there are four locations with existing sewer manholes in the vicinity of that property. She concurred with staff in that there is a case for bringing this property into the Urban Services area and allowing it to hook up to sewer. She asked for consideration of the request. 1 James Berger, 3120 Adelaide, Paso Robles, spoke on the Wranglerette land use designation and requested that the Planning Commission designate the land as Recreation. He noted that this arena is one of the few available for public use, and added that at the current time, the property owner does not have any plans for the property. James Watson, 8400 Atascadero Avenue (#20) , asked the Commission to 1 consider changing the land use from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family to allow one-half acre lot sizes. He pointed out that the surrounding properties are all zoned for one- half acre. Chris Anderson, 1705 San Ramon, asked for clarification regarding the property at Del Rio and Highway 101 (on north side) . 1 Mr. Engen replied that at the immediate corner of P el Rio and 101, there is a smaller parcel (t 2 acres) proposed for Tourist Com 1 mercial to line up with the Del Rio Motors, which is across the street. He added that the question had been raised (at the last hearing) concerning the land area adjacent to that (San Ramon Land Company - 14-17) . Mr. Engen reiterated that this was the property he had indicated would require its own project application and detailed analysis before it could be considered; the Commission is not recommending that it be incorporated into the General Plan at this time. He further stated that the land owner has contacted the City to relay his feeling that this request be dropped. Mrs. Anderson stated that the petition (from 9/17/91 meeting) and her comments still imply opposition to changing the land use desig- nation for both parcels of land. 169 , PC 10/29/91 PAGE 6 Fred Hartman, 10325 Atascadero Avenue, apologized if he offended anyone with his previous comments. He noted that the most success- ful creek control is in San Luis Obispo, and added that many people have money invested in their property and it is not right for someone else to tell that. individual ividual how to control his property without buying it. Mr. Hartman then spoke on his request (10325 Atascadero Road) noting that he has too much land for its present use. He talked about efforts to split his property while under County jurisdic- tion, and explained why he wants the designation changed to allow 1 1/2 acre lots, without sewer. Eric Greening pointed out that cementing a creek is not a solution to a flood hazard because it enhances the speed of runoff and will create more serious peaking flows and problems downstream even if it doesn't create them. He added that it is responsible both aesthetically and economically to let the creek perform its natural function. - End of Public Testimony , Mr. Engen then read a letter from Celia Moss (Attachment J) urging the Commission to incorporate the recommendations made by the De- partment of Fish and Game into the General Plan Update. Upon discussion, it was the Commission's general consensus not to accept any more public comment or correspondence concerning requests for land use changes Paul Crawford asked the Chair that at some point deemed appropri- ate, he would like to make some comments associated with the testimony related to creek setbacks. Commissioner Lochridge expressed reservation with closingtestimony Y to the public in light of some of the testimony given on the creek setbacks. Commissioner Highland emphasized that Fish and Game have submitted their recommendations and the Commission, at some point, has to accept them as such. Discussion continued. t Commissioner Highland stated that the City has the right to estab tablish setbacks; they are established in the Zoning Ordinance for side yard, front yards, etc. This is not a great deal different philosophically, and that is what the Commission has been appointed to do. He added that once the Commission adopts a position to recommend to the Council relative to creek setbacks, the rest of the unresolved map changes will go rapidly. He requested that the issue of creek setbacks be the first item to be resolved. The rest of the Commission agreed. t' Paul Crawford clarified that the first issue is what Fish and Game has recommended and what they have not recommended. Fish and Game ' PC 10/29/91 PAGE 7 1 has been characterized as recommending setbacks of 50 and 100 feet but that is not correct. What Fish and Game is recommending is that specific setbacks be established. Mr. Crawford emphasized that the Department simply referenced these setbacks as examples that are in place in the County. Mr. Crawford further stated that he has had experience with those setbacks in the Coastal Zone, as he was responsible for them. He added that they were not developed thru any rigorous analysis whatsoever, but were literally pulled out of the air working with the Coastal Commission staff and Fish and Game. Mr. Crawford emphasized that by no means is it inappropriate for the EIR and for the Commission to recommend to the Council specific mitigation 1 measures that provide a specific setback. Mr. Crawford remarked that it is important to understand the purpose of a Program EIR as opposed to a Project EIR. The fact is that CEQA did not contemplate that a Program EIR on a general plan would necessarily evaluate every natural characteristic in the community, even those that are of great significance, and come up with precise, well reasoned mitigation measures for each at a pro- ject level which is what a precise setback is; he offered suggested language to this 'end. Commissioner Hanauer stated that, absent a hard number, the Commis- sion would put the Council into a public battle that could go on forever; he suggested that the Commission select that hard number ' and recommend it. Mr. Crawford offered that, based on testimony, the word should should be replaced with shall in Mitigation -Measure #18. With respect to Mitigation Measure #19, the following language is recommended to replace the existing wording: t19. Grading shall not occur and buildings or structures shall not be located within 50 feet of any creekway riparian vegetation or within 50 feet of the centerline of the creekway, whichever is greater, unless: A. A site specific evaluation by a qualified biologist approved by the City determines that a lesser setback will provide equivalent habitat protection; or B. The City completes a creekway mapping program and adopts other specific setback requirements based upon that mapping program. 1 Commissioner Highland noted that there are three specific sites where, in ,his observation, a 50 foot setback would be insufficient, yet the proposed language does not make provision for that. ' Mr. Crawford replied that is the problem with any number you come up with in advance of a detailed study of the entire creek system. That is one of the reasons why the mitigation measures were 1 PC 10/29/91 PAGE 8 proposed as originally worded. He added that 50 feet was chosen since there has been experience using this figure in the County; the number is intended as an interim measure until a detailed study is completed that will 'establish an appropriate setback. , Commissioner Johnson noted that he has been adamantly opposed to setting any specific setback number; however, he could support the proposed language because it has built into it the ability to vary' from that hard 50 foot line. Commissioner Waage concurred. Commissioner Kudlac expressed objection to the 50 foot setback adding that each lot should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. The wording suggests that one would not even be able to put a play- house on his property if it's within 50 feet of the creek. Discussion continued. Commissioner Highland stated that he is opposed to putting hard figures into the General Plan as he did not think they are appro- priate. Commissioner Lochridge and Chairperson ' i hair erson Luna indicated concurrence g P with thero osed language. e. P P g MOTION: By Chairperson Luna and seconded by Commissioner Lochridge to modify Mitigation Measure #18 by replacing "should be identified. . " to "shall be identified. . " and Mitigation Measure #19 to read: 1119. Grading shall not occur and buildings or structures shall not be located within 50 feet of any creekway riparian vegetation, or within 50 feet of the centerline of the creekway, whichever is greater, unless: A. A site specific evaluation by a qualified bio- logist approved by the city determines that a lesser setback will provide equivalent habitat protection; or B. The City completes a creekway mapping program and adopts other specific setback requirements based upon that mapping program. " Commissioner Waage asked for clarification with regard to what type , of buildings or structures. Mr. Crawford suggested adding the words ". . . . .buildings or structures requiring permit approval. . ." Chairperson Luna and Commissioner Lochridge concurred with the ' P g amendment. The motion carried; 5:2 with the following roll call: AYES: Commissioners Lochridge, Waage, Johnson, Hanauer, and Chairperson Luna I � iPC 10/29/91 PAGE 9 NOES: Commissioners Kudlac and Highland Mr. Engen suggested that the PlanningCommission sion resolve the other responses to the Fish and Game letter recommended by the consul- tants (Mitigation Measures #20, 21, 22, & 23) . MOTION: By Chairperson Luna to accept Mitigation Measures #20, 21, 22, and 23 as recommended by the consultants. Com- missioner Lochridge seconded the motion; motion passed 6:1 with the following roll call: AYES: Commissioners Lochrid e, Hanauer, Highland, Waage, and Chairperson Luna NOES: Commissioner Kudlac Chairperson Luna read a policy contained in the Land Use Element concerning channelization: "Waterways in the city shall be main- tained in a natural state and concrete channelization .of creeks shall be prohibited. Any alterations required for public safety will be guided by this policy. ,, (in addressing comments made earlier in public testimony) . The Commission then took action on the various unresolved map changes. Unresolved Map Changes: A) #15 -San Anselmo Monterey Road (Kuden) - There was Commission consensus to retain the recommended Low Density Single Family Resi- dential designation. B) #16 San Anselmo/San Palo Road (Kundert/Summers) Commission consensus was unanimous in recommending that the Kundert property be retained as Tourist Commercial/with the Summers property remain- ing as originally proposed: Low Density Single Family. C) #17c E1 Camino Real/San Jacinto (Mary Jazwiecki) - Commission consensus was to revert the property to the current plan designa tion of Retail Commercial. D) #20 - Atascadero Avenue/Marchant (Watson/Petition) - There was Commission consensus (With Commissioner Highland dissenting) to not allow an increase in density to High Density Single Family - that any project would need to be reviewed on its own merit. E) #21 & #29 - Santa Rosa Road/Frontage Road (Chamberlain/Baldwin)- There was unanimous agreement among the Commission not to change the land use designation to High Density Single Family. F) #22, #23 & #24 - Atascadero Avenue between San Gabriel and San Rafael - (Hazard/Tomassacci, Erbstoesser, and Hartman) The Commission was in unanimous accord to recommend that the �3 PC 10 /29/91 PAGE 10 Hazard/Tomassacci property be designated as Moderate Density Single , Family, but not to support a change< for the Erbstoesser and Hartman properties. G --2325-2355 E1 Camino Real (Culbertson) - The Commission unanimously agreed to leave this property in current designation of Suburban Residential. H) 8760 Curbaril (Sherer) - The current designation is low density multi-family and the update proposed to make it moderate density single family. There was general consensus to revert the property to Moderate Density Single Family. I Wran lerette Arena - Aragon & Tampico (Mel Smith) The Commission was in accord to designate the property as Recreation. J) 3125-27 Ramona Road (LeGras) - Unanimous consensus to leave the property at its present designation. Mr. Engen brought up the concern related to Pine Mountain (east side) whether to change it to public because of 17 acre conveyance to city; the Commission agreed to change the land use designation to Public and Moderate Density Single Family. K) Update to General Plan by Atascadero 2000 The Commission concurred that this document was unfortunately submitted very late in the process and was not considered in the EIR. , MOTION: By Commissioner Johnson and seconded by Commissioner Lochridge to recommend to the City Council the acceptance of the draft Resolution with amendments as directed and certification of the EIR as adequate. The motion carried 7.0. Commissioner Highland wished to convey the clear understanding that there are things that have been adopted to which he does not agree. Chairperson Luna thanked the consultants for their hard work adding that for the Commission to complete the hearing process with three hearings was due to the consultants' hard work and recommendations. C. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT 1. Planning Commission ' Commissioner Johnson noted that there are at least 30 cars for sale in the Vons parking lot. 2. Community Development Director s ' PC 10/29/91 PAGE 11 There was nothing to report. The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. MINUTES RECORDED BY: PATRICIA SHEPPHARD, Administrative Secretary - MINUTES APPROVED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 10 ' COMMUNICATIONS ' THE ACCOMPANYING COMMUNICATIONS WERE GENERATED AFTER THE OCTOBER 29, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING I Enclosures: Michael Sherer (Ferrocaril parcel) - 11/5/91 Henry Engen (Creek setback memo) 11/5/91 Lester & Martha Jeffries (30% slope standards) 11/5/91 U DERO TY RECEIVED NOy' p 71991 November 5 1991 Henry Engen ' g Community Development Director City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, Ca. 93422 Dear Mr. Engen: On behalf of the owners of the property known as 2955 ' Chico Rd., I respectfully request placement on the agenda of the City Council during the upcoming General Plan Update Hearings to consider continuation of the current General Plan designation of Industrial Park. I believe that this reduction of the available Industrial Park property is not in the best interest of the community since it would significantly reduce the future , job market and is personally damaging to my client due to a decrease in value of the property approximating 65%. It is my estimation that as IPK and with the existing improvements, it , is worth approximately$3.50 per square foot, being$450,000. If it was zoned RS, as is proposed, it is likely that as one residential site, it would be worth $160,000. ' Sincerely, ' Michael Sherer cc: L. Davis L-Dprop.gpl 6760 EL CA,MINO REAL . ATASCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93422 . TELEPHONE 805 466-9700 REALTOR' / r7 M E M O R A N D U M ' TO: Ra Windsor City ty Manager ' FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director -�- DATE: November 5, 1991 RE: GENERAL PLAN HEARING: 50 FOOT CREEK SETBACK ISSUE The newspaper headlines on h the Planning Commission' s October 29th public hearing on the General Plan Draft and EIR gave the wrong impression of what actually happened. Here is what generally occurred: the Department of Fish and Game raised concerns over the language in the Draft General Plan which was discussed at the joint meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council on Octo- ber 10th. At the public hearing held by the Planning Commission on October 29th, there was considerable testimony in support of the 50 foot setback standard that had been referenced in the Fish and Game ' letter to the City. In regard to that letter, it was clarified that Fish and Game did not actually recommend a specific setback of 50 feet; rather, they cited as examples the use of 100 foot set ' • backs in the Coastal Zone for riparian areas and 50 foot for urban areas. In any event, there was considerable testimony pro and con on the 50 foot issue and the language that was offered by the consultants and accepted by the Planning Commission, was to include the follow- ing as one of the mitigation monitoring measures in the General ' Plan: "Grading shall not occur and buildings or structures requiring ' permit ap rova1 shall not be located within 50 feet of any creekway riparian vegetation, or within 50 foot of the center- line of the creekway, whichever is greater unless : ' a. A site-specific evaluation by a qualified biologist approved by the . City determines that a lesser setback will provide equivalent habitat protection; or ' b. The City completes a creekway mapping program and adopts other specific setback requirements based upon that mapping program. " The effect of this language - if adopted by the City Council - would be to establish the 50 foot distance as a trip wire for ' additional review of permits in selected riparian areas. The mechanism could be precise plans or conditional use permits depending on the nature of the project; or it could be a form of administrative use permit as discussed on October 10th. It in no ' way mandates that the 50 foot be a hard line along existing creekways and/or for previously developed properties. - Nor does it mandate that the public have access to the setback area or pri- vately owned creekways. It simply would require greater review in those kinds of areas to make sure that, as development occurs, it is done properly. From my listening to the October 10th discussion by g the Planning ' Commission and Council, the Commission' s recommendation is not that much different from the direction given by consensus at the time, which was to come up with a riparian protection ordinance with some form of administrative hearing and/or review. But to read the headlines in the papers, this is clearly not the impression given. ' The big story should have been: "General Plan Recommended for Approval by Planning Commission" . HE:ps ' 51\creekmmo. 114 cc: City Council Planning Commission City Engineer ' City Attorney • I /'7 9 m LIVE FILE Corvert ! Access I Stare THIS SHEET INDICATES THIS SECTION CONTAINS POOR QUALITY IMAGES P FS'"i 1v F j OV 2 7 131 29002 Firthridge Road uiVilY 'G Rancho Palos Verdes ��i'tLllr(r;�r�f California 902-14 November 26 , 1991 Community- Development Department ' 600 Palma Avenue Atascadero , CA 93422 ' Attention : Henry Engen, Director Dear Mr . Engen; We appreciated the opportunity to meet with you on November 22 to discuss our plans for subdividing our parcel in West Atascadero . We are eagerly awaiting our move to Atascadero to build our ' retirement home . As we mentioned briefly in our meeting , there are two elements in ' the proposed General Plan Cpdate that we strongly disagree with: ( 1 ) Not permitting new lots where the emergency response time is over 5 minutes and ( 2 ) not permitting new lots where the average '• slope is over 30% (allowing possible exceptions where there is a building envelope of at least 8 , 000 square feet with average slope less than 200%' ) . it seems to us that such explicit language is inappropriate as part of the City' s General Plan . If either of ' these two critera are adopted, any further development of a large fraction of West Atascadero would be blocked. ' The adoption of a specific requirement for emergency response time in the General Plan might cause present homeowners ( who have a 12 . 5 minute average fire/emergency response time currently according to the newly issued draft EIR) to hold the City liable if it takes tlonger than the specified time to reach their ho,m, in an emergency. The issues that arise with development of property with an average ' slope of greater than 309 can be better addressed ;:,y other means ( such as the subdivision ordinance or grading and building codes ) than by the City' s General Plan . ' In summary , we think the City Council should not adopt these overly restrictive elements as part of the General Plan. We would appreciate your forwarding our letter to members of the City ' Council . Lester Jeffries • Martha Jeffries