The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-071 w RESOLUTION NO. 2007-071 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DENYING APPEAL 2007-0012 AND APPEAL 2007-0013 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 5105 AND 5305 CHAUPLIN LANE AND CERTIFICATION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-0020 (APL 2007-0012 & APL 2007-0013: Clay/Messer/Finch/Polin) WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0012) of the Planning Commission's action to approve an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Jerry Clay, Sr., Council member 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero California 93422; and, WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0013) of the Planning Commission's action to approve an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, California 93423, Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue,No. 101, Fresno, California 93704 and Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, California 93405; and, grit WHEREAS, Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 requested the removal of sixty-two (62) native trees located at 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Lane; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located within the Single Family Residential land use designation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use Diagram; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located in the Residential Single Family—Z zoning district; and, WHEREAS; the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Tree Removal application on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 6907 E1 Camino Real and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made as the project was designed and approved the tree removal request subject to mitigation measures, as stated in the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City Council heard the appeals, as filed by Mr. Clay, Mr. Messer, Mr. Finch and Mr. Polin on July 24, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 2 of 10 WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made based on the project design with modified mitigation measures as follows: WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020 were prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the project will have no significant impacts with project specific mitigation measures as modified and incorporated; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on July 24, 2007, following the close of the review period, to consider the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and, NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, hereby resolves to certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 based on the following Findings, and as shown in Exhibit A: 1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and, 2. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the City Council, and the information contained therein was considered by the City Council, prior to recommending action on the project for which it was prepared; and, 3. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project; and, 4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals; and, 5. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and, 6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly; and, NOW,THEREFORE, the City Council takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Denial of Appeal. The City Council denies the appeals of Mr. Clay, Sr., Mr. Messer and Mr. Finch, and upholds the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 and finds as follows: City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 3 of 10 The trees are obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: • Early consultation with the City; • Consideration of practical design alternatives; • Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; • If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property; or • If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. SECTION 2. Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020. The City Council hereby certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 based on Findings and subject to mitigation measures. SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council hereby approves Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits: Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 W,,,,, Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval, Mitigation Measures Exhibit C: Tree Fee Table Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservaticn/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 4 of 10 On motion by Council Member Beraud and seconded by Council Member Brennler, the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: r AYES: Council Members Beraud,Brennler, O'Malley and Mayor Luna NOES: Council Member Clay ABSENT: None ADOPTED: July 24, 2007 CITYITASCADERO By: Mike Brennler,Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M. , City Clerk APPR VPD AS TO FORM: Patti L. V right, City Attorney City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 5 of 10 �rrrr Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 Due to the length of this document, it has not been reproduced as an attachment; however, it may be reviewed in the office of the City Clerk City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 6 of 10 Exhibit B:Conditions of Approval Tree Removal-TRP 2006-0094 irllru Conditions Of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TRP 2006-0094 /Monitoring Measure PR:Prior to Renard PS:Planning Services BL:Business License BS:Building Services BP:Building Perrrit FD:Fire Deparilnenl TO:Temporary Occupancy PD:Police Deparbrrent F0:Final Occupancy CE:City Engineer WW:Wastewater CA:City Attorney Planning Services 1. The applicant shall mitigate the removal or impact of PR PS the trees in accordance with the requirements of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 2. The applicant shall pay all required mitigation fees prior PR/BP PS to any tree removal as shown on exhibit B. 3. During the lot clearing and tree removal period,the Ongoing PS project arborist shall provide weekly reports detailing the project's compliance with the arborist"s recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. If the project is not in compliance,a stop work notice shall immediately be issued and the applicant shall immediately contact staff to discuss bringing the project into compliance. 11rr 4. After the lot clearing and tree removal period,the Ongoing PS project arborist shall submit bi-weekly reports discussing the project's compliance with the arborist's recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. 5. Prior to building permit final, an arborist letter and BP/FO PS photographic proof shall be submitted which documents that all root systems for trees#14 and#15 are intact and that all proper mitigation was adhered to during construction. City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 7 of 10 Exhibit C: Native Tree Removal Mitigation Tree Removal-TRP 2006-0094 Date: December 28, 2006 Prepared by: KM Address: 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Permit#: TRP 2006-0094 (PPN 2005-0172) Applicant: Don Messer Telephone: 466-0549 Owner: Burt Polin Telephone: (559) 439-9300 NATIVE TREE REMOVAL MITIGATION Tree protection required? YES Arborist review required? YES Total number of trees impacted: 34 (Lots 13 and 14) not including removals which are listed below 40 (Lot 15) not including removals which are listed below Removals: Number greater than 24"DBH: 0 (Lots 13 and 14) 8 (Lot 15) X00 Number less than 24" DBH: 20 (Lots 13 & 14) 34 (Lot 15) PC Permit Required? Yes Status: in process Replacements Required: City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 8 of 10 Evergreen Native Trees(inches) Deciduous Native Trees(inches) Totals dbh notes dbh notes 1 14-inches Tree R-1 (Lots 13&14) 1 16-inches Tree R-3 (Lots 13&14) 2 14-inches Tree R-2 (Lots 13&14) 2 16-inches Tree R-4 (Lots 13&14) 3 8-inches Tree R-9 (Lots 13&14) 3 14-inches Tree R-5 (Lots 13&14) 4 5-inches Tree R-10 (Lots 13&14) 4 5-inches Tree R-6 (Lots 13&14) 5 15-inches Tree R-16 (Lots 13&14) 5 5-inches Tree R-7 (Lots 13&14) 6 18-inches Tree R-17 (Lots 13&14) 6 5-inches Tree R-8 (Lots 13&14) 7 4-inches Tree R-18 (Lots 13&14) 7 12-inches Tree R-11 (Lots 13&14) 8 6-inches Tree R-12 (Lots 13&14) 8 7-inches Tree R-1 (Lot 15) 9 7-inches Tree R-13 (Lots 13&14) 9 10-inches Tree R-2 (Lot 15) 10 10-inches Tree R-14 (Lots 13&14) 10 20-inches Tree R-3 (Lot 15) 11 12-inches Tree R-15 (Lots 13&14) 11 12-inches Tree R-4 (Lot 15) 12 4-inches Tree R-19 (Lots 13&14) 12 8-inches Tree R-5 (Lot 15) 13 7-inches Tree R-20 (Lots 13&14) 13 29-inches Tree R-6 (Lot 15) 14 12-inches Tree R-7 (Lot 15) 14 6-inches Tree R-20 (Lot 15) 15 22-inches Tree R-8 (Lot 15) 15 11-inches Tree R-21 (Lot 15) 16 26-inches Tree R-9 (Lot 15) 16 6-inches Tree R-24 (Lot 15) 17 19-inches Tree R-10 (Lot 15) 17 5-inches Tree R-25 (Lot 15) 18 10-inches Tree R-11 (Lot 15) 18 10-inches Tree R-26 (Lot 15) 19 6-inches Tree R-12 (Lot 15) 19 13-inches Tree R-28 (Lot 15) 20 15-inches Tree R-13 (Lot 15) 20 6-inches Tree R-29 (Lot 15) taw 21 14-inches Tree R-14 (Lot 15) 21 4-inches Tree R-38 (Lot 15) 22 14-inches Tree R-15 (Lot 15) 22 6-inches Tree R-41 (Lot 15) 23 31-inches Tree R-16 (Lot 15) 24 20-inches Tree R-17 (Lot 15) 25 42-inches Tree R-18 (Lot 15) 26 34-inches Tree R-19 (Lot 15) 27 16-inches Tree R-22 (Lot 15) 28 8-inches Tree R-23 (Lot 15) 29 22-inches Tree R-27 (Lot 15) 30 36-inches Tree R-30 (Lot 15) 31 10-inches Tree R-31 (Lot 15) 32 30-inches Tree R-32 (Lot 15) 33 18-inches Tree R-33 (Lot 15) 34 14-inches Tree R-34 (Lot 15) 35 10-inches Tree R-35 (Lot 15) 36 34-inches Tree R-36 (Lot 15) 37 12-inches Tree R-37 (Lot 15) 38 10-inches Tree R-39 (Lot 15) 39 4-inches Tree R-40 (Lot 15) 40 16-inches Tree R-42 (Lot 15) Total 669-inches Total 186-inches 855-inches Mitigation Requirement Tree Fund Payment: $ 5,575.00 Tree Fund Payment: $ 3,100.00 $ 8,675.00 low City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 9 of 10 Exhibit D:Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement TRP 2006-0094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 14 +»rw Eassment 1 Lot 14 t..^l f aw « J ei+w�tx.xa: II+ ro,Ay A at x am City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-071 Page 10 of 10 Exhibit D:Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement am TRP 2006-0094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 15 Easement 3 Lot 15 s ilrrr .r. r m w Easement 2 k Lot 15 r m A ; A n 41 - RESO No. 2007-071 Exhibit A — Mitigated Neg Dec 2006-0020 — RECEIVED CITY OF ATASCADER FEB 2 N 900/ JULIE L. 80DEWALU COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTcounty C18(h �� Ue puv NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Environmental Coordinator of the City of Atascadero has completed a review of the following project and is proposing the following environmental determination: Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero,3CA 93423 Project Title.• Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10%. Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 & 030-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to construct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 square foot deck. The proposed project will require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on moderate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. This is a revised proposed mitigated negative declaration and replaces the document previously posted ou June 5, 2006. General Plan Designation: SFR -Z Zoning District: RSF-Z Environmental Begins: February 28, 2007 Review Dates: Ends: March 19, 2007 Hearing Date: Tree Removal Request is tentatively scheduled before the Planning Commission on March 19, 2007 Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental is proposed. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public Determination: review from 02/28/07 through 03/19/07 at 6907 El Camino Real, Community Development Department from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m-, Monday through Friday. Any interested person may review the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and projectfiles. Questions should be directed to &erry Margaociate Planner at 461-5000, ext. 3442. arren Frace, Director of Commuruty Development Date Fisc: 2005-0172 MND =d- Prins D-: 02118/071:46 Phi 6907 EL CAMINO REAL- ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805) 461-5000 • FAX 461-7612 CITY OF ATAS CADER 0 PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2006-0020 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5000 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Date Posted: Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Project Title: Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10%. Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 & 030-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to construct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 square foot deck. The proposed project wi4 require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and Site Plan, Lot 15 approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on m6derate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Attachment 5 - Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. Tree Protection Plan, Lot 15 This is a revised proposed mitigated negative dee_]aration and replaces the document previously Attachment 7 - posted on June 5, 2006. General Plan Designation: SFR -Z Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 15 Zoning District: RSF-Z Findings: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment. 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. Determination: Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study 2006-0020 (made a part hereof by reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined that the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the project (see attachment). Prepared By: Kerry Margason, Associate Planner Date Posted: February 27, 2007 Public Review Ends: March 18, 2007 Attachments- Attachment 1- Location Map. Attachment 2 - Aerial Attachment 3 - Site Plan, Lot 14 Attachment 4 - Site Plan, Lot 15 Attachment 5 - Tree Protection Plan , Lot 14 Attachment 6 - Tree Protection Plan, Lot 15 Attachment 7 - Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 14 Attachment 8 - Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 15 Attachment 9 - Open Space/Preservation Areas, Lot 14 Attachment 10 - Open Space/Preservation Areas, Lot 15 Attachment 11 — Exhibit A — Mitieation Measures and Monitoring Attachment 12 - Initial Study 2006-0020 Fk: 2005-0177 NiNDI ad- Pdu. Due: OIRMM07 PM 6907 EL CAMINO REAL, ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805) 461-5000 • FAX 461-7612 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Review 2006-0020 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Address: Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Project Title: Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10%. Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 & 030-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to co#tstruct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 Surrounding Land Uses and square foot deck. The proposed project will require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and Setting: approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on moderate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. This is a revised proposed mitigated negative declaration and replaces the document previously Other public agencies posted on June 5, 2006. whose approval is required General Plan Designation: SFR -Z (e.g., permits, financing approval, or Zoning District: RSF-Z Lead Agency Name and City of Atascadero Address: 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 Contact Person and Phone Kerry Margason, Associate Planner Number: City of Atascadero 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential -Z Zoning: Residential Single Family -Z Surrounding Land Uses and North: RSF-Z Setting: South: RS `-Z West: RSF-Z East: RSF-Z Other public agencies None whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) 02/28/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km Attachment 1 Location Map 5225 and 5205 Chauplin Lane Atascadero, CA CITY OFATASCADER0 INITIAL STUDY PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposed MNDArn 02/28/07 Attachment 3 Site Plan - Lot 14 CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY C" Or Ausuxe 030-311-005 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 02/28107 Attachment 4 Site Plan - Lot 15 CITY OF A TA S CADER O INITIAL STUDY 030-311-002 02128I07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MNO.km 1 CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Attachment 5 Tree Protection Plan Lot 14 TREE PROTECTION PLAN 'CHAUPUN ' PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled 02128!07 Attachment 6 Tree Protection Plan Lot 15 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY TREE PROTECTION PLAN LLDCND _ O _ _'A- " LOT .1 . /rte' � d -OT _-95 5'ss 41 _ xs a",r — y ,4. A c F L -�. �-11 _Y� 1 ' •�- j t 7ti:;� L' V t ,� - ,1- --,f ': 1 � _ nis-rs®rvnw .eu � 1 _--. ':. ` CHAUPLIN 'AVENUE 02!28107 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.knn .•y�e Attachment 7 Open Space/Preservation Areas Lot 14 CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY 02128107 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km Yu{�L ��IG�IIk��• 6 CITY OF ATASCADER0 INITIAL STUDY Attachment 8 Open Space/Preservation Areas Lot 15 Open Space Areas TREE PROTECTION PLAN LEGEND / 4� DoT i 4.. r r , 1 1+y------ 1'�,- ... lT ' x. 1 1 )7 117 H}LIIT 0- IILI EHAUPLIN''AVENUE -11 ` PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km 02120/07 Attachment 9 Tree Protection Plan Spreadsheet Lot 14 ��a aaaso �a�aa e ®aoe s® maaavaems maasoa CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY TRf£ PROTECTION AND PRE- RVARON P N- TREE LfC£ND: ��, r. �• — r mea... oaaaeae eaaa a�� ea�sa311 maaoa��®e® ooa vaMM o aao os®a ea®a®��saa Moommis o�a000� maoavo� �oOO®O�i, oo®oo��o HIM��t,��e o Lot 14 02128/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km Attachment 10 'free Protection Plan Spreadsheet Lot 15 TRCC PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION PLAN 7R�GEND.. CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY AVOIDED TREE INDEX TAPIF MY TO 40' AWAY APPROX,) til .. �1. eta .. . .. ® aasat�e e��t�sasoist��stri� Iia aae®�� o®a�� 0oera�at�s�� m 000�ovss� t�t�tiv>oto o®�� 00 MOM 00 t�ooot�ti� � iso ��oora oO0p eaoa�isoses t��ot�saoo m®a0t�t�osst�s m000a �� t�aa�a�ao ®®s t�aat�a a ®0000 ts�o®oa�vosa� oo�taooeo ®o oo��mot�vt�ravo� ta�oirioo�� v 02E18/07 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposled MND.km Attachment II Mitination Moniforinn Frnnram CITY OF ATAS CADER O uNNNAVA ��r41-11A Exhibit A Timing Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring PPN 2005-0172 cP.Grading Pennil PS: Paring servms BP: Buiing Permit BS: Budding Servkg TQ Temporary FD: Fn Depa tTr nl 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Fane n. Final nspechon PR Porte Departrnont CE: City Engineer FD: Fria Omipancy WW: Waslev ler Ca: City Anuney AMWC: Waler Comp. Mitigation Measure 1 .c.1: The project shall be conditioned to provide tree preservation easements to ensure that all native trees remaining after construction/development of the sites are not removed/impacted by future property owners and that ample area remains for natural regeneration of the native trees. Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: All of the following regulations shall be placed on all grading and construction plans. - Section 6.3: Construction Equipment • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. - Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes. loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for use off-road). • Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques • Develop a comprehensive construction activity management plan designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. • Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. • Limit the length of the construction workday period, if necessary. • Phase construction activities, if appropriate. Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10 All of the following measures shall be included on grading, demolition and building plan notes: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non -potable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project re - vegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are plann4ed to be reworked at dates greater than 0228/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Exhibit A Timing Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring PPN 2005-0172 GP: Gracing Pe1mf PS: Plar� Seer BR Buldng PaTril BS: Bwldng Senors TO,. Temporary FD: Fre Cepartrrrnl 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane 0=pancy FI: Fnalnspedion PD: Pdioe Depavenl CecyFmneef Fp: Fnal Omipanq WW: Wastewater CA Gy Attorney AMWC: Water Comp. one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast -germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to re -vegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binder, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved should be complete as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance - between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of any structure. Mitioation Measure 4.c.d.1: An open space easement shall be placed over the drainage swale area prior to building permit issuance to insure buildings and other structures are not placed with the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources. This open space easement will also facilitate current wildlife movement patterns and ensure retention of wildlife nursery sites. Mitigation Measure 4.c.2: There shall be no construction within the drainage swale area other than the placement of the culvert under the proposed driveway. All construction in this area shall be on Lot 15 and all activities shall be limited in scope as much as practicable in order to minimize disturbance of the drainage area. Mitigation 4.c.3: All construction activities shall be conducted outside of the rainy season (October 15 to March 15). Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: An open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure the trees are not removed in the future. Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall have all trees clearly marked in the field and shall call for a field inspection by Community Development staff prior to issuance of any building permits. The developer, construction supervisor, arborist and Community Development staff shall be present during the field inspection. 02128/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Exhibit A Timing Responsibility /Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Program PPN 2005-0172 GR BP: BuddrgP � BSBuUn9`� TO: Temporary FD: Fre Depa trim! Ooa9ancy PP. Poke Depanrnent 5225 S 5205 Chaupiin Lane Fnai CE:City sLnva� F mipan F0: Fcial O�vaparcy CA City AnaTey AMWC: Waley Canp, Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: The certified arborist shall be responsible for monitoring the project during all phases of construction through project completion, as follows: (a) A written agreement between the arborist and the developer outlining an arborist monitoring schedule for each construction phase through final inspection shall be submitted to and approved by planning staff prior to the issuance of building/grading permits. (b) Arborist shall schedule a pre -construction meeting with engineering /planning staff, grading equipment operators, project superintendent to review the project conditions and requirements prior to any grubbing or earth work for any portion of the project site. All tree protection fencing and trunk protection shall be, installed for inspection during the meeting. Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the line of encroachment into the tree's root zone area: (c) All mitigation measures, as outlined in any updated report shall be closely followed. Mitigation should include the following: ■ Prune all trees in active development areas for structural strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist; • Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning. • Unless the arborist recommends other mitigation, in locations where paving is to occur within the tree canopy, grub only and do not grade nor compact. Install porous pavers over a three-inch bed of/, inch granite covered with one -inch pea gravel for screeding. If curbs are required, use pegged curbs to secure the porous pavers. Pegged curbs are reinforced six to eight curbs poured at grade with a one -foot by one -foot pothole every four to six linear feet. • All trenching or grading within the protected root zone area, outside of the tree protection fence shall require hand trenching to preserve and protect roots that are larger than 2 inches in diameter. ■ No grading or trenching is allowed within the fenced protected area. • Any roots that are 4 inches in diameter or larger are not to be cut until inspected and approved by the on-site arborist. (d) Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by the project arborist certifying that the tree protection plan was implemented, the trees designated for protection were protected during construction, and the construction -related tree protection measures are no longer required for tree protection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: • All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain. • Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area. • Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be pruned prior to any heavy equipment work being done. • Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the drip line of all trees. • All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for protection with 4 -foot chain link, snow or safety fencing placed per the approved tree Drotection clan. Tree protection fencinq shall be in place prior to any site PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted 02!28/07 I'tIII7r9• 7 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Exhibit A Timing Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring P P N 2005-0172 GP: Grading Permd BR Buldng Pemrl PS: parkg servEas BS: BuMi g SerAms TD Temporary FD: FnDepatiwt 5225 & 5205 Chaupiin Lane FI PD: PokeDryyartrte [ CE, UyE,gr*ff FD: Fnal Cm4kfq WW: Wastewater ca coy Aitaney AWNC: Waley Cone. excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all construction activities. • Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal. • Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer should be redirected from under the canopy of any trees that are to remain. • Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges across any root systems. • Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand. At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment. Mitigation Measure 5.d.1: Should any cultural resources be unearthed during site development work, the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, will be followed to reduce impacts to a non-significant level. _ Mitigation Measure 5.d.2: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has been contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and to determine if the remains are of Native American heritage. If the remains are of Native American Heritage, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. Mitigation Measure 6.a.1: All construction on site shall comply with the seismic construction standards for Seismic. Construction Zone 4 per the California 2001 Building Code. Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket, hydro -mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of earthwork between the months of October 15 through April 15. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place. Duration of the project: The contractor will be responsible for the clean up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles. Mitigation Measure 6.c.d.1: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a building permit by the building department. The building plans will be required to follow the recommendations of the soils report to assure safety for residents and buildings. Mitigation Measure 11.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation. 02128/07 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposled MND.km M Attachment 12 CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. F-1 Aesthetics ❑ Biological Resources F-1Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Mineral Resources F-1 Agriculture Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Noise F-1 Air Quality Geology /Soils F-1 Land Use / Planning 1:1 ❑ Population /Housing F—Transportation/TrafficRecreation Public Services❑ F-1 Utilities / Service Systems F-1 Mandatory Findings of Significance On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant effect" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MNO.km 02!28/07 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: CITY OF ATAS CADER 0 INITIAL STUDY 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached. Other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 0228/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km pr :-7 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Elof Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation 1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: Elof Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- Ellimited within a state scenic highway? agricultural use? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ V\\1 ❑ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ❑ SOURCES: Project Description; Site Plan, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering DISCUSSION: 1.a. The proposed project does not obscure a scenic vista. 1.b. The proposed project will not substantially damage scenic resources. Impacts to native trees in the construction area will be mitigated according to the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. The project site is not near a state scenic highway and does not contain a historic structure. The project site will not disturb any rock outcroppings. 1.c. The proposed residences are an infill development and will remain within the character of the surrounding area. However, several native trees will be removed and/or impacted. Open space easements will be required. 1.d. New single-family residences at these two adjoining locations are not expected to generate substantial light or glare. All lighting will be residential in nature. Mitigation Measure 1.c.1: The project shall be conditioned to provide tree preservation easements to ensure that all native trees remaining after construction/development of the sites are not removed/impacted by future property owners and that ample area remains for natural regeneration of the native trees. 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland Elof Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their ❑ location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? SOURCES: Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION 07/30/07 Page 18 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 2.a. The property is not shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency as prime farmland. 2.b. The property is not under a Williamson Act contract. 2.c. The project will not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. 3. AIR QUALITY -- The significance criteria established by the Air Quality Control District in its CEQA Guidelines may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 0 El M air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ® ❑ 1-1 to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any El 0 El criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ El concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number El F1 of people? SOURCES: Air Pollution Control District (APCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook DISCUSSION: 3.a.c.) The Air Quality Handbook finds that a project that produces 10 pounds a day of emissions will have a significant effect on air quality. The construction of 35 homes would result in the production of 10 pounds of emissions per day. Therefore, the project's 2 new homes will produce less than ten pounds a day and air quality impacts are considered to be less than significant. 3.b.) Construction activities, including site grading may produce small quantities of air pollution, including dust and equipment exhaust. Any air quality impacts will be temporary and short term. The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. 3.d.e) The construction of single -family -residences and the associated public improvements will not concentrate pollutants. Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: All of the following regulations shall be placed on all grading and construction plans. Section 6.3: Construction Equipment • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for use off-road). • Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. 07/30/07 Page 19 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques • Develop a comprehensive construction activity management plan designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. • Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. • Limit the length of the construction workday period, if necessary. • Phase construction activities, if appropriate. Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10 All of the following measures shall be included on grading, demolition and building plan notes: Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible - Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non -potable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project re -vegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast -germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to re -vegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binder, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved should be complete as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of any structure. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat ❑ or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 07/30/07 Page 20 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km.doc (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? SOURCES: Project description, Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Eric Gobler, dated September 2006; Land Use Element EIR; Atascadero Tree Ordinance; Arborist Report prepared by Henry Curtis, dated September 2006; Site Visit 5/22/06. DISCUSSION: 4.a. No sensitive species have been found near the site. 4.b. The project is located near a large, intermittent drainage Swale. However, as designed, construction will not take place within a riparian zone. It will be necessary to place a culvert within the drainage Swale under the driveway in order to provide access to the lots. This is the only area of disturbance in the Swale and it does not appear that riparian vegetation will be impacted. 4.c. There are potential wetlands on the project site in and surrounding the drainage Swale area. As designed, with the shared driveway and. placement of the structures, there will be no construction in any areas showing signs of riparian vegetation. 4.d. The Land Use Element EIR concludes that development within the city limits will not have a significant impact on wildlife or wildlife corridors. However, it has been noted that areas of this site do provide a "nursery" for local wildlife. 4.e.f An aborist report and tree protection plan have been submitted. An updated report and field identification shall be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits. Special precautions have been made regarding tree removals and construction around native tree. Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1: An open space easement shall be placed over the drainage Swale area prior to building permit issuance to insure buildings and other structures are not placed with the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources. This open space easement will also facilitate current wildlife movement patterns. Mitigation Measure 4.c.2: There shall be no construction within the drainage Swale area other than the placement of the culvert under the proposed driveway. All construction in this area shall be on Lot 15 and all activities shall be limited in scope as much as practicable in order to minimize disturbance of the drainage area. Mitigation 4.c.3: All construction activities shall be conducted outside of the rainy season (October 15 to March 15). Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: An open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure the trees are not removed in the future. Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall have all trees clearly marked in the field and shall call for a field inspection by Community Development staff prior to issuance of any building permits. The developer, construction supervisor, arborist and Community Development staff shall be present during the field inspection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: The certified arborist shall be responsible for monitoring the project during all phases of 07/30/07 Page 21 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATAS CADER O T]VTTTAT cT1MV Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation construction through project completion, as follows: (a) A written agreement between the arborist and the developer outlining an arborist monitoring schedule for each construction phase through final inspection shall be submitted to and approved by planning staff prior to the issuance of building/grading permits. (b) Arborist shall schedule a pre -construction meeting with engineering /planning staff, grading equipment operators, project superintendent to review the project conditions and requirements prior to any grubbing or earth work for any portion of the project site. All tree protection fencing and trunk protection shall be installed for inspection during the meeting. Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the line of encroachment into the tree's root zone area. (c) All mitigation measures, as outlined in any updated report shall be closely followed. Mitigation should include the following: ■ Prune all trees in active development areas for structural strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist; • Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning. ■ Unless the arborist recommends other mitigation, in locations where paving is to occur within the tree canopy, grub only and do not grade nor compact. Install porous pavers over a three-inch bed of 3/. inch granite covered with one -inch pea gravel for screeding. If curbs are required, use pegged curbs to secure the porous pavers. Pegged curbs are reinforced six to eight curbs poured at grade with a one -foot by one -foot pothole every four to six linear feet. ■ All trenching or grading within the protected root zone area, outside of the tree protection fence shall require hand trenching to preserve and protect roots that are larger than 2 inches in diameter. ■ No grading or trenching is allowed within the fenced protected area. • Any roots that are 4 inches in diameter or larger are not to be cut until inspected and approved by the on-site arborist. (d) Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by the project arborist certifying that the tree protection plan was implemented, the trees designated for protection were protected during construction, and the construction -related tree protection measures are no longer required for tree protection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.4• • All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain. • Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area. • Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be pruned prior to any heavy equipment work being done. • Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the drip line of all trees. • All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for protection with 4 -foot chain link, snow or safety fencing placed per the approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be in place prior to any site excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all construction activities. • Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal. • Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer should be redirected from under the canopy of any trees that are to remain. • Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges across any root systems. • Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand. • At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? ❑ ❑ ❑ 07/30/07 Page 22 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than PPN 2005-0172 No Significant Significant with Significant Impact ❑ Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ F-1resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ❑ ❑ Eloutside of formal cemeteries? SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: 5.a.b.c.d. No known historical, archeological or cultural sites have been found or documented in the vicinity of the project. Mitigation Measure 5.d.1: Should any cultural resources be unearthed during site development work, the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, will be followed to reduce impacts to a non-significant level. Mitigation Measure 5.d.2: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has been contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and to determine if the remains are of Native American heritage. If the remains are of Native American Heritage, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated ❑ ® ❑ on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ F1liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and17 ❑ ❑ ❑ potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ VN risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ 07130i07 Page 23 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR; Site Plan, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering DISCUSSION: 6.a. The City of Atascadero is located in the Salinian domain of the Coast Range geomorphic province of California. This domain is relatively quiet in terms of seismic activity. The San Andreas Fault zone lies approximately 30 miles to the west of the City, with the San Simeon-Hosgri Fault about 19 miles to the east. These faults are considered active. In addition, the Rinconada Fault which is considered "potentially active" lies to the southeast and the Nacimiento Fault zone is approximately 3 miles to the west of the City. The Nacimiento Fault is considered inactive. This places the Atascadero community in a "moderate" hazard zone for seismic activity. The project site is not located in an area subject to liquefaction or landslide. 6.b. Construction activities on the site will be required to comply with sedimentation and erosion control measures prescribed by the City Engineer. 6.c.d.e Soil conditions will be reviewed during building permit review in accordance with the municipal code. The property contains no unusual geological formations. Percolation tests are required in the City of Atascadero before building permits for residences can be issued. Mitigation Measure 6.a.1: All construction on site shall comply with the seismic construction standards for Seismic Construction Zone 4 per the California 2001 Building Code. Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket, hydro -mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of earthwork between the months of October 15 through April 15. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place. Duration of the project: The contractor will be responsible for the clean up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles. Mitigation Measure 6.c.d.1: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a building permit by the building department. The building plans will be required to follow the recommendations of the soils report to assure safety for residents and buildings. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal ❑ ❑ ❑ of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and ❑ ❑ ❑ accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- ❑ ❑ quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government ❑ ❑ ❑ Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two ❑ 07/30/07 Page 24 ppN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, wouldEl Elthe project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element. DISCUSSION 7a.b.c. Homes do not generate or involve use of significant amounts of hazardous materials. There are no known hazardous materials on the site or nearby. 7.d. The properties are not a listed hazardous material site. 7e.f. The properties are not near an airport. 7g.h. The site is within the Fire Department's 5 minute or less response area. During building permit review, the fire department will verify appropriate fire hydrant locations. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: d) viuldLV any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ Elrequirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there CITY OF ATASCADERO would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the INITIAL STUDY local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No PPN 2005-0172 Significant Significant with Significant Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, wouldEl Elthe project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element. DISCUSSION 7a.b.c. Homes do not generate or involve use of significant amounts of hazardous materials. There are no known hazardous materials on the site or nearby. 7.d. The properties are not a listed hazardous material site. 7e.f. The properties are not near an airport. 7g.h. The site is within the Fire Department's 5 minute or less response area. During building permit review, the fire department will verify appropriate fire hydrant locations. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: d) viuldLV any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ Elrequirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there ❑ ❑ Elsubstantially would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of previously -existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a ❑ ❑ stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration the ❑ ❑ of course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems ❑ ❑ or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 07i30i07 Page 25 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact ❑ Incorporation ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ gect cescrlptlon; flood Insurance Rate Map 060700 0004; DISCUSSION: 8a. The construction will not violate water quality standards. 8b. The project will not deplete ground water supplies. Water will be provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company. 8c.d.e.f. All cut and fill during construction shall be subject to review for compliance with City drainage and grading regulations. Drainage will not be permitted to create or intensify any hazards for persons or property in the vicinity. 8.g.h.i. Future housing will be outside of the 100 -year flood hazard area. 8.j. The project area is not subject to inundation by a tsunami. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: ❑) rllyblcaliy aiviae an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N ement; Circulation Element; project description; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: 9.a. The project will not physically divide an established community. The two single-family residences are consistent and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 9.b. The General Plan identifies single-family residential uses as an appropriate use in the Rural Estates land use designation. 9.c. The project is consistent with the open space and conservation policies identified in the General Plan. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: 07/30i07 Page 26 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Eli '�`"°�^' CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No PPN 2005-0172 Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ Elresource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important ❑ ❑ El resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? SOURCES: Project description. DISCUSSION: 10.a.b. No mining is proposed as a part of this project. No known mineral resources have been identified in the area 11. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or El ❑ ❑ noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels? ❑ ❑ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels the project vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ El project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ® ❑ ❑ without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of ❑ ❑ a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people living or working in the project ❑ ❑ area to excessive noise levels? SOURCES: Project description; Noise Element; Noise Ordinance; Acoustical Design Manual DISCUSSION: 11 a.b.c.d.) Construction is expected to involve some heavy machinery and use of impact tools that make noise. Noise levels on the site are thus expected to be raised temporarily. The future home is not expected to generate unacceptable levels of noise. 11.e.f.) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or private airstrip. Mitigation Measure 11.d 1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ Eldirectly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of 07/30/07 Page 27 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km.doc �> CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2006-0020 Potentially Less Than Less Than No PPN 2005-0172 Significant Significant with Significant Impact Police protection? ❑ Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ Elnecessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the Elconstruction of replacement housing elsewhere? El El SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element. DISCUSSION: 12.a.) Two homes will be built where the general plan projection anticipates approximately two additional houses 12.b.c.) No housing or persons will be displaced. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ 1`71 ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ auurcx.ta: t-rolect oescnptlon; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: Development Impact Fees: Development Impact Fees will be required of any new project for which a building permit is issued. The concept of the impact fee program is to fund and sustain improvements which are needed as a result of new development as stated in the General Plan and other policy documents within the fee program. Development Impact Fees fall into the following categories: Drainage; Streets, Roads, Bridges; Sewer; Public Safety; Park, and Miscellaneous Fees. In addition, school fees are collected by the Atascadero Unified School District. The amount of impact fees to be paid will be determined at the time of issuance of building permit. Fire and Police: Impact fees are charged for new development, to help pay the cost of providing new facilities to serve the expanding City. The Fire Department of the City of Atascadero has indicated that it will be able to adequately service the proposed project. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Department. The City of Atascadero Police Department has also indicated that the proposed project poses no problems to the police to adequately service it. Schools: At buildout, the city's population will overburden the existing school system unless additional classroom space is added. The Atascadero Unified School District charges impact fees to fund additional schools as needed. State law 07/30/07 Page 28 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation restricts mitigation of school impacts to the levying of these fees and other measures adopted by the school district. Provision of adequate facilities for the population is the responsibility of the school district. Fees will be required through construction permits for the residences. Parks: New residences will increase demand on parks and recreation facilities. The City's Parks & Recreation Commission is committed to finding ways to continue to provide parks and other recreational opportunities to City residents as the City expands, thereby addressing cumulative impacts. Other public facilities: The construction is not expected to have significant impacts on any other public facilities. 14. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ Elneighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require ❑ ❑ ❑ the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SOURCES: Project description; Parks and Recreation Element. DISCUSSION: 14.a.) Residents are expected to use existing parks and recreational facilities, but the numbers are not expected to result in substantial physical deterioration of any facilities. 14.b.) The project does not involve construction of recreational facilities. 15. TRANS PORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 07/30/07 Page 29 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km.doc Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation Incorporation g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ ❑ supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? SOURCES: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; Project Description. Less Than No Significant Impact Impact DISCUSSION: 15a.b. The Circulation Element (CE) anticipates an increase in development in this area. The CE incorporates mitigation for effects from increased traffic. 15.c. No changes will occur to the air traffic patterns. 15.d. There are no sharp curves or major intersections within the vicinity. 15.e. The project will have adequate emergency access from Chauplin Road. 15.f. Adequate parking will be provided on-site for the future residences. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water El El Elapplicable Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or treatment facilities ❑ ❑ ❑ wastewater or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities ❑ ❑ ❑ or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the from ❑ ❑ ❑ project existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment that ❑ ❑ ❑ provider serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to the ❑ E] Elaccommodate project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ regulations related to solid waste? SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element. DISCUSSION: Water: The Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) will provide water. All property within the city limits is entitled to water from the AMWC. The project is not expected to require significant quantities of water for the proposed uses. Water is pumped from two portions of the largest underground basin in the county, the Paso Robles Formation, using a series of shallow and deep wells. The water company anticipates that it will be able to meet the city's needs through buildout and beyond: Water demand at buildout under the LUE is estimated at about 8,500 acre-feet per year (AFY). The total available 07/30/07 Page 30 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc cis•— �psun�; Initial Study 2006-0020 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation groundwater supply greatly exceeds demand, according to the findings of the Long -Term Viability of Water study. However, the water company does not currently have the deep wells needed to tap into the total amount needed at buildout. The water company is currently developing plans for installing wells where they will be most effective and will not conflict with water rights of others. According to the Water Company, development of additional wells is expected to keep pace with construction in the City, so that water supply will not be interrupted. Sewer. Both residence will be required to hook up to the City's wastewater facilities. 1 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality Elof the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will Elcause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION: The project site is an undeveloped residential infill site which is currently being proposed as two single-family residences, consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project has been analyzed as required by CEQA and the Atascadero Municipal Code. Project -related impacts have been identified and mitigation measures have been included within the proposal to reduce the effect of the proposed project as described herein. -- SOURCES: General Plan Land Use Element, City of Atascadero, 2002 Zoning Ordinance, part of Municipal Code, City of Atascadero, as amended through 1999. Land Use Element Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Crawford, Multari, & Clark, adopted 2002 CEQA Handbook, Air Quality Control District, August 1995 General Plan Safety Element, City of Atascadero, 2002 General Plan Circulation Element, 2002 General Plan Noise Element, adopted 2002 Acoustical Design Manual, Brown-Buntin Associates, 1991 Noise Ordinance, City of Atascadero, 1992 Flood Insurance Rate Map, community -panel number 060700 0004 Trip Generation, Institute of Traffic Engineers PROJECT SOURCES: Project Description Project Plans, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering Grading and Drainage Plan, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering Tree Protection Plan, Henry Curtis 07/30/07 Page 31 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km.doc