HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2007-09-18_AgendaPacketCITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 18, 2007 — 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call: Chairperson O'Keefe
Vice Chairperson Fonzi
Commissioner Jack
Commissioner O'Grady
Commissioner Slane
Commissioner Marks
Commissioner Heatherington
Chairperson will read the decorum guidelines
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Prior to a project hearing Planning Commission Members must disclose any communications
they have had on any quasi-judicial agenda items. This includes, but is not limited to, Tentative
Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps, Variances, Conditional Use Permits, and Planned Development
Permits. This does not disqualify the Planning Commission Member from participating and
voting on the matter, but gives the public and applicant an opportunity to comment on the ex
parte communication.
PUBLIC COMMENT
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter not
on this agenda and over which the Commission has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes.
Please state your name and address for the record before making your presentation. The Commission may
take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda)
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
Regular Meeting September 18, 2007
Page 2 of 5
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non -controversial by City Staff and will
be approved by one motion if no member of the Commission or public wishes to comment or ask questions.)
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 4, 2007.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
2. BUDGET PRESENTATION
PUBLIC HEARINGS
(For each of the following items, the public will be given an opportunity to speak. After a staff report, the Chair will open the public
hearing and invite the applicant or applicant's representative to make any comments. Members of the public will be invited to provide
testimony to the Commission following the applicant. Speakers should state their name and address for the record and can address the
Commission for five minutes. After all public comments have been received, the public hearing will be closed, and the Commission
will discuss the item and take appropriate action(s))
3. PLN 2006-1117, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR 5825 RIDGEWAY COURT
CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF APRIL 17, 2007
Owners/
Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825 Ridgeway Court, Atascadero, CA 93422
Applicants:
Gary and Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title:
PLN 2006-1117: CUP 2006-0184, TTM 2006-0089, ZCH 2006-0121
Project
Palma Avenue, Rosario Avenue, Ridgeway Court
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN's: 029-322-022, 023, 024
Project
The proposed project was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of April
Description:
17, 2007 until a Historic Survey/Report could be obtained for the project, which has
now been completed.
The proposed project consists of an application for construction of 7 single-family
detached homes on individual lots that will be developed under the requirements of a
Planned Development Overlay -29 within the RMF -10 Zoning District. One existing home,
designated as an Atascadero Colony Home is proposed to remain. Proposed homes
range in size from 1500 to 2300 square feet. Lot sizes range from 3155 to 22,407 square
feet. The project includes one home per lot, each two stories tall and with either a porch
or a deck. Eight native trees are proposed for removal; 4 Toyons, 2 Live Oaks, and 2
Valley Oak trees. The project will take access from Palma, Rosario, and Ridgeway Court.
General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family -10 (RMF -10)
Proposed
Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is
Environmental
proposed. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review at
Determination:
6907 EI Camino Real, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda
Regular Meeting September 18, 2007
Page 3 of 5
4. PLN 2007-1238, CITYWIDE TITLE 9 PLANNING AND ZONING TEXT
AMENDMENTS
Applicant:
City of Atascadero, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title:
PLN 2007-1238 / Zone Change 2007-0138 Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendments
Project
Citywide
Location:
APN 030-212-016 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
The project consists of a proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to portions of Title
Description•
9 Planning and Zoning, of the Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC). The proposed text
updates consist of three Amendments that encompass the following:
1.) Amend the timeframe for determination of completeness for Precise Plan and
Conditional Use Permit applications to be consistent with the requirements of the State of
Proposed
California's Permit Streamlining Act (AMC 9.2-102).
Environmental
2.) Extend the permit timeline for planning entitlements, including Conditional Use Permits
Determination:
and Precise Plans, from 12 months to 24 months, to be consistent with the approval period
of Tentative Tract Maps (AMC 9-1.104, AMC 9-2.113, AMC 9-2.114, AMC 9-2.119).
3.) Amend RSF-Y and RSF-Z minimum lot size from net area to gross area in order make
the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the General Plan requirements (AMC 9-3.154).
Proposed
Exempt from CEQA, Proposed Notice of Determination
Environmental
Determination:
5. PLN 2007-1200, ROAD ABANDONMENT, PRECISE PLAN, AND LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT FOR 6305 MORRO ROAD
Owner:
Donald A. Giessinger, PO Box 791, Atascadero, CA 93423
Project Title:
PLN 2007-1200, RAB 2007-0018, PPN 2007-0222, LLA 2007-0082
Project
6305 Morro Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
APN 030-212-016 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
Consideration of a request to have the City of Atascadero abandon a portion of Marchant
Description:
Avenue right-of-way and allow a Lot Line Adjustment between one legal lot of record (Tesoro
Gas Station / Car Wash) located at 6305 Morro Road and adjacent Marchant Avenue right-of-
way. The project is proposed to accommodate an 850 square -foot Car Wash adjacent to an
existing Car Wash / Gas Station.
Proposed
Categorical exemption: CEQA Section 15305; Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations:
Environmental
Class 5
Determination:
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
6. PLN 2007-1188, PLANNING COMMISSION NORMS
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Regular Meeting September 18, 2007
Page 4 of 5
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be on October 2, 2007 at City Hall,
Council Chambers, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero.
Please note: Should anyone challenge in court any proposed development entitlement listed
on this Agenda, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public
hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission at, or prior to this public hearing.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting September 18, 2007
Page 5 of 5
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Planning Commission meets in regular session on the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00
p.m., at City Hall, Council Chambers, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the
Commission in the order of the printed Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the
Agenda are on file in the office of the Community Development Department and are available for public
inspection during City Hall Annex business hours at the Community Development counter and on our
website, www.atascadero.org. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero
Library, 6850 Morro Road. All documents submitted by the public during Commission meetings that are
either read into the record or referred to in their statement will be noted in the minutes and available for
review in the Community Development Department.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in
a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager's Office, (805)
461-5000, or the City Clerk's Office, (805) 461-5000. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or
time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be
made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Chairperson will identify the
subject, staff will give their report, and the Commission will ask questions of staff. The Chairperson will
announce when the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the
Commission regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for,
against, or comment in any way:
• You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Chairperson
• Give your name and address (not required)
• Make your statement
• All comments should be made to the Chairperson and Commission
• All comments limited to 5 minutes (unless changed by the Commission)
• No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity
to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the Community
Development Department at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Access to hook up your laptop to the
City's projector will be provided. You are required to submit to the Recording Secretary a printed copy
of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the Chairperson before the meeting begins to
announce your presence and turn in the printed copy.
The Chairperson will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further
public comments will be heard by the Council.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, "PUBLIC HEARINGS", the Chairperson will call for anyone from the audience having
business with the Commission to:
• Please approach the podium and be recognized
• Give your name and address (not required)
• State the nature of your business
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Commission's attention. A maximum of
30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Commission).
CALL TO ORDER
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 9-18-07
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 4, 2007 — 7:00 P.M.
Chairperson O'Keefe called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Vice Chairperson
Fonzi led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present
Absent
Others Present
Commissioners Heatherington, Marks, Slane, Fonzi and
Chairperson O'Keefe
Commissioners O'Grady (excused), and Commissioner Jack
(joined the meeting at 7:04 p.m.)
Recording Secretary Grace Pucci
Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works
Director / City Engineer Steve Kahn, Deputy Community
Development Director Steve McHarris, and Planning Technician
Mathew Fawcett.
Chairperson O'Keefe read the decorum guidelines.
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Marks to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote.
PC Draft Minutes 09/04/07
Page 1 of 4
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
■ Commissioner Marks stated he visited both sites on tonight's agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT
ILIreMW
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON AUGUST 21, 2007.
2. APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION ON TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2005-0076,
4705 EL CAMINO REAL, (THE ACACIAS DEVELOPMENT, LLC)
Items pulled: Chairperson O'Keefe, Item #2.
MOTION: By Commissioner Heatherington and seconded by
Commissioner Marks to approve Item #1.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (Fonzi abstained)
Commissioner Jack joined the hearing 7:04 p.m.
Item #2:
Chairperson O'Keefe suggested the Commission read through the new corrections for
Item #2 prior to a motion.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jack and seconded by Vice Chairperson
Fonzi to approve Item #2.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
3. PLN 2007-1229, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR 1320 EL CAMINO REAL
Owner:
Ross Trust, PO Box 529, Santa Margarita, CA 93453
Certified
Arborist:
Steven Alvarez, A&T Arborist, 1565 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title•
PLN 2007-1229/Tree Removal Permit 2007-0114
Project
Location:
1320 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 049-093-015 (San Luis Obispo County)
PC Draft Minutes 09/04/07
Page 2 of 4
Project A request to remove two (2) California Black Walnuts (13" and 24" at dbh) and three (3)
Description: Coast Live Oak (6", 5", and 14" at dbh). The two California Black Walnuts are located in
the public frontage along EI Camino Real and the Coast Live Oaks are directly impacted
by construction.
Planning Technician Mathew Fawcett gave the staff report and answered questions of
the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Glen Ross, applicant, answered questions of the Commission.
Chairperson O'Keefe closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Jack adopt Resolution PC 2007-0076 to approve the request to
remove two (2) California Black Walnuts and three (3) Coast
Live Oak subject to findings and Conditions of Approval.
Motion passed 5:1 by a roll -call vote. (O'Keefe opposed)
Chairperson O'Keefe stated for the record she voted no because she does not believe
she has been given sufficient proof that the building could not have been designed to
have fewer impacts to the two oaks trees.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
Commissioner Marks asked about a memo he had received regarding ex parte
communications. Community Development Director Warren Frace stated he assumed
that the Commission and Council had received the same information and explained that
the City is in the process of selecting a new City Attorney and there should be a new
training session on these issues in the future.
Commissioner Marks spoke about an issue raised at the last City Council meeting
regarding ex parte communications in which his name was mentioned. Commissioner
Marks stated for the record that he has 30 years of professional experience in the waste
water industry. His responsibilities included protecting public health and environmental
quality through application of basin plan requirements, part of which is the issue of
septic systems. He further stated that if, during his deliberations on the project in
question he had felt that he had to contact Water Quality he would have done so and
then disclosed that in his ex parte communications.
Commissioner Jack stated that he had attended the Energy Conference at Cal Poly with
Commissioner Marks. He reported the conference was instructive with many good
ideas about the need to become sensitive to trying to find alternatives to energy use.
PC Draft Minutes 09/04/07
Page 3 of 4
Commissioner Marks offered to prepare a brief synopsis of the energy conference for a
future Commission meeting. He reported that participants got a great feel for what all
the incorporated communities in this county are doing, thinking and proposing to
address green house gas issues.
Chairperson O'Keefe referred to a project on EI Camino Real just before Del Rio and
expressed concerns regarding the Colony House and grading. She asked what the
responsibility of the developer would be as she is certain more trees will be impacted.
Director Frace explained that all the issues raised by Chairperson O'Keefe are the
responsibility of the developer who has been very unresponsive for the last 9 months.
He stated staff recently sent another letter regarding the health of the trees, and will
follow up, possibly turning this into a code enforcement action.
Commissioner Marks asked if the Request for Qualifications for the City's economic
consultant is available at this time. Director Frace explained that the RFQ should be
issued next week.
Vice Chairperson Fonzi questioned the tenants at the Annex project. Director Frace
stated the developers do not have a formal agreement with Marshalls, but are still
negotiating with them, and that Big 5 and Office Depot are under construction and will
open soon.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Community Development Director reviewed the agenda for the next Planning
Commission meeting, and reported that the Santa Ana Map denied by the Commission
is being appealed and will eventually go to the City Council.
Public Works Director Steve Kahn commented that the Finance Director will give a
budget update at the next meeting, and reported on the successful first meeting for the
transit center site selection. The second meeting will be held on September 18th at 5:30
p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson O'Keefe adjourned the meeting at 7:46 p.m. to the next regularly
scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on September 18, 2007.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary
PC Draft Minutes 09/04/07
Page 4 of 4
ITEM NUMBER
DATE: 9-18-07
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Budget Presentation
Rachelle Rickard, Director of Administrative Services will make a presentation on the
budget.
C:\Documents and Settings\amanier\Desktop\budget placeholderldoc
ITEM NUMBER: 3
DATE: 9-18-07
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
PLN 2006-1117
Ridgeway Court Planned Development:
Custom Planned Development #29
5825 Ridgeway Ct
(Beck)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff Recommends Planning Commission:
1. Adopt Resolution PC 2007-0029 recommending the City Council certify Proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003; and,
2. Adopt Resolution PC 2007-0030 recommending the City Council introduce an
ordinance for first reading by title only, to approve Zone Text Change 2006-0121 to
establish Planned Development Overlay Zone #29; and
3. Adopt Resolution PC 2007-0031 recommending the City Council introduce an
ordinance for first reading by title only, to approve Zone Map Change 2007-0135
based on findings; and,
4. Adopt Resolution PC 2007-0032 recommending the City Council approve
Conditional Use Permit 2006-0184 (Master Plan of Development), with parking
option "c", based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation
Monitoring; and,
5. Adopt Resolution PC 2007-0033 recommending the City Council approve Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 2006-0089 based on findings and subject to Conditions of
Approval and Mitigation Monitoring.
REPORT -IN -BRIEF:
The proposed project consists of a Zone Text Change to establish a new site-specific
Planned Development Overlay Zone #29, and Zone Map Amendment to establish a
Planned Development Overlay Zone #29 on the subject site with a corresponding
Master Plan of Development (CUP) and vesting Tentative Tract Map that would allow
an 8 -unit detached residential planned development. The project site is currently
developed with a single-family residence that has been identified as a Colony Home.
The project was brought before the Planning Commission on April 17, 2007. The project
was continued pending analysis of the impacts to the historic site. The applicant
submitted a historic analysis which concludes that the project as proposed will not
negatively impact historic resources with mitigation measures incorporated.
Of highest concern were impacts to the historic wall along Palma Ave. The historic
consultant recognized that the wall does have historic significance, but, due to the
structural failure of the wall, recognizes the need for removal. The consultant concluded
that the removal of the wall can be mitigated by the placement and use of the material
throughout the project site. Staff is recommending that the material be used to construct
an entry feature wall at the corner of Palma and Rosario Ave. The use of excess
material should be focused on the historic home site, Lot 1 (Mitigation Measure 5. a. 2).
In addition, conditions of approval have been added to the attached resolutions based
on Planning Commission recommendations discussed during the April 17th meeting as
follows:
Condition 22: Rosario shall include a red curb to ensure that no parking is
allowed along the Rosario frontage.
Condition 23: The applicant shall work with the post office during the building
permit process to locate mail boxes. A 5 -foot path of travel shall be maintained
along all project frontages.
Condition 24: A repair permit for the Carriage House shall be approved and
finaled prior to final of the last residential permit.
Condition 25: The Tract Improvement Landscape Plan shall include upgrades to
the landscaping along the Ridgeway Court frontage in front of the existing Colony
Home.
The applicant is also requesting modifications to the Conditions of Approval requiring
stone veneer for all garage level floors for the units facing Palma and stone veneer for
all retaining walls throughout the project. The applicant has determined that this, paired
with the requirements to rebuild the historic wall on-site, creates an excessive financial
burden on the project. Staff is in support of modifying the condition to allow flexibility in
material choice while still providing high quality decorative walls and architectural
appearance (Condition 10). Modifying the material of the walls will also create an
appropriate contrasting background for the rebuilt historic wall.
DISCUSSION:
Situation and Facts:
1. Applicant / Representative: Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825 Ridgeway Court,
Atascadero, CA 93422
Gary & Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Road,
Atascadero, CA 93422
2. Project Address: 5825 Ridgeway Court, Atascadero, CA 93422
APNs 029-322-022, 023, 024 (San Luis Obispo County)
3. General Plan Designation: MDR (Medium Density Residential)
4. Zoning District: RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family - 10)
5. Site Area: 1.105 acres
6. Existing Use: Historic Colony Home
7. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003
Background
Surrounding Land Use and Setting:
North: Residential Multi -family
South: Residential Multi -family
East: Residential Multi -family
West: Commercial Retail / Public
Proposed
Project Sites
The project site is within the Medium Density Residential General Plan land use
designation and is zoned Residential Multi -Family -10, which allows for a maximum
density of 10 units per acre. The properties within the existing residential neighborhood
are developed with a combination of single and multiple -family projects. The existing
home is designated as a Colony Home and is proposed to remain.
ANALYSIS:
The proposed site plan has been designed to meet the requirements of the Atascadero
Municipal Code and the appearance review requirements of the General Plan. Seven
new detached hillside units are proposed on the project site along Palma and Rosario
Avenues and the existing Colony Home located off of Ridgeway Court is proposed to
remain. Proposed new homes range in size from 1500 square feet to 2300 square feet.
Lot sizes range from 3155 square feet to 22,407 square feet. The proposed homes
along Palma are 3 -stories in height.
As a Planned Development, the Planning Commission must find the project provides
high quality architectural, landscape, and site design to warrant the granting of special
development standards.
Appearance Review
Site Plan and Circulation
The proposed project includes seven detached units and one existing Colony Home.
Each of the new units will take access either off Rosario Ave or Palma Ave. The
Ridgeway Court frontage will remain as existing, with the exception of required frontage
improvements, designed to maintain the historic character of the existing home and
preserve character defining site elements such as an existing rock entry wall and
historic carriage house.
Three concerns were discussed at the July Planning Commission meeting at which staff
request Planning Commission direction on a variety of site design issues. Staff
presented concerns related to tree impacts and minimized setbacks off of Palma
Avenue for discussion. The Planning Commission also discussed concerns regarding
vehicles backing out of the driveways onto Rosario Avenue. The following summarizes
each issue with the Planning Commission direction given and applicant response.
Native Tree Impacts and Setbacks along Palma Ave:
The existing hillside area adjacent to Palma Ave contains 19 native trees ranging in
diameter from 17 -inches to 88 -inches dbh. Due to the historic nature of the existing
home, the development area of the site is limited to the more sloped areas of the
property. The Planning Commission directed the applicant to position the units in a way
that aimed to preserve the healthiest trees. In addition, the Planning Commission
recommended further reducing the setback along Palma Avenue to allow for fewer
impacts to the hillside.
The applicant redesigned the units to reduce the depth of the units and moved the units
closer to Palma Avenue to minimize impacts to the existing native trees. In addition, the
units closest to the corner of Rosario and Palma were designed to avoid the need to
remove two native oak trees (26 -inch Live Oak and 36 -inch Valley Oak). The applicant
maintained the 3 -story design which minimizes the building footprint and, thus, the area
of disturbance necessary to construct the units.
The proposed setback along Palma Avenue is a minimum of 5 -feet from the existing
right-of-way for the garage level with the units stepping back at the upper floors.
Because of newer ADA requirements, staff is recommending and has conditioned an
alternative to the proposed sidewalk design as discussed below in the frontage
improvement section.
Driveways along Rosario Avenue:
The applicant redesigned the units along Rosario Avenue to provide adequate turn-
around area to allow vehicles to forward exit onto Rosario Avenue. The turn -around
area is provided both for the garage and guest parking spaces.
Parking
Each new unit contains a 2 -car garage with the Colony Home site remaining as it
currently exists today.
Parking Option A includes 2 guest parking spaces between units 7 and 8, and two
spaces between units 5 and 6 with a consolidated landscape area between units 6 and
7. The applicant is proposing to construct the guest parking spaces of pavers or
stamped and colored concrete. Staff has concerns that the streetscape along Palma
Avenue is hardscape dominant under this scenario and not enough opportunities exist
for landscaping along the Palma Avenue frontage.
The applicant is aware of staff's concerns and has prepared 2 alternative site
configurations that maintain the reduced footprint and setback but modify the location of
the guest parking spaces. As a custom Planned Development Overlay, the Planning
Commission has the discretion to allow a modified parking scenario.
The Planning Commission, at the April 17th meeting, concurred that option "c" presented
the best parking alternative. As such, the revised site plan has been included in the
resolution for adoption. If the Planning Commission wishes to make any modifications or
adopt a different parking option, the exhibit will need to be revised during the motion for
recommendation to City Council.
The alternative site plan options are analyzed below:
Alternative A: Current proposal discussed above.
Alternative 8: The applicant separated the guest parking spaces so that 1 space is
between each of the units fronting Palma Ave. The scenario increases
the amount of landscaping between each unit.
Alternative C: The applicant is proposing to eliminate guest parking for units 5 through
8 and construct improvements on the opposite side of Palma Ave along
the rear frontage of the City's police station to increase the on -street
parking opportunities along Palma Avenue as a whole. While on -street
parking does not technically count towards the counted number of
parking spaces for a project, the Planning Commission has the ability
under the custom Planned Development Overlay Zone #29 to approve
this option. It is the applicant's opinion that, due to the limited number of
residences off of Palma Avenue and the likelihood of the police station
site being redeveloped and required to construct full frontage
improvements, the proposed improvements would benefit the proposed
development and fulfill the guest parking need.
Frontage Improvements:
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk are required along all frontages of the project site including
Ridgeway Court. Due to the location of the existing stone wall, the frontage
improvements have been slightly modified to allow these improvements to remain. Staff
is recommending and has conditioned that the Palma Avenue frontage include a rolled
concrete curb up to lot 5 and location of the sidewalk at the edge of the existing right-of-
way.
Architecture, Materials, and Color
The proposed units range in size from 1500 square feet to 2300 square feet. The units
along Palma Ave are 3 -storied in height. Unit 3 located along Rosario Avenue also
includes a third story conditioned floor within the apex of the roofline.
During the July meeting, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to enhance
the colony style architecture of the proposed units and added detailing to compliment
the existing Colony Home and surrounding historic properties.
Units 2, 3, and 4 include porches facing Rosario Avenue that include stylized columns,
a variety of siding materials including horizontal and vertical siding, and shake accents.
In addition, each unit includes double hung windows and exposed roof rafter tails. Each
garage is designed as a side -loading garage to minimize the appearance of the garage
doors from Rosario Avenue. Unit 4, located on the corner of Rosario and Palma
Avenues is designed with the garage facing Palma Avenue. The applicant's original
design presented in July included a design with a wrapped porch at the corner,
however, in designing the site to minimize impacts to native trees and prevent backing
out onto Rosario, the applicant could not maintain the original design concept. The
applicant did tilt the garage and added an additional porch feature along the side of the
garage facing Rosario Avenue to minimize the appearance of the garage. In addition,
the conditioned entry wall as recommended by staff and the historic consultant will add
a decorative element to the corner of Rosario Ave and Palma Ave.
Units 5, 6, 7, and 8 are designed as 3 -story hillside homes that will be built into the hill.
From the front the unit will appear as 3 -stories, however, from the rear, the unit will
appear as 2 -stories. The applicant has varied the fagade of each unit providing an
individual character for each residence by differing the roof elements and styles as well
as the porch elements. The units have been designed with two single -car garages to
minimize the bulk of the garage doors and contain a variety of materials and colony
style architectural details.
Landscape Design
The preliminary landscape plan has been designed to retain existing mature native oak
trees. Street trees are provided along Palma and Rosario Avenues with medium scale
trees included in landscape planters adjacent to the sidewalk along Palma Avenue.
Proposed landscaping includes drought tolerant shrubs and accent plants with
minimized turf areas. Staff has added Conditions of Approval to ensure high quality
landscaping along the Palma Avenue frontage and integration with proposed retaining
walls.
Native Tree Mitiaation/Preservation
A tree removal application for 8 native trees is included with the proposed development,
4 Toyons, 2 Valley Oaks, and 2 Live Oaks. A Condition of Approval has been included
requiring the applicant to pay mitigation fees into the Tree Replacement Fund or provide
equivalent re -plantings on site, as required by the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance
and as shown in the following chart (Condition CUP 20).
Evergreen Native Trees (inches) Deciduous Native Trees (inches) I Totals
dbh
notes
dbh
notes
1 4 -inches
1 24 -inches
2 4 -inches
2 22 -inches
3 30 -inches
3
4 5 -inches
4
5 5 -inches
5
6 5 -inches
6
Total 53 -inches
Total 46 -inches
99 -inches
Mitigation Requirement
req'd tree replacements:
18 five gal trees
req'd tree replacements:
31 five gal trees
48 five gal trees
Proposed Replanting
0 five gal trees
Proposed Replanting
0 five gal trees
0 five gal trees
0 box trees (24")
0 box trees (24")
0 box trees (24";
Remaining Mitigation 18 five gal trees Remaining Mitigation 31 five gal trees 1 48 five gal trees
Tree Fund Payment: $ 883.33 Tree Fund Payment: $ 1,533.33 1 $ 2,416.67
A Condition of Approval has also been included to require the applicant to pay a
mitigation deposit for all trees impacted 40% or greater. Under this scenario, a deposit
will be required for 2 trees.
Site Drainage
Site drainage will be piped to underground detention basins. Easements will be required
to be recorded on the final map to ensure continued maintenance of the shared
facilities.
INnefcueiatcr
Sanitary sewer will be connected to existing facilities in Rosario and Palma Avenues.
Fiscal Impact
Based on findings from the Taussig Study, revenue from new residential development
including property tax revenues, vehicle licensing fees, sales taxes, and other revenues
are insufficient to cover the maintenance and emergency services costs of new
development. Based on the revenue projections from the Taussig Study, the City has
developed standard Conditions of Approval for new development projects that require
the cost of maintenance and emergency services to be funded by the project through a
combination of road assessment districts, landscape and lighting districts and
community facilities districts (Conditions 17 and 18).
Inclusionary and Workforce Housing
The City Council has implemented an interim Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program
to include a fixed percentage of units within residential developments that require a
legislative approval to be reserved as deed restricted affordable units or for an in -lieu
fee to be paid. A Condition of Approval has been added to ensure this requirement is
met (Conditions 14 and 15).
Project Benefits
One of the required findings for approval of a Planned Development Rezone is the
project must "...offer certain redeeming features to compensate for the requested
modification." The table shown below outlines the Council policy on Planned
Development benefits. In order to approve this project, the Planning Commission must
find that the project offers all of the Tier 1 benefits to qualify for a Planned Development
project. In addition, staff notes that this project does include preservation of a historic
Colony Home, which is listed as a Tier 2 benefit.
PD Location
Tier 1 Benefits
Tier 2 Benefits
Inside of Urban Core
a) Affordable / Workforce Housing
a) Pocket Parks in larger projects
b) High Quality Architectural Design
b) Trails /Walkways for Pedestrian
PD -25
c) High Quality Landscape Design
Connectivity
d) Buffering between Urban and
c) Historic Preservation
Suburban zones (large lot sizes,
increased setbacks, landscape
buffers, etc.)
e) Higher density to meet Housing
Element goals
Tentative Tract Map
An 8 -lot Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2006-0089) is proposed as part of the project
consistent with the proposed Master Plan of Development and proposed PD Overlay
Zone #29. The Tract Map has been conditioned by staff and the City Engineer to meet
all City standards including on-site subdivision and frontage improvements. The
applicant will be required to record CC&R's with the map that will include maintenance
and access of common areas (Condition 19).
General Plan Consistency
The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Land Use and
Housing Element Policies:
Land Use Policy 1.1: "Preserve the rural atmosphere of the community and assure
"elbow room" in areas designed for lower density development by guiding new
development into the Urban Core to conform to the historic Colony land use patterns of
the City and to respect the natural environment, hillside area and existing
neighborhoods".
Land Use Program 1.1.7: "Within the Urban Core encourage infill development or
revitalization or reuse of land already committed to urban development where utilities
and public services exist.
Land Use Policy 2.1: "Ensure that new development is compatible with existing and
surrounding neighborhoods".
Land Use Program 6.1.7: The City shall carefully evaluate both public and private
projects to require the preservation of trees, watersheds, natural slopes, and other
natural features.
Land Use Program 6.1.9: Attention shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land division.
Building sites shall minimize disruption of natural slopes, native vegetation and
watersheds by the careful selection of building sites, leach fields and driveways.
Building designs inappropriate for hillside locations shall not be approved.
Land Use Program 6.2.1: Actively utilize the Historic Overlay zoning district to protect
known historic structures, significant Colony homes and colony sites.
Land Use Program 6.4.1: Protect historic buildings and sites. Atascadero's historic
buildings and features shall be preserved and protected in recognition of the role the
community's past plays in its present and future. Historic overlay zoning shall be
utilized to protect appropriate historic districts.
Land Use Program 6.4.5: Update the PD (Planned Development) overlay zone to
include retention and rehabilitation of historic resources as a primary justification for PD
zoning regulation standards.
Housing Element Policy 4.3: "Encourage attractive architecture and site landscaping
that respect terrain and native trees".
In staff's opinion the proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the
Land Use Element and the Housing Element. The project will provide seven new
single-family residential units and will preserve an existing Colony Home within the
medium -density residential zone. As conditioned, the project incorporates elements
that are consistent with the character of the surrounding residential neighborhood and
the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Findings
Establishment of PD -29 (Zone Text Amendment
1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted
to promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance
the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the Overlay Zone cannot be reasonably achieved through
existing development standards or processing requirements.
Planned Development Overlay (Zone Map Amendment)
As specified in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the following specific
findings for the proposed Zone Change shall be made in order to approve the proposed
project:
1. The proposed Zone Change is in conformance with the adopted General Plan
goals, policies, and programs and the overall intent of the General Plan.
2. The proposed Zone Change is compatible with existing development,
neighborhoods and the environment.
3. The proposed Zone Change will not create any new significant and unavoidable
impacts to traffic, infrastructure, or public service impacts.
4. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the project -specific Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
Conditional Use Permit (Master Plan of Develoament
A Master Plan of Development is required for the Planned Development in the form of a
Conditional Use Permit. The proposed Master Plan of Development sets development
standards related to architectural design, site design, landscape, signage, and specific
development standards required by the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission
must make the following five findings to recommend approval of the proposed Master
Plan of Development:
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General Plan and the City's
Appearance Review Manual.
Staff Comment: The use is consistent with the General Commercial designation of
the General Plan and General Plan Land Use Element Policy 1.1, 1.1.7, 2.1, 6.1.7,
6.1.9, 6.2.1, 6.4.1, 6.4.5, and Housing Element Policy 4.3.
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning
Ordinance) including the Planned Development Ordinance.
Staff Comment: As conditioned, the project satisfies all Conditional Use Permit and
Planned Development zoning code provisions.
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not,
because of the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity of the use.
Staff Comment: The proposed residential development will not be detrimental to the
general public or working person's health, safety, or welfare.
4. That the proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the
immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development.
Staff Comment: The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood by providing a higher density residential development that includes
high quality architecture and preserves the existing on-site Colony Home.
5. That the proposed use or project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the
safe capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be
improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the
surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance
with the Land Use Element.
Staff Comment: The proposed project and use is consistent with the traffic
projections and road improvements anticipated within the General Plan and as
proposed by the applicant.
Tree Removals
1. The tree is 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
■ If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees
Proposed Environmental Determination
A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to public agencies and interested
members of the public on March 5, 2007. The environmental analysis identified
concerns regarding potential impacts to aesthetics, land use and planning, noise,
biological resources, and traffic. Mitigation Measures pertaining to these resources are
included. A finding is proposed that this project would not have a significant effect on
the environment based upon the implementation of the identified Mitigation Measures.
In addition, Mitigation Measure 5. a.2 and 5. a.6 should be modified to be consistent with
the recommendations of the historic evaluation related to the relocation and reuse of the
stone wall. The Planning Commission must make a finding that these Mitigation
Measures are equivalent to or better than the previous Mitigation Measure. Based on
the provided historic analysis, staff believes that this finding can be made.
Conclusion
In staff's opinion, the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The project incorporates appearance
review of architectural design, materials, and landscaping, and incorporates
architectural themes into the site and building design, as conditioned. Native trees have
been preserved where feasible and required conditions and Mitigation Measures have
been appropriately incorporated into the project. As analyzed within the project Initial
Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, the proposed Master Plan of
Development would have no significant environmental impacts and will not be
detrimental to the general public or working persons health, safety, or welfare. Based
on staff's analysis in the preceding sections, it appears all of the required findings for
project approval can be made.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider a guest parking
alternative plan for the units located off of Rosario Avenue. Eliminating the guest
parking will enhance the appearance along Palma Avenue and allow for additional
landscape opportunities. The applicant has proposed 3 alternatives for your review and
consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may recommend modifications to the project and/or Conditions
of Approval for the project to the City Council.
2. The Commission may determine more information is needed on some aspect of
the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to develop the
additional information. The Commission should clearly state the type of
information required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The Commission may recommend the City Council deny the project. The parcel
would retain its designation of Residential Multi -family. The Commission should
specify the reasons for denial of the project and recommend an associated
finding with such action.
PREPARED BY: Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1:
Location, General Plan, and Zoning Map
Attachment 2:
Proposed Mitigated
Negative
Declaration and Initial Study
Attachment 3:
Draft
Resolution
PC
2007-0029
Attachment 4:
Draft
Resolution
PC
2007-0030
Attachment 5:
Draft
Resolution
PC
2007-0031
Attachment 6:
Draft
Resolution
PC
2007-0032
Attachment 7:
Draft
Resolution
PC
2007-0033
Attachment 1: Location, General Plan and Zoning Map
Existing Designation:
tion:
- Medium Density Residential
- Residential Multi -family - 10
Proposed Designation:
- Medium Density Residential
- Residential Multi -Family -10/ PD 29
I Proposed I
Project Sites
Attachment 2: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
See Following
ATTACHMENT 3: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0029
Approval of Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0029
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY PROPOSED MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2007-0003 PREPARED FOR PLN 2006-1117
ON APN 029-322-0229 0239 024
5825 Ridgeway Ct.
(Beck)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825
Ridgeway Ct, Atascadero, Ca 93422, and Gary and Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Rd,
Atascadero, Ca 93422 (Applicants and Property Owners), to consider a project consisting of a
Zone Change from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10) to RMF -10 / PD -29 (Residential
Multi -Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay #29) with corresponding Master Plan of
Development and Vesting Tentative Tract Map located at 5825 Ridgeway Ct, (APN 029-322-
022, 023, 024); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003
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 Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing
on September 18, 2007 following the close of the review period to consider the Initial Study and
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the project will have no
significant impacts with project specific mitigation measures incorporated; and,
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, hereby
resolves to recommend that the City Council certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
2007-0003 based on the following:
Exhibit A: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with
CEQA; and,
2. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning
Commission, and the information contained therein was considered by the Planning
Commission, 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,
7. Mitigation Measures 5.a.2 and 5.a.6 have been modified to be consistent with the
recommendations of the historic analysis. These Mitigation Measures are equivalent to or
better than the originally posted Mitigation Measures for the project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing
resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Vice -Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Exhibit A Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003
See following
ATTACHMENT 4: Draft Resolution PC 2007--0030
Approval of Proposed Zoning Text Change to establish a PD Overlay Zone #29
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0030
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL
CODE BY APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 2006-0121 TO ESTABLISH A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY #29
5825 Ridgeway Ct.
(Beck)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825
Ridgeway Ct, Atascadero, Ca 93422, and Gary and Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Rd,
Atascadero, Ca 93422 (Applicants and Property Owners), to consider a project consisting of a
Zone Change from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10) to RMF- 10/PD29 (Residential Multi -
Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay #29) with corresponding Master Plan of
Development and Vesting Tentative Tract Map located at 5825 Ridgeway Ct, (APN 029-322-
022, 023, 024); and,
WHEREAS, Article 28 of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows for the creation of
Planned Development Overlay Zones to promote orderly and harmonious development and to
enhance the opportunity to best utilize special site characteristics; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003 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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to the Zoning Code Text to protect the health, safety, and welfare
of its citizens by applying orderly development and expanding housing opportunities within the
City; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone Text
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said zoning text
amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing
held on September 18, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2006-0121, after first studying
and considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Text Change Creating a PD Planned
Development Overlay #29 District. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted
to promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance
the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the Overlay Zone cannot be reasonably achieved through
existing development standards or processing requirements.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on April 17, 2007 resolved to recommend that the
City Council introduce for first reading by title only, an ordinance that would amend the City
Zoning Code Text with the following:
9-3.674 Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone #29
This Planned Development Overlay Zone on APN 029-322-022, 023, 02 in the Residential Multi-
family Zone. The maximum residential density within the planned development shall not exceed
the density allowed by the underlying zoning district and provisions of the Atascadero Municipal
Code. The following development standards shall be met by the entitled project within the PD
Overlay Zone #29:
a) All site development shall require the approval of a Master Plan of Development. All
construction and development shall conform to the approved Master Plan of Development,
as conditioned.
b) The Tentative Tract Map and any subsequent amendments for the site shall be consistent
with an approved Master Plan of Development. All construction and development shall
conform to the approved Master Plan of Development, as conditioned.
c) No subsequent Tentative Parcel or Tract Map shall be approved unless found to be
consistent with the approved Master Plan of Development.
d) Appearance of each dwelling unit, site landscaping, site development, and amenities shall
be consistent with the Atascadero Appearance Review Manual. All landscaping shown on
the approved landscape plan will be installed by the developer and shall be maintained as
approved. Buffer landscaping along the eastern property line shall be maintained by the
individual property owners in perpetuity.
e) Any future improvements/rehabilitation of the historic Colony Home shall be completed in
accordance with the secretary of the interior's standards for rehabilitating historic
structures.
f) Each unit shall include the following:
300 cubic feet of shelved storage area. (Bedroom and entry/coat closets shall not
count toward this requirement).
Dedicated space for laundry facilities with hookups.
g) All utilities, including electric, telephone, and cable, within the PD and along the project
frontages shall be installed and/or relocated underground.
h) Exterior walls or fencing shall be consistent throughout the project. Design and appearance
of fences and/or walls shall be compatible with the design of the dwelling units. Fence
posts shall be metal or pressure treated wood. Wood preservative/sealer shall be applied to
fence panels.
i) All mechanical equipment, including HVAC units and utility meters, shall be screened from
view from adjacent streets and properties.
j) Trash shall be stored in individual garages.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing
resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES:
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
ATTACHMENT 5: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0031
Approval of Proposed Zoning Map Change
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0031
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 2007-0135,
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP DESIGNATION OF
APN 029-322-022,0239 024 FROM RMF -10 (RESIDENTIAL MULTI-
FAMILY —10) TO RMF -10 /PD -29 (RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY —10/
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY #29) WITH AN HS (HISTORIC
SITE) DESIGNATION ON THE RESULTING LOT 1
5825 Ridgeway Ct.
(Beck)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Jim and Adrienne Beck (5825
Ridgeway Ct, Atascadero, Ca 93422) and Gary and Mary Tharp (12250 San Antonio Rd,
Atascadero, Ca 93422) Applicants and Property Owners, to consider a project consisting of a
Zone Change from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10) to RMF-10/PD29 (Residential Multi -
Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay 29) with corresponding Master Plan of
Development and Vesting Tentative Tract Map located at 5825 Ridgeway Ct, (APN 029-322-
022, 023, 024); and,
and,
and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is MDR (Medium Density Residential);
WHEREAS, the site's current zoning district is RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10);
WHEREAS, proposed Lot 1 contains an existing historic Colony Home; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003 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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to the Official Zoning Map to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning Amendments;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on September 18, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2007-0135,
after first studying and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the
project, and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Change to the Official Zoning Map of
Atascadero Changing the existing site zoning to RMF -10/ PD -29. The Planning Commission
finds as follows:
1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to
promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the
opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial
effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the Overlay Zone cannot be reasonably achieved through
existing development standards or processing requirements.
4. The proposed project offers certain redeeming features to compensate for the
requested zone change.
5. The project site includes the retention of an existing Colony Home and an open space
easement over the existing riparian area allowing for location of the guest parking in a
parallel fashion along the shared driveway at the entrance to the project site.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on April 17, 2007, resolved to recommend that the
City Council introduce for first reading by title only, an ordinance that would rezone the subject
site consistent with the following:
Exhibit A: Location Map/Zone Map Amendment Diagram
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Vice -Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Exhibit A: Location Map / Zone Map Amendment Diagram
A
aII
L�
sy
-
p
--
�
�
Proposed
Project Sites
Existing Designation:
- Medium Density Residential
- Residential Multi -family - 10
Proposed Designation:
- Medium Density Residential
- Residential Multi -Family -10/ PD 29 — HS designation on resulting Lot 1
ATTACHMENT 6: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0032
Approval of Proposed Master Plan of Development (CUP)
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0032
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
2006-0184 (MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPEMNT)
ON APN 029-322-0229 0239 024
5825 Ridgeway Ct.
(Beck)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825
Ridgeway Ct, Atascadero, Ca 93422, and Gary and Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Rd,
Atascadero, Ca 93422 (Applicants and Property Owners), to consider a project consisting of a
Zone Change from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10) to RMF- 10/PD29 (Residential Multi -
Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay #29) with corresponding Master Plan of
Development and Vesting Tentative Tract Map located at 5825 Ridgeway Ct, (APN 029-322-
022, 023, 024); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that the site's Zoning District
be changed from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -Family -10) to RMF -10 with PD29 (Residential
Multi -Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay #29); and,
WHEREAS, the Planned Development Overlay Zone #29 requires the adoption of a
Master Plan of Development, approved in the form of a Conditional Use Permit; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003 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 laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Conditional
Use Permit application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Master Plan of
Development; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on September 18, 2007 studied and considered the Conditional Use Permit
2006-0184 (Master Plan of Development), after first studying and considering the Proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of Conditional Use Permit. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General Plan and the City's
Appearance Review Manual; and,
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning
Ordinance) including provisions of the PD Overlay Zone #29; and,
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not, because
of the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or working in
the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity of the use; and,
4. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the
immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and,
5. The proposed use or project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe
capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be improved
in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the
surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance
with the Land Use Element.
6. The Master Plan of Development standards or processing requirements will enhance
the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area; and
7. Benefits derived from the Master Plan of Development and PD Overlay Zone cannot
be reasonably achieved through existing development standards or processing
requirements; and,
SECTION 2. F_ indings for Approval of Tree Removal. The Planning Commission
finds as follows:
1. 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 3. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on September 18, 2007 resolved to recommend that
the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 2006-0184 (Master Plan of Development) and
Tree Removal Permit subject to the following:
EXHIBIT A:
Conditions of approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
EXHIBIT B:
Master Plan of Development / Site Plan
EXHIBIT C:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 2
EXHIBIT D:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 3
EXHIBIT E:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 4
EXHIBIT F:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 5
EXHIBIT G:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 6
EXHIBIT H:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 7
EXHIBIT I:
Floor Plan and Elevations — Lot 8
EXHIBIT J:
Preliminary Landscape Plan
EXHIBIT K:
Tree Protection Plan
EXBIBIT L:
Grading, Drainage, and Frontage Improvement Plan
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing
resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Vice -Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planned Development -29 /PLN 2006-1117
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Planning Services
1. The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective for the purposes
FM
PS
of issuing building permits thirty (30) days following the City Council approval of
ZCH 2006-0121 and ZCH 2007-0135 upon second reading, unless prior to that
time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the
Zoning Ordinance.
2. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve the
BP/FM
PS, CE
following minor changes to the project that (1) modify the site plan project by less
than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or (3) address a
construction design issue that is not substantive to the Master Plan of
Development.
3. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for twelve (12) months after
BP/FM
PS
its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall expire and become
null and void unless the project has received a building permit.
4. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Atascadero
Ongoin
PS
or its agents, officers, and employees against any claim or action brought to
9
challenge an approval by the city, or any of its entities, concerning the subdivision
5. All subsequent Tentative Map and construction permits shall be consistent with
BP/FM
PS, CE
the Master Plan of Development contained herein.
6. All exterior elevations, finish materials and colors shall be consistent with the
BP
PS
Master Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT B through L with the following
modifications:
■ All exterior material finishes (siding, trim, doors, windows, light fixtures, garage
doors) shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with the architectural
appearance.
• Windows shall be gridded on all four elevations.
■ Roofs shall be architectural grade dimensional shingles.
7. All site development shall comply with the standards of the Planned Development
BP
PS, BS
Overlay District #29.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
8. All site work, grading, and site improvements shall be consistent with the Master
BP/FM
PS, BS, CE
Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT B, J, K, and L. Where discrepancies
exist between the landscape plan and the grading plan, the grading plan will take
precedence. The following modification shall be required:
■ A rolled concrete curb shall be provided along Palma Avenue and the back
of sidewalk shall be located at the extent of the existing right-of-way.
■ The parking configuration as shown in the Master Plan of Development
(EXHIBIT B) shall take precedence over all other plans shown with the
following modifications
■ Condition the project that the applicant increase on -street parking
opportunities rather than approve the exhibit as presented. Staff is not
in support of widening the opposite side of Palma Avenue based on
current slope conditions. Eliminating the guest parking between the
units would provide two on -street parking spaces in front of the
proposed units, creating a reduction in standard parking requirements
of two spaces.
9. All project fencing shall be installed consistent with EXHIBIT Band J subject to
GP/BP
PS
the following modifications:
■ Fencing material and treatment shall comply with the PD -29 standards.
■ Fencing for the units shall be placed at the rear property lines. Fencing shall
be 4 -foot maximum solid or transparent fencing.
10. The proposed project shall incorporate dark earth -toned colors and shall utilize
GP/BP
PS
high quality decorative architectural materials compatible with the existing stone
walls surrounding the Colony Home. Dark split -faced block that is compatible with
the stone veneer may be utilized for the rear retaining walls.
11. A 3 -foot wide planter shall be provided between the guest parking spaces along
BP
PS
Palma Avenue and the retaining wall. Landscape in this area shall be low-lying to
allow for vehicle overhang.
12. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be approved prior to the issuance of
BP
PS
building permits and included as part of site improvement plan consistent with
EXHIBIT J, and as follows:
• All exterior meters, air conditioning units and mechanical equipment shall
be screened with landscape material.
■ All areas shown on the landscape plan shall be landscaped by the
developer prior to the final of any single building permit on-site.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
• Final tree list shall be submitted with building permits, subject to staff
approval. Street trees within tree planters along Palma Avenue shall be
medium sided shade trees such as honey or purple robe locust. Planting
adjacent to parking spaces and within narrow planters shall consist of
ornamental grasses and compatible upright screen shrubs and vines.
Landscaping at the terraced walls shall consist of trailing plants and screen
shrubs.
■ Street trees shall be minimum 15 -gallon size and double staked.
■ Front yard areas not specifically conditioned shall be landscaped with
drought tolerant species, subject to staff approval.
13. The developer and/or subsequent owner(s) shall assume responsibility for the
FM /
PS
continued maintenance of all landscape and common areas, consistent with
Ongoin
EXHIBIT B, J, and L.
g
14. Affordable Housing Requirement: The applicant shall comply with the City
FM/BP
PS, CA
Council inclusionary housing policy and either deed restrict 20% of the proposed
units or pay an in -lieu fee based on 5% of the construction valuation of each new
and existing housing unit.
15. Workforce Housing: Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall enter into
BP
PS, CA
a legal agreement with the City to reserve 1/2 of the units for sale to residents or
workers within the City of Atascadero, including the affordable units. The
agreement shall include the following provisions:
■ The units shall be offered for sale to residents or workers within the
City of Atascadero for a minimum of 60 -days. During this time period
offers may only be accepted from Atascadero residents or workers;
■ The applicant shall provide reasonable proof to the City that at least
one of the qualified buyers is a resident or worker within the City Limits
of Atascadero;
■ The Atascadero resident or worker restriction shall apply to the initial
sale only;
■ The applicant shall identify which units will be reserved; and
■ The City Attorney shall approve the final form of the agreement.
16. A Tree Protection Plan shall be submitted with subsequent building permits for
GP/BP
PS
encroachment within the drip line of native trees located on the subject parcel and
any adjacent properties. The applicant will contract with a certified arborist to
monitor all activity within the drip lines of existing native oak trees.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
17. The emergency services and facility maintenance costs listed below shall be
BP
PS
100% funded by the project in perpetuity. The service and maintenance costs
shall be funded through a community facilities district established by the City at
the developer's cost. The funding mechanism must be in place prior to or
concurrently with acceptance of the final maps. The funding mechanism shall
be approved by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services
Director prior to acceptance of any final map. The administration of the above
mentioned funds shall be by the City. Developer agrees to participate in the
community facilities district and to take all steps reasonably required by the
City with regard to the establishment of the district and assessment of the
property.
■ All Atascadero Police Department service costs to the project.
• All Atascadero Fire Department service costs to the project.
■ Off-site common City of Atascadero park facilities maintenance service
costs related to the project.
18. All tract maintenance costs listed below shall be 100% funded by the project in
BP
PS
perpetuity. The service and maintenance cost shall be funded through a Home
Owners Association established by the developer subject to City approval. The
Home Owners Association must be in place prior to, or concurrently with
acceptance of any final maps. The Home Owners Association shall be approved
by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services Director prior to
acceptance of any Final Map. The administration of the above mentioned funds,
and the coordination and performance of maintenance activities, shall be the
responsibility of the Home Owners Association.
a) All streets, bridges, sidewalks, streetlights, street signs, roads, emergency
access roads, emergency access gates, and sewer mains within the
project.
b) All parks, trails, recreational facilities and like facilities.
c) All open space and native tree preservation areas.
d) All drainage facilities and detention basins.
e) All creeks, flood plains, floodways, wetlands, and riparian habitat areas.
f) All common landscaping areas, street trees, medians, parkway
planters, manufactured slopes outside private yards, and other similar
facilities.
g) All frontage landscaping and sidewalks along arterial streets
19. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit CC&Rs for review and approval by
BP
PS, BS
the Community Development Department. The CC&R's shall record with the Final
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
5825 Ridgeway Ct
PLN 2006-1117
Planned Development Overlay #29
Timing
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading
Permit
BP: Building
Permit
FI: Final
Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation
Measure
Map and shall include the following:
a) Provisions for maintenance of all common areas including access,
parking, street trees, fencing and landscaping in perpetuity.
b) A detailed list of each individual homeowner's responsibilities for
maintenance of the individual units.
c) Residents shall keep all trash receptacles within the unit's designated
trash storage area.
d) Garages shall be maintained and used for vehicle parking.
e) No boats, RV's or other type of recreation vehicle may occupy a guest or
resident parking space, including within an individual garage.
f) A provision for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department for any changes to the CC&R's that relate to the above
requirements prior to the changes being recorded or taking effect.
The applicant may choose not to record CC&R's as shared facilities are
minimal. In this case, the applicant will be required to record a combination of
deed restrictions alerting future owners to project conditions and maintenance
agreements for the shared maintenance of the drainage and shared parking
facilities.
20. Approval of this permit shall include the removal of 8 Native Trees. The applicant
BP
PS, BS
shall be required to pay mitigation fees or provide replantings on-site per the
requirements of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. Any additional removals
shall be subject to Planning Commission approval.
■ A mitigation deposit shall be collected for all native trees impacted 40% or
greater. The deposit shall be released no sooner than 18 months following
final of the unit(s) impacting the trees.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
21. The applicant must provide for the repair and maintenance of on-site shared
FM
CE
improvements. This includes guest parking areas that cross property lines, shared
driveways, and common drainage facilities. The two methods that may be used
are:
a. Homeowners Association. This private organization would be responsible for
the maintenance, repair and replacement of the facilities.
b. Other form of non -revocable maintenance agreement approved by the City
Engineer and the Community Development Director.
The City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve the final form prior to
recordation.
22. Rosario shall include a red curb to ensure that no parking is allowed along the
Rosario Ave. frontage.
23. The applicant shall work with the Post Office during the building permit process to
locate mail boxes. A 5 -foot path of travel shall be maintained along all project
frontages.
24. A repair permit for the carriage House shall be approved and finaled prior to final
of the last residential unit.
25. The tract improvement landscape plan shall include upgrades to landscaping
along the Ridgeway Court frontage in front of the existing Colony House.
City Engineer Project Conditions
26. Project shall include construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk along entire
GP, BP
CE
frontage of Palma Avenue, Rosario Avenue and Ridgeway Court, as modified on
the Tentative Parcel Map.
27. In accordance with municipal code section 9-4.160, the applicant shall overlay
GP, BP
CE
Rosario Avenue across the frontage of the property to a width of 1/2 the street plus
10'.
28. In accordance with municipal code section 9-4.160, the applicant shall overlay
GP, BP
CE
Palma Avenue across the frontage of the property to a width of 1/2 the street plus
10'.
City Engineer Standard Conditions
29. In the event that the applicant bonds for the public improvements required as a
GP, BP
CE
condition of this map, the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Agreement with the City Council.
30. An engineer's estimate of probable cost shall be submitted for review and
GP, BP
CE
approval by the City Engineer to determine the amount of the bond.
31. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall record concurrently with the Final
FM
CE
Map.
32. A six (6) foot Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be provided contiguous to the
GP, BP
CE
property frontage.
33. The applicant shall acquire title interest in any off-site land that may be required to
GP, BP
CE
allow for the construction of the improvements. The applicant shall bear all costs
associated with the necessary acquisitions. The applicant shall also gain
concurrence from all adjacent property owners whose ingress and egress is
affected by these improvements.
34. Slope easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to accommodate
GP, BP
CE
cut or fill slopes.
35. Drainage easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to
GP, BP
CE
accommodate both public and private drainage facilities.
36. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction
FM
CE
with the processing of the tract map.
37. The final map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to the map being placed
FM
CE
on the agenda for City Council acceptance.
38. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall pay all outstanding plan
FM
CE
check/inspection fees.
39. Prior to recording the map, the applicant shall bond for or complete all
FM
CE
improvements required by these conditions of approval.
40. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall bond for or set monuments at
FM
CE
all new property corners. A registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor
shall indicate by certificate on the parcel map, that corners have been set or shall
be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be
retraced.
41. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall submit a map drawn in
FM
CE
substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with
all conditions set forth herein. The map shall be submitted for review and approval
by the City in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Ordinance.
42. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to
FM
CE
be shown on the final/parcel map. If there are building or other restrictions related
to the easements, they shall be noted on the final/parcel map. The applicant shall
show all access restrictions on the final/parcel map.
43. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall have the map reviewed by all
FM
CE
applicable public and private utility companies (cable, telephone, gas, electric,
Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The applicant shall obtain a letter from
each utility company indicating their review of the map. The letter shall identify
any new easements that may be required by the utility company. A copy of the
letter shall be submitted to the City. New easements shall be shown on the parcel
map.
44. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit plans and
GP, BP
CE
supporting calculations/reports including street improvements, underground
utilities, composite utilities, and grading/drainage plans prepared by a registered
civil engineer for review and approval by the City Engineer.
45. Submit calculations to support the design of any structures or pipes. Closed
GP, BP
CE
conduits shall be designed to convey the 10 -year flow with gravity flow, the 25 -
year flow with head, and provide safe conveyance for the 100 -year overflow.
46. Provide for the detention and metering out of developed storm runoff so that it is
GP, BP
CE
equal to or less than undeveloped storm runoff.
47. Drainage basins shall be designed to desilt, detain and meter storm flows as well
GP, BP
CE
as release them to natural runoff locations.
48. Show the method of dispersal at all pipe outlets. Include specifications for size &
GP, BP
CE
type.
49. Show method of conduct to approved off-site drainage facilities.
GP, BP
CE
50. Concentrated drainage from off-site areas shall be conveyed across the project
GP, BP
CE
site in drainage easements. Acquire drainage easements where needed.
Drainage shall cross lot lines only where a drainage easement has been provided.
If drainage easement cannot be obtained the storm water release must follow the
exact historic path, rate and velocity as prior to the subdivision.
51. Applicant shall submit erosion control plans and a Storm Water Pollution
GP, BP
CE
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), as applicable. The Regional Water Quality Control
Board shall approve the SWPPP.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
52. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of
GP, BP
CE
Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as
directed by the City Engineer
53. Off-site streets shall be improved consistent with the Tentative Tract Map.
GP, BP
CE
54. Alignment of frontage improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer.
GP, BP
CE
55. All utilities shall be undergrounded on project frontage
GP, BP
CE
56. Applicant shall pay sewer extension (Annexation), Connection and
BP
CE
Reimbursement fees (if applicable) upon issuance of building permit.
57. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims located below the
BP
CE
elevation of the next upstream manhole cover of the public or private sewer
serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by
installing an approved type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall
not discharge through the backwater valve.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 1.b.1: All houses constructed along the Palma Ave frontage on
BP
PS
1.b.1
slopes of 20% or greater shall incorporate stone veneer into the fagade of the lower
garage level and shall be painted darker earth toned colors to blend with the natural
surrounding.
Mitigation Measure 1.d.1: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any off site
BP
PS
1.d.1
glare. All exterior site lights shall utilize full cut-off, "hooded" lighting fixtures to
prevent offsite light spillage and glare. Any luminaire pole height shall not exceed
14 -feet in height, limit intensity to 2.0 foot candles at ingress /egress, and otherwise
0.6 foot candle minimum to 1.0 maximum in parking areas. Fixtures shall be shield
cut-off type.
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
BP
BS, PS
3.b.1
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.
■ Asbestos has been identified by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air
contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common in the state
and may contain naturally occurring asbestos. Under the State Air
Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading
activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic
evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos is present
within the area that will be disturbed. If Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA)
is found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in
the Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
5825 Ridgeway Ct
PLN 2006-1117
Planned Development Overlay #29
Timing
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading
Permit
BP: Building
Permit
FI: Final
Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation
Measure
Mining Operations. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed
with the District. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must comply with all
requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development
of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety
Program for approval by the APCD. Should Naturally Occurring Asbestos be
identified within the area of construction, and the worked area will be less
than or equal to one acre, then the dust control measures identified below are
required. If the disturbed area is greater than one acre, additional
requirements may include but are not limited to 1) an Asbestos Dust
Mitigation Plan which must be approved by the District before construction
begins, and 2) an Asbestos Health and Safety Program will also be required
for some projects.
■ Dust Control Measures for Construction and Grading Operation Projects One
Acre or Less: No person shall engage in any construction or grading
operation on property where the area to be disturbed is one (1.0) acre or less
unless all of the following dust mitigation measures are initiated at the start
and maintained throughout the duration of the construction or grading activity:
(A) Construction vehicle speed at the work site must be limited to
fifteen(15) miles per hour or less;
(B) Prior to any ground disturbance, sufficient water must be applied to the
area to be disturbed to prevent visible emissions from crossing the
property line;
(C) Areas to be graded or excavated must be kept adequately wetted to
prevent visible emissions from crossing the property line;
(D) Storage piles must be kept adequately wetted, treated with a chemical
dust suppressant, or covered when material is not being added to or
removed from the pile;
(E) Equipment must be washed down before moving from the property onto
a paved public road;
(F) Visible track -out on the paved public road must be cleaned using wet
sweeping or a HEPA filter equipped vacuum device within twenty-four
(24) hours
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified
BP
PS
3.16.2
by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and
ultramafic rocks are very common in the state and may contain naturally occurring
asbestos. Under the State Air Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM)
for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any
grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic
evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos is present within
the area that will be disturbed. If naturally occurring asbestos is found at the site the
applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM for
Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. These
requirements may include but are not limited to 1) an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan
which must be approved by the District before construction begins, and 2) an
Asbestos Health and Safety Program will also be required for some projects.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: The Grading Plan shall identify tree protection fencing
BP
PS
4.e.1
around the dripline, or as recommended by the project arborist, of each existing on-
site or off-site native tree.
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
5825 Ridgeway Ct
PLN 2006-1117
Planned Development Overlay #29
Timing
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading
Permit
BP: Building
Permit
FI: Final
Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation
Measure
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall contract with a certified arborist
GP
PS
4.e.2
during all phases of project implementation. The certified arborists 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 a 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) As specified by the arborist report and City staff:
■ Prune all trees in active development areas to be saved for structural
strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist;
■ Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning.
■ 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 a/4
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 or 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.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: Grading and excavation and grading work shall be
GP, BP
PS
4.e.3
consistent with the City of Atascadero Tree Ordinance. Special precautions when
working around native trees include:
1. All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain.
2. Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area.
3. Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be pruned prior to
any heavy equipment work being done.
4. Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the dripline of all
trees.
5. All trees within the area of 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.
6. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by
hand and sealed with an approved tree seal.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: Erosion control hydroseed/slope stabilization shall
BP
CE, PS
4.e.4
consist of native species matching the existing plant species within the tributary
stream. The seed and plant material shall not contain any introduced plant species.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.1: A "HS" (Historic Site) zoning designation shall be placed
ZCH
PS
5.a.1
over Lot 1.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.2: All rota•„;.,,, walls reps- GerteF .,R+, r-APd ;4s art of the
BP
PS
5.a.2
prejeGt shall be aesthet'Gally GOPApatible with the eXiStiRg eRtFY feature walls. These
q -.h-;;" ;nr_-.Iud_e stane verleer that as _;0rP0l_;;r an shape and Geier te the existing The
existing retaining wall shall be disassembled and reconstructed as an entry feature
on the corner of Rosario and Palma Avenues. Any remaining rock shall be used as
accent features of the remaining lots and shall be focused on enhancing and
preserving the additional stone walls on Lot 1, the Colony Home lot. All other
retaining walls shall be constructed of high quality material and shall compliment the
architectural style of the prosect.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.3: CC&R's recorded for the development shall include a
FMP
PS
5.a.3
statement addressing the historic nature of Lot 1.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.4: Any exterior building modifications or site plan changes
Ongoing
PS
5.a.4
not represented in the proposed project that could occur during the Building Permit
application process or during construction shall be consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings and shall meet the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, as
approved by Planning Staff.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 5.a.5: The existing carriage house/drive through out-building
BP
PS
5.a.5
shall be restored and maintained in a structurally and aesthetically sound condition.
All modifications or repairs necessary for such shall be consistent with the Secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and shall meet the provisions of CEQA -Section
15064.5, as approved by Planning Staff.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.6: A written historic evaluation and photographic recordation
required,of the ex sting Colony Home shall be iR quality and format nensi teRt with
as S u i (HABS) r+n o
c+ndards of+he H*,.-r'n Ars h'+onfi ral R, MiR
nl.-rin a nAFFative histelry and deSGFip+inn of the p er+., plans and phetegraphs
BP
PS
5.a.6
Fellewing HABS guidelines the narrative roper+ and the plans shall be presented
together, and the -pkvtographrs-shall ,be-presented separately in binders. The
to each photo view shall be included. Three sets of the wr tten and photographic
print documentation shall be provided to the City of AtasGadero All
recommendations of the Historic Analysis shall be implemented and adhered to
throughout construction and the life of the historic Colony Home.
Mitigation Measure 6.b: The grading permit application plans shall include erosion
GP, BP
CE
6.b
control measures to prevent soil, dirt, and debris from entering the storm drain
system during and after construction. A separate plan shall be submitted for this
purpose and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer at the time
of Building Permit application. (See section 8 of the document).
Mitigation Measure 6.c.d: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a
GP, BP
CE
6.c.d.
future 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 8e.f.1: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
GP, BP
CE
8.0.1
(SWPPP)/Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted and approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of the building permit. The plan shall include storm
water measures for the operation and maintenance of the project for the review and
approval of the City Engineer. The Building Permit application plans shall identify
Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the uses conducted on site that
effectively prohibit the entry of pollutants into storm water runoff.
Mitigation Measure 8.e.f.2: The developer is responsible for ensuring that all
BP, GP
CE
8.e.f.2
contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures
are implemented. Failure to comply with the approved construction Best
Management Practices will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or
stop work orders.
Mitigation Measure 11.d: All construction activities shall comply with the City of
GP, BP
PS
11.d
Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Pernmt
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 15.a.b.1: Full frontage improvements shall be required along
PI
CE
15.a.b.1
Palma Avenue, Rosario Avenue, and Ridgeway Court, per the standards and
approval of the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT B: Master Plan of Development / Site Plan
N
c
0
CL0
C
Y
co
CL
EXHIBIT C: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 2
R I nr;FUVA\y
ROSA
MAIN LM weft —1 M, m. rt
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 2, ROSARIO AVE.
SHED
A0.9
EXHIBIT D: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 3
RIDGEWAY COURT
' OT 3, ROSARIO AVE. ,
--------------- — — - -- ---- --- A0.0
�a�w �rrt�Ew
LELB] Yl. ll.
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 3, ROSARIO AVE.
A0.1
EXHIBIT E: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 4
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 4. ROSARIO AVE.
0
�! LEVEI waw s:rct rzx sr � i
SHEET
A0.0
TR LEVEL RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 4, ROSARIO AVE. LOT
SHEET
A0.1
EXHIBIT F: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 5
r%Im^r-,ai ^^I ir"%T
SLI
MAINLE I IxNG 5'!G[ 9 5 50. 11.
wymw
.ME LEVEL U [ 1 703 % rt.
2
Ao.0
1
R
a
wo
y4
RIDGEWAY COURT -_
LOT 5, PALMA AVE. �oTS
A0.1
EXHIBIT G: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 6
RInt,FWAY CC)[ IRT
7
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 6, PALMA AVE.
SHEET
A0.1
x
SHEET
A0.1
EXHIBIT H: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 7
Rinr.PWAY rOl IRT
:)p
Wrxu�uva _
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 7, PALMA AVE.
SHEET
A0.0
a
A
SHEET
I1�PVER IEVELz•utceixi �!. A0.1
EXHIBIT I: Floor Plan and Elevations - Lot 8
--------------------------
-----
--__-- ___—____.
� r �
RIDGEWAY COURT
gp.EER LEVEL ..1--. n.
'ALMA AVE.
RIf�MWEW
RIDGEWAY COURT
LOT 8, PALMA AVE.
$MEET
A0.1
EXHIBIT J: Preliminary Landscape Plan
Sf ffi'�II� f9 ` � 3hY OIlYSOtl Y YIYIYd d0 tl3Ntl00
3,3
�
�•, �� - •+�^++HONYNI AYM3F)GIH<
NV -1d 21-38,11, 'WOl7Eld -
s 9
3
Nm
.mq Fri.y
�o' 0n, Qjk
N 4 3
PH
Ij
NC— 1
t
3 'hR
J �Sv�r Ei+�9
a��pp f�sx`yg R�
33 KHMOK
Y
�r �HxLLB��t=j
3g8. a F
L Sga Y�
V, 4
EXHIBIT K: Tree Protection Plan
IlaE D i x. 3 d m
a x D :.• ��a�g & m
®& a a
E
%s M
m
\ >M
O
r'y
N () O
gpo
NZ�
�D
Z
_.
4g+Vy3.Y age SQ JJ QQQ
a
q
t E€� ��Yjl�b�9 q65 s°.:6 oe je655 ob
it o ............ ..
�Sis�ra��l '�3 � 3ii�$95"99435 lig 399: ;. !
. q 1 S
F' fli e3 rg iii 3 if 1, fit
FeFi 5; p ji�9999 99 9.99 999!999. e r
t !g i ^
��d 3i Ilirt`S i ��ee as sea aaca 5 ' 4 J
�I'I�daaaaddaaaeddaad
it Rit
,tif gl _
sR
m 8QLi
EXHIBIT L: Grading, Drainage and Frontage Improvement Plan (I of 2)
AVE
1.'-e
>
>
>
z
OD >
>
>
EXHIBIT L: Grading, Drainage and Frontage Improvement Plan (2 of 2)
s
an `z;
D A n 1!} r
isFtl
a
x _
1
---
s D =
s
ATTACHMENT 7: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0033
Approval of Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0033
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2006-
0089 (TRACT 2854), AN EIGHT LOT SUBDIVISION CONSISTENT WITH
A MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT ON APN 029-322-0229 0239 024
5825 Ridgeway Ct.
(Beck)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Jim and Adrienne Beck, 5825
Ridgeway Ct, Atascadero, Ca 93422, and Gary and Mary Tharp, 12250 San Antonio Rd,
Atascadero, Ca 93422, (Applicants and Property Owners), to consider a project consisting of a
Zone Change from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -family -10) to RMF-10/PD-29 (Residential Multi -
Family -10 with a Planned Development Overlay #29) with corresponding Master Plan of
Development and Vesting Tentative Tract Map located at 5825 Ridgeway Ct, (APN 029-322-
022, 023, 024); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that the site's Zoning District
be changed from RMF -10 (Residential Multi -Family -10) to RMF -10 / PD -29 (Residential Multi -
Family -10 / Planned Development Overlay #29); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0003 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 laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Tentative
Tract Map application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Master Plan of
Development; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on September 18, 2007 studied and considered Tentative Tract Map 2006-
0089, after first studying and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared
for the project, and
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map, the Planning
Commission of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
The proposed subdivision, design and improvements as conditioned, is consistent with
the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements, including provisions of the PD
Overlay District #29.
2. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the Master Plan of
Development (CUP 2006-0184).
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed.
5. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their
habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at
large for access through, or the use of property within, the proposed subdivision; or
substantially equivalent alternative easements are provided.
7. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) or equivalent shall be required that
incorporate the Master Plan of Development conditions of approval to ensure that the site
retains the proposed qualities (architecture, colors, materials, plan amenities, fencing, and
landscaping) over time.
8. The proposed subdivision design and type of improvements proposed will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general public.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on September 18, 2007, resolved to recommend that
the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 2006-0089 subject to the following:
1. Exhibit A: Tentative Tract Map (Tract 2854)
2. Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Vice -Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Exhibit A: Tentative Tract Map
E !6 Q
Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2006-0089
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Planning Services
1. The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective for the purposes
FM
PS
of issuing building permits thirty (30) days following the City Council approval of
ZCH 2006-0121 and ZCH 2007-0135 upon second reading, unless prior to that
time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the
Zoning Ordinance.
2. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve
BP/FM
PS, CE
the following minor changes to the project that (1) modify the site plan project by
less than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or (3)
address a construction design issue that is not substantive to the Master Plan of
Development.
3. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for twelve (12) months
BP / FM
PS
after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall expire and
become null and void unless the project has received a building permit.
4. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Atascadero
Ongoing
PS
or its agents, officers, and employees against any claim or action brought to
challenge an approval by the city, or any of its entities, concerning the
subdivision
5. All subsequent Tentative Map and construction permits shall be consistent with
BP/FM
PS, CE
the Master Plan of Development contained herein.
6. All exterior elevations, finish materials and colors shall be consistent with the
BP
PS
Master Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT B through L with the following
modifications:
■ All exterior material finishes (siding, trim, doors, windows, light fixtures,
garage doors) shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with the
architectural appearance.
■ Windows shall be gridded on all four elevations.
• Roofs shall be architectural grade dimensional shingles.
7. All site development shall comply with the standards of the Planned
BP
PS, BS
Development Overlay District #29.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
8. All site work, grading, and site improvements shall be consistent with the Master
BP/FM
PS, BS, CE
Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT B J, K, and L. Where discrepancies
exist between the landscape plan and the grading plan, the grading plan will take
precedence. The following modification shall be required:
■ A rolled concrete curb shall be provided along Palma Avenue and the back
of sidewalk shall be located at the extent of the existing right-of-way.
9. All project fencing shall be installed consistent with EXHIBIT Band J subject to
GP/BP
PS
the following modifications:
■ Fencing material and treatment shall comply with the PD29 standards.
■ Fencing for the units shall be placed at the rear property lines. Fencing
shall be 4 -foot maximum solid or transparent fencing.
■ No fencing shall cross the creek channel nor shall be placed in any way
which restricts flow.
■ Fencing adjacent to the open space easement shall be transparent in
nature.
10. The proposed project shall incorporate dark earth toned colors and shall utilize
GP/BP
PS
stone veneer similar to or compatible with the existing stone walls surrounding
the Colony Home. Stone veneer shall be used on the garage levels of lots 5
through 8 and for all retaining walls adjacent to the Palma Ave. frontage. Dark
split faced block that is compatible with the stone veneer may be utilized for the
rear retaining walls.
11. A 3 -foot wide planter shall be provided between the guest parking spaces along
BP
PS
Palma Avenue and the retaining wall. Landscape in this area shall be low-lying
to allow for vehicle overhang.
12. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be approved prior to the issuance of
BP
PS
building permits and included as part of site improvement plan consistent with
EXHIBIT J, and as follows:
■ All exterior meters, air conditioning units and mechanical equipment shall
be screened with landscape material.
■ All areas shown on the landscape plan shall be landscaped by the
developer prior to the final of any single building permit on-site.
■ Final tree list shall be submitted with building permits, subject to staff
approval. Street trees within tree planters along Palma Avenue shall be
medium sided shade trees such as honey or purple robe locust. Planting
adjacent to parking spaces and within narrow planters shall consist of
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
ornamental grasses and compatible upright screen shrubs and vines.
Landscaping at the terraced walls shall consist of trailing plants and screen
shrubs.
■ Street trees shall be minimum 15 -gallon size and double staked.
■ Front yard areas not specifically conditioned shall be landscaped with
drought tolerant species, subject to staff approval.
13. The developer and/or subsequent owner(s) shall assume responsibility for the
FM/
PS
continued maintenance of all landscape and common areas, consistent with
Ongoing
EXHIBIT B, J, and L.
14. Affordable Housing Requirement: The applicant shall comply with the City
FM/BP
PS, CA
Council inclusionary housing policy and either deed restrict 20% of the proposed
units or pay an in -lieu fee based on 5% of the construction valuation of each new
and existing housing unit.
15. Workforce Housing: Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall enter
BP
PS, CA
into a legal agreement with the City to reserve 1/2 of the units for sale to residents
or workers within the City of Atascadero, including the affordable units. The
agreement shall include the following provisions:
■ The units shall be offered for sale to residents or workers within the
City of Atascadero for a minimum of 60 -days. During this time period
offers may only be accepted from Atascadero residents or workers;
■ The applicant shall provide reasonable proof to the City that at least
one of the qualified buyers is a resident or worker within the City
Limits of Atascadero;
■ The Atascadero resident or worker restriction shall apply to the initial
sale only;
■ The applicant shall identify which units will be reserved; and
■ The City Attorney shall approve the final form of the agreement.
16. A Tree Protection Plan shall be submitted with subsequent building permits for
GP/BP
PS
encroachment within the drip line of native trees located on the subject parcel
and any adjacent properties. The applicant will contract with a certified arborist to
monitor all activity within the drip lines of existing native oak trees.
17. The emergency services and facility maintenance costs listed below shall be
BP
PS
100% funded by the project in perpetuity. The service and maintenance costs
shall be funded through a community facilities district established by the City
at the developer's cost. The funding mechanism must be in place prior to or
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
concurrently with acceptance of the final maps. The funding mechanism shall
be approved by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services
Director prior to acceptance of any final map. The administration of the above
mentioned funds shall be by the City. Developer agrees to participate in the
community facilities district and to take all steps reasonably required by the
City with regard to the establishment of the district and assessment of the
property.
■ All Atascadero Police Department service costs to the project.
■ All Atascadero Fire Department service costs to the project.
■ Off-site common City of Atascadero park facilities maintenance service
costs related to the project.
18. All tract maintenance costs listed below shall be 100% funded by the project in
BP
PS
perpetuity. The service and maintenance cost shall be funded through a Home
Owners Association established by the developer subject to City approval. The
Home Owners Association must be in place prior to, or concurrently with
acceptance of any final maps. The Home Owners Association shall be approved
by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services Director prior to
acceptance of any Final Map. The administration of the above mentioned funds,
and the coordination and performance of maintenance activities, shall be the
responsibility of the Home Owners Association.
h) All streets, bridges, sidewalks, streetlights, street signs, roads,
emergency access roads, emergency access gates, and sewer mains
within the project.
i) All parks, trails, recreational facilities and like facilities.
j) All open space and native tree preservation areas.
k) All drainage facilities and detention basins.
1) All creeks, flood plains, floodways, wetlands, and riparian habitat
areas.
m) All common landscaping areas, street trees, medians, parkway
planters, manufactured slopes outside private yards, and other similar
facilities.
n) All frontage landscaping and sidewalks along arterial streets
19. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit CC&Rs for review and approval by
BP
PS, BS
the Community Development Department. The CC&R's shall record with the
Final Map and shall include the following:
Provisions for maintenance of all common areas including access,
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
parking, street trees, fencing and landscaping in perpetuity.
h) A detailed list of each individual homeowner's responsibilities for
maintenance of the individual units.
i) Residents shall keep all trash receptacles within the unit's designated
trash storage area.
j) Garages shall be maintained and used for vehicle parking.
k) No boats, RV's or other type of recreation vehicle may occupy a guest
or resident parking space, including within an individual garage.
1) A provision for review and approval by the City Community
Development Department for any changes to the CC&R's that relate to
the above requirements prior to the changes being recorded or taking
effect.
The applicant may choose not to record CC&R's as shared facilities are minimal. In
this case, the applicant will be required to record a combination of deed
restrictions alerting future owners to project conditions and maintenance
agreements for the shared maintenance of the drainage and shared parking
facilities.
20. Approval of this permit shall include the removal of 8 Native Trees. The applicant
BP
PS, BS
shall be required to pay mitigation fees or provide replantings on-site per the
requirements of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. Any additional removals
shall be subject to Planning Commission approval.
■ A mitigation deposit shall be collected for all native trees impacted 40% or
greater. The deposit shall be released no sooner than 18 months following
final of the unit(s) impacting the trees.
21. The applicant must provide for the repair and maintenance of on-site shared
FM
CE
improvements. This includes guest parking areas that cross property lines,
shared driveways, and common drainage facilities. The two methods that may
be used are:
a. Homeowners Association. This private organization would be responsible for
the maintenance, repair and replacement of the facilities.
b. Other form of non -revocable maintenance agreement approved by the City
Engineer and the Community Development Director.
The City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve the final form prior to
recordation.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
City Engineer Project Conditions
22. Project shall include construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk along entire
GP, BP
CE
frontage of Palma Avenue, Rosario Avenue and Ridgeway Court, as modified on
the Tentative Parcel Map.
23. In accordance with municipal code section 9-4.160, the applicant shall overlay
GP, BP
CE
Rosario Avenue across the frontage of the property to a width of '/2 the street
plus 10'.
24. In accordance with municipal code section 9-4.160, the applicant shall overlay
GP, BP
CE
Palma Avenue across the frontage of the property to a width of 1/2 the street plus
10'.
City Engineer Standard Conditions
25. In the event that the applicant bonds for the public improvements required as a
GP, BP
CE
condition of this map, the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement
Agreement with the City Council.
26. An engineer's estimate of probable cost shall be submitted for review and
GP, BP
CE
approval by the City Engineer to determine the amount of the bond.
27. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall record concurrently with the Final
FM
CE
Map.
28. A six (6) foot Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be provided contiguous to the
GP, BP
CE
property frontage.
29. The applicant shall acquire title interest in any off-site land that may be required
GP, BP
CE
to allow for the construction of the improvements. The applicant shall bear all
costs associated with the necessary acquisitions. The applicant shall also gain
concurrence from all adjacent property owners whose ingress and egress is
affected by these improvements.
30. Slope easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to accommodate
GP, BP
CE
cut or fill slopes.
31. Drainage easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to
GP, BP
CE
accommodate both public and private drainage facilities.
32. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction
FM
CE
with the processing of the tract map.
33. The final map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to the map being placed
FM
CE
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
on the agenda for City Council acceptance.
34. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall pay all outstanding plan
FM
CE
check/inspection fees.
35. Prior to recording the map, the applicant shall bond for or complete all
FM
CE
improvements required by these conditions of approval.
36. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall bond for or set monuments at
FM
CE
all new property corners. A registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor
shall indicate by certificate on the parcel map, that corners have been set or shall
be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be
retraced.
37. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall submit a map drawn in
FM
CE
substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with
all conditions set forth herein. The map shall be submitted for review and
approval by the City in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's
Subdivision Ordinance.
38. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to
FM
CE
be shown on the final/parcel map. If there are building or other restrictions
related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final/parcel map. The
applicant shall show all access restrictions on the final/parcel map.
39. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall have the map reviewed by all
FM
CE
applicable public and private utility companies (cable, telephone, gas, electric,
Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The applicant shall obtain a letter from
each utility company indicating their review of the map. The letter shall identify
any new easements that may be required by the utility company. A copy of the
letter shall be submitted to the City. New easements shall be shown on the
parcel map.
40. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit plans and
GP, BP
CE
supporting calculations/reports including street improvements, underground
utilities, composite utilities, and grading/drainage plans prepared by a registered
civil engineer for review and approval by the City Engineer.
41. Submit calculations to support the design of any structures or pipes. Closed
GP, BP
CE
conduits shall be designed to convey the 10 -year flow with gravity flow, the 25 -
year flow with head, and provide safe conveyance for the 100 -year overflow.
42. Provide for the detention and metering out of developed storm runoff so that it is
GP, BP
CE
equal to or less than undeveloped storm runoff.
43. Drainage basins shall be designed to desilt, detain and meter storm flows as well
GP, BP
CE
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
as release them to natural runoff locations.
44. Show the method of dispersal at all pipe outlets. Include specifications for size &
GP, BP
CE
type.
45. Show method of conduct to approved off-site drainage facilities.
GP, BP
CE
46. Concentrated drainage from off-site areas shall be conveyed across the project
GP, BP
CE
site in drainage easements. Acquire drainage easements where needed.
Drainage shall cross lot lines only where a drainage easement has been
provided. If drainage easement cannot be obtained the storm water release must
follow the exact historic path, rate and velocity as prior to the subdivision.
47. Applicant shall submit erosion control plans and a Storm Water Pollution
GP, BP
CE
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), as applicable. The Regional Water Quality Control
Board shall approve the SWPPP.
48. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of
GP, BP
CE
Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or
as directed by the City Engineer
49. Off-site streets shall be improved consistent with the Tentative Tract Map.
GP, BP
CE
50. Alignment of frontage improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer.
GP, BP
CE
51. All utilities shall be undergrounded on project frontage
GP, BP
CE
52. Applicant shall pay sewer extension (Annexation), Connection and
BP
CE
Reimbursement fees (if applicable) upon issuance of building permit.
53. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims located below the
BP
CE
elevation of the next upstream manhole cover of the public or private sewer
serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by
installing an approved type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall
not discharge through the backwater valve.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 1.b.1: All houses constructed along the Palma Ave frontage on
BP
PS
1.b.1
slopes of 20% or greater shall incorporate stone veneer into the fagade of the lower
garage level and shall be painted darker earth toned colors to blend with the
natural surrounding.
Mitigation Measure 1.d.1: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any off site
BP
PS
1.d.1
glare. All exterior site lights shall utilize full cut-off, "hooded" lighting fixtures to
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
5825 Ridgeway Ct
PLN 2006-1117
Planned Development Overlay #29
Timing
FM; Final Map
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading
Permit
BP: Building
Permit
FI: Final
Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation
Measure
prevent offsite light spillage and glare. Any luminaire pole height shall not exceed
14 -feet in height, limit intensity to 2.0 foot candles at ingress /egress, and otherwise
0.6 foot candle minimum to 1.0 maximum in parking areas. Fixtures shall be shield
cut-off type.
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
Bp
BS, PS
3.b.1
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.
■ Asbestos has been identified by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air
contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common in the state
and may contain naturally occurring asbestos. Under the State Air
Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading
activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic
evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos is
present within the area that will be disturbed. If Naturally Occurring
Asbestos (NOA) is found at the site the applicant must comply with all
requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. If NOA is not present, an
exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site
the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos
ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan
and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD.
Should Naturally Occurring Asbestos be identified within the area of
construction, and the worked area will be less than or equal to one acre,
then the dust control measures identified below are required. If the
disturbed area is greater than one acre, additional requirements may include
but are not limited to 1) an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan which must be
approved by the District before construction begins, and 2) an Asbestos
Health and Safety Program will also be required for some projects.
■ Dust Control Measures for Construction and Grading Operation Projects
One Acre or Less: No person shall engage in any construction or grading
operation on property where the area to be disturbed is one (1.0) acre or
less unless all of the following dust mitigation measures are initiated at the
start and maintained throughout the duration of the construction or grading
activity:
(A) Construction vehicle speed at the work site must be limited to
fifteen(15) miles per hour or less;
(B) Prior to any ground disturbance, sufficient water must be applied to the
area to be disturbed to prevent visible emissions from crossing the
property line;
(C) Areas to be graded or excavated must be kept adequately wetted to
prevent visible emissions from crossing the property line;
D Storage piles must be kept adequately wetted, treated with a chemical
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
dust suppressant, or covered when material is not being added to or
removed from the pile;
(E) Equipment must be washed down before moving from the property
onto a paved public road;
(F) Visible track -out on the paved public road must be cleaned using wet
sweeping or a HEPA filter equipped vacuum device within twenty-four
24 hours
Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified
BP
PS
3.b.2
by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and
ultramafic rocks are very common in the state and may contain naturally occurring
asbestos. Under the State Air Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure
(ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior
to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a
geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos is
present within the area that will be disturbed. If naturally occurring asbestos is
found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the
Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining
Operations. These requirements may include but are not limited to 1) an Asbestos
Dust Mitigation Plan which must be approved by the District before construction
begins, and 2) an Asbestos Health and Safety Program will also be required for
some projects.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: The Grading Plan shall identify tree protection fencing
BP
PS
4.e.1
around the dripline, or as recommended by the project arborist, of each existing on-
site or off-site native tree.
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
5825 Ridgeway Ct
PLN 2006-1117
Planned Development Overlay #29
Timing
FM; Final Map
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading
Permit
BP: Building
Permit
FI: Final
Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation
Measure
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall contract with a certified arborist
GP
PS
4.e.2
during all phases of project implementation. The certified arborists 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 a
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) As specified by the arborist report and City staff:
■ Prune all trees in active development areas to be saved for structural
strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist;
■ Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning.
■ 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 or 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.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: Grading and excavation and grading work shall be
GP, BP
PS
4.e.3
consistent with the City of Atascadero Tree Ordinance. Special precautions when
working around native trees include:
7. All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain.
8. Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area.
9. Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be pruned prior to
any heavy equipment work being done.
10. Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the dripline of all
trees.
11. All trees within the area of 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.
12. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by
hand and sealed with an approved tree seal.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: Erosion control hydroseed/slope stabilization shall
BP
CE, PS
4.e.4
consist of native species matching the existing plant species within the tributary
stream. The seed and plant material shall not contain any introduced plant
species.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.1: A "HS" (Historic Site) zoning designation shall be
ZCH
PS
5.a.1
placed over Lot 1.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.2: wa4sThe existing retaining wall shall be disassembled
BP
PS
5.a.2
and reconstructed as an entry feature on the corner of Rosario and Palma
Avenues. Any remaining rock shall be used as accent features of the remaining
lots and shall be focused on enhancing and preserving the additional stone walls
on Lot 1, the Colony Home lot. All other retaining walls shall be constructed of high
quality material and shall compliment the architectural style of the project -AR
retaiRing walls replaced GF GenStFUGted as part of the project shall be aesthetiGally
GGrnpatible vdth the existing eRtFY feature �.yalls;. These .-;halt inr_-.I,_-d_e stene venee
+ho+ k; c4nol.r in shone and r..l.-.r +n +ho o ic+inn walls
Mitigation Measure 5.a.3: CC&R's recorded for the development shall include a
FMP
PS
5.a.3
statement addressing the historic nature of Lot 1.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.4: Any exterior building modifications or site plan changes
Ongoing
PS
5.a.4
not represented in the proposed project that could occur during the Building Permit
application process or during construction shall be consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings and shall meet the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, as
approved by Planning Staff.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Final Map
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
FI: Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 5.a.5: The existing carriage house/drive through out-building
BP
PS
5.a.5
shall be restored and maintained in a structurally and aesthetically sound condition.
All modifications or repairs necessary for such shall be consistent with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and shall meet the provisions of CEQA -Section
15064.5, as approved by Planning Staff.
Mitigation Measure 5.a.6: All recommendations of the Historic Analysis shall be
BP
PS
5.a.6
implemented and adhered to throughout construction and the life of the historic
Colony Home.
A .r't+on h'stor'neval, efien and nhotonranh'n reperdafien of the existing Galen
Herne shall be required, quality and format n is+on+ with standards of the
other phySiGal changes. The WFitten hiSt0FiG evaluation shall include a narrative
guide"1118S, the narrative report and the plans shall be presented together, and the
photographs shall be presented separately In binders. The photographs
I Gludo nrin+Sand an index +o the prints. The negatives aRd a Logi to oanh nhete
yleyrshall ho innli dod. Three sets of the wFi++eR and phetegraphiG grin
dons �monta+ion shall hoprovided +o the Gi+., of A+asoadnro
Mitigation Measure 6.b: The grading permit application plans shall include erosion
GP, BP
CE
6.b
control measures to prevent soil, dirt, and debris from entering the storm drain
system during and after construction. A separate plan shall be submitted for this
purpose and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer at the
time of Building Permit application. (See section 8 of the document).
Mitigation Measure 6.c.d: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a
GP, BP
CE
6.c.d.
future 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 8e.f.1: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
GP, BP
CE
8.e.f.1
(SWPPP)/Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted and approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of the building permit. The plan shall include storm
water measures for the operation and maintenance of the project for the review
and approval of the City Engineer. The Building Permit application plans shall
identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the uses conducted on
site that effectively prohibit the entry of pollutants into storm water runoff.
Mitigation Measure 8.e.f.2: The developer is responsible for ensuring that all
BP, GP
CE
8.e.f.2
contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures
are implemented. Failure to comply with the approved construction Best
Management Practices will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or
stop work orders.
Mitigation Measure 11.d: All construction activities shall comply with the City of
GP, BP
PS
11A
Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
Measure
FM; Fnal Map
PS: Planning Services
BL; Business
BS: Building Services
5825 Ridgeway Ct
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading
PD: Police Department
Permit
CE: City Engineer
PLN 2006-1117
BP: Building
Permit
WW: wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Fl; Final
Inspection
Planned Development Overlay #29
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 15.a.b.1: Full frontage improvements shall be required along
PI
CE
15.a.b.1
Palma Avenue, Rosario Avenue, and Ridgeway Court, per the standards and
approval of the City Engineer.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendment
PLN 2007-1238
(City of Atascadero)
SUBJECT:
The project consists of a proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to portions of Title
9, Planning and Zoning, and Title 11, Subdivisions, of the Atascadero Municipal Code
(AMC). The proposed text updates consist of four amendments that encompass the
following:
1.) Amend the processing timeframe for a determination of completeness for Precise
Plan and Conditional Use Permit applications to be consistent with the
requirements of the State of California's Permit Streamlining Act, and amend time
limit for processing application to allow applicant up to one year before application
is deemed withdrawn (AMC 9.2-102).
2.) Extend the permit approval period for planning entitlements from 12 months to 24
months, so that all planning applications have an approval timeline consistent with
the limitations of Tentative Tract Maps, and additional amendments to substantial
site work definition and what constitutes progress towards work on an entitlement
(AMC 9-1.104, AMC 9-2.113, AMC 9-2.114, AMC 9-2.119).
3.) Change RSF-Y and RSF-Z minimum lot size from net area to gross area in order to
make the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the General Plan requirements (AMC
9-3.154).
4.) Change the 10 -foot minimum setback from an access way to 5 feet in order to be
consistent with side property line setbacks (AMC 11-6.26, AMC 9-4.107).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC 2007-0077,
recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for first reading, by title
only, to approve PLN 2007-1238 (Zone Change 2007-0138) based on findings.
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant:
2. General Plan Designation
3. Zoning District:
4. Environmental Status
DISCUSSION:
Analysis:
City of Atascadero
Citywide
Citywide
Exempt from CEQA
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
1.) Update of Processing Time Limits for Completeness Review
Section 9-2.102 of the Atascadero Municipal Code states specific requirements and
timeframes for the processing and completeness review for planning entitlement
applications. The current code states that for Conditional Use Permits and Precise Plan
applications, staff shall provide the applicant with a determination of completeness
within 15 days of the submittal date (11 working days). Conditional Use Permits and
Tentative Tract Maps are already regulated by the California Permit Streamlining Act,
which requires that a determination of completeness is provided to the applicant within
30 days.
In order to create a consistent time frame for the processing of all Planning Applications,
a Code Text Change is proposed which will change the processing time for Precise
Plans and Conditional Use Permits to be consistent with the State of California's Permit
Streamlining Act.
Permit Streamlining Act Requirements:
(From the State of California, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Website)
"Upon receipt of a project application containing a statement identifying the application as being
for a "development permit," an agency has 30 calendar days to notify the applicant, in writing,
of whether or not the project application is complete enough for processing. When rejected as
incomplete, the agency must identify where deficiencies exist and how they can be remedied.
The resubmittal of the application begins a new 30 -day review period. If the agency fails to
notify the applicant of completeness within either of the 30 -day periods, the application is
deemed to be complete (§65943; Orsi v. City Council (1990) 219 Cal. App. 3d 1576). If rejected
as incomplete a second time, the applicant may appeal the decision to jurisdiction's hearing body
who must make a final written determination within 60 calendar days. Again, failure to meet this
time period constitutes acceptance of the application as complete."
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
The proposed Text Change will provide consistent processing requirements for all of the
City's planning applications. Multiple applications are often submitted and reviewed
together for a single project, each of which currently have different processing
timeframes. A consistent 30 -day processing time will allow all City Departments,
including Planning, Public Works, Building, and Fire, to do a thorough first plan check
on projects in order to address any issues associated with a new project.
In addition, a Zone Text Amendment is proposed which would allow applicant's up to
one year to resubmit the additional required information before the application is
deemed withdrawn. Currently, the code requires that an applicant resubmit within 90 -
days of a notice of incomplete application. Many times, this is not sufficient time for the
applicant, and therefore staff is recommending that the time period be extended.
Proposed Text Change:
9-2.102 Determination of completeness.
Within the time periods specified by subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the
Community DevelopmentPlanning Director or their designee shall determine whether an
application includes the information required by this chapter, and shall notify the applicant
if the application is incomplete of the results of that detef,,.,;,,atio. The applicant shall be
informed by a letter either- that the '�
„ea*: ,,, h been *e' r pror that the
application is incomplete and that additional information, specified in the letter, must be
provided to make the application complete.
(a) Plot Plans. A plot plan application shall not be accepted for processing unless it is
determined to be complete at the time of filing.
(b) Precise Plans and Conditional Use Permits. The timeframe for determination of
completeness shall be consistent with the State of California's Permit Streamlining
oeetif within fifteen (15) days of the filing of a preeise plan or- eonditional ase- pen-,,+
a„�In the event that the Planning Director or their designee does not make such a
determination, the application shall be considered complete and processing of the
environmental document required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
shall commence.
When an applicant is notified that a submitted application is incomplete, the time used by
the applicant for preparation and submittal of the required additional information shall not
be considered part of the period within which the Planning Director or their designee must
complete the determination of completeness. The time available to an applicant for
preparation and submittal of additional information is limited by Section 9-2.121. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.102, 1983)
9-2.121 Applications deemed withdrawn.
Any application received and processed shall be deemed withdrawn if it has been held in
abeyance or continuance, awaiting the submittal of additional required information by the
applicant, and if the applicant has not submitted such information within 12 months y
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(hof the last written notification to the applicant requesting additional information
in advance of either a decision to accept the application for processing or review by the
Planning Commission or City Council, to which the applicant has not responded.
When an application is deemed withdrawn, or has been withdrawn by the applicant, the
Community Development Planning Director or their designee shall return the entire
application package to the applicant, including accompanying information and any portion
of the filing fee is not used in processing up to the point of withdrawal. The return
application shall also be accompanied by a letter explaining the requirements for refiling.
A withdrawn application may be refiled at any time, provided that it shall be received and
processed as a new application. (Ord. 68 § 9-2.121, 1983)
2.) Extension of Approval Time Limit for Planning Entitlements
The second portion of the proposed Code Text Amendment is in regards to the amount of
time an applicant has to begin work on a site after receiving planning entitlement approval
and entitlement expiration timelines.
Conditional Use Permits and Tentative Maps are often processed and approved together
for a project. Tentative Maps, however, are regulated under the Subdivision Map Act,
which allows applicants up to 24 months to obtain a Final Map. In most cases, a Final
Map must be recorded prior to building permit issuance; therefore work cannot begin on-
site until the map is finaled.
Currently, the Atascadero Municipal Code requires that projects authorized through the
approval of Departmental Reviews, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, and
Development Plans shall obtain construction permits and complete substantial site work
within 12 months of the approval date.
Time Extensions may be approved in order to allow the applicant additional time to begin
work on the project. However, the differing expiration dates on the separate map and
CUP approvals can create inconsistencies and confusion. The proposed Code Text
Amendment would extend the planning entitlement approval for Conditional Use Permits
from 12 months to 24 months in order to create a consistent approval period for all
planning applications.
Additionally, section 9-2.114 is proposed to be removed in order to create a new definition
of what constitutes work being done towards a planning entitlement. Currently, an
applicant is required to show that substantial site work has been done, which for most
projects, includes showing that site work has progressed beyond grading and completion
of structural foundations and construction is occurring above grade. The proposed text
change would amend this requirement to only require that building permits have been
applied for and have not expired.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
Proposed Text Change:
9-1.104 Applicability of the zoning regulations.
(a) Proposed Uses. The provisions of this title apply to all lots, buildings, structures and
uses of land created, established, constructed or altered subsequent to the adoption of this
title, unless specifically exempted by this section.
(b) Existing Uses. The provisions of this title are not retroactive in their effect on a use of
land lawfully established before the effective date of this title, unless an alteration,
expansion or modification to an existing use is proposed which requires approval pursuant
to this title. A use lawfully established before the effective date of this title shall become a
nonconforming use subject to all applicable provisions of Chapter 9-7 unless the use is
determined to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of this title.
(c) Completion of Approved Uses. Nothing in this title shall require any change in the
plans, construction or approved use of a building or structure for which a permit has been
issued or a zoning approval has been granted before the effective date of this title, as
follows:
(1) Building Permits. Site work has progressed beyond grading and completion of
structural foundations within one hundred eighty (180) days after building permit issuance.
(2) Zoning Approvals. Projects authorized through the approval of departmental reviews,
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances,, and development plans shall ^'apply
for construction permits and complete substantial t See °
Sectio„ �-2.114) within
one o years of the effective date of the approval of a , conditional
use permit, precise plan, variance, development plan, o unless an extension of time
granted such entitlements has been approved as provided under Section 9-2.118. before
effective date of this title proceed, th-at-Any project that was approved for phased
construction may continue under the approved
phasing schedule. No entitlement „ oa , ndef the P. i . regulations shall be
gr -anted an e*tefisien of time after- the effee.i . this title &Eeept as provided by
Seeti ,,, 9 2.118.
(d) Nonexisting Use. A use of land not completed as provided by Section 9-1.104(c) as of
the effective date of this title shall be prohibited unless the use is determined to be in
compliance with all applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 68 § 9-1.104, 1983)
9-2.113 Permit time limits.
An approved plot plan is valid for the time limits established by Title 8 governing building
permits. An approved precise plan or conditional use permit is valid for twenty. f�24)
twelve (12) months after its effective date, unless otherwise provided by adopted
conditions. At the end of the twen . four (241twe -N months the approval shall expire
and become null and void unless:
(a) Building_ permits have been applied for and have not expired Substantial site Work,
towafd establishing the .,,,f1iorized use has been turf ,-,, e (Seetion 9 2 1 1 ll; or
(b) The project is completed (Section 9-2.115); or
(c) An extension has been granted (Section 9-2.118); or
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(d) A building moratorium is imposed on the project site.
Nothing in this title shall be construed as affecting any time limits established by Title 8 of
this Code regarding work authorized by a building permit or other construction permit
issued pursuant to Title 8, or time limits relating to the expiration of such permit. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.113, 1983)
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained.
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established (Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2) The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
. .. ... ..._�
. . _
..._ . .. .....
�. ..
. .
ZEE
•
-
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained.
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established (Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2) The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(3) A use or structure authorized through precise plan or conditional use permit approval
remains vacant and unused for its authorized purpose, or is abandoned or discontinued for
a period greater than twenty-four (12) consecutive months; or
(4) The entitlement is revoked in accordance with Section 9-8.105.
:.::-i..:.: �� .�e.ev�e:. �i..��s�:: a:i:• nom.. v.v�:-
i.�
(Ae) Condition Declared Void. The conditional use permit shall cease to be valid in the
event that a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction declares one or more of the
conditions of a conditional use permit approval to be void or ineffective, or enjoining or
otherwise prohibiting the enforcement or operation of one or more of such conditions.
(Ord. 68 § 9-2.119, 1983)
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
3.) RSF-Y and RSF-Z Minimum Lot Size
Currently, there is a contradiction between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance with
regard to the required minimum lot size in the RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning districts. Both
the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance state that Residential Single Family -Y
zoning requires 1 acre minimum lot size, and Residential Single Family -Z requires 1 '/2
to 2 '/2 acres, based on performance standards. However, the General Plan states that
.gross area shall be used in determining minimum lot sizes, while the Zoning Ordinance
states that net area shall be used.
As proposed, the Text Amendment will create consistency between the required
minimum lot sizes in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed
Amendment would change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to reflect a minimum gross
area requirement.
The zoning designation RSF-X, however, will not be changed and will continue to use
the net area of the lot in determining minimum lot size. Both the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance currently state net area in regards to minimum lot size in the
Residential Single Family -X zoning district. The RSF-X requirements are not being
changed in either document.
Proposed text change:
Article 4. RSF (Residential Single Family) Zone
�'NARE' u t i1�7 lmiilr
The minimum lot size in the Residential Single Family Zone shall be one-half ('/z) acre
and may range up to two and one-half (2'/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with
the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the
symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the official zoning maps
as provided by Section 9-3.104(d).
Symbol Minimum Lot Size
X One-half ('/2) acre net area (excluding
land needed for street rights of way
whether publicly or privately owned).
Y One (1) acrerg oss net area diRg
land Reeded for street Fights of way
Z One and one-half (1'/2) to two and one-
half (2'/2) acresrg oss based on
performance standards set forth in this
section.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element:
D. Land Use Designations
The Land Use Element and Diagram establish distinct residential and non-residential land use
categories that identify where certain q pes of uses may occur. While the General Plan outlines
overall development parameters, the Zoning Ordinance implements these designations through
regulations for specific districts and allowed uses. Table H-3 establishes the land use
designations of the General Plan and lists maximum potential development for each
designation.
Table II -3: General Plan Land Use - Projected Potential Development
Land
L'se
Designation
Matdmum
Density
Average
FAR
Mimutum Lot
Size
Acres
4aC-
Projected
DtivellingUnits
;dui
Projected
Population
_.c: people/u..:,
RR RE.' SE
3,1 - 0.4 unitlacregross"
2.5 -10 ac
9.340 ac
3834 dL-
9830 pp
SFR -Z
1.0 uniHacregross"
1.5 - 2.5 ac
655.2 ac
852 &
1728
SFR -Y
2.0 un'rstacre gross
1.0 ac
1.579.5 ac
293ldt,
7503pp
SFR -X
4.0 unitsiacre ret'
0.5 ac
472.7 ac
1380 dt,
3858 pp
HCR
10 un'rslacre net
0.5 ac
217.1 ac
1118 dL
2958 pp
HDR
18 unitslacre net
0.5 ac
303.0 ac
3848 dL
9888 pp
GC
18 un'rsracre net
0.3 FAR
292.1 ac
189 dL
-
501 PF
SC
0.4 FAR
41.8 ac
D
16 un'rslacre net
3.0 FAR
82.3 ac
50 dL
133 pp
MU
18 unitVacre net
0.3 FAR
88.8 ac
200 dr,
530 pp
CPK
0.4 FAR
82.9 ac
CREC
10 unitslacre net
0.1 FAR
8.7 ac
IND
0.4 FAR
85.2 ac
AG
CA -0.4 unitslacregross"
2.5 - 10 ac
43.9 ac
REC
501.7 ac
PUB
0.4 FAR
1.174.3 ac
OS
277.4 ac
Total
15,182.6 ac
13,701 du
36.308 > >
"Net" shall mean minimum lot size exclusive of private or publicly owned abutting road rights-of-way while "Gross' shall include
abutting road right-of-way to center line.
FAR (Floor Area Ratio): The FAR expresses the percentage of a site area that could be covered by a building. The FAR is not considered an
absolute cap under this General Plan but is used as an overall land use designation average to calculate traffic and job generation related to
the uses. Actually site utilization restrictions are determined by the zoning ordinance's setback, landscaping, parking and height
standards.
Downtown FAR is assumed with an average of 0.4 with a max of 3.0.
' The maximum density sets a limit to the number of units that may be developed in each land use designation. The General Plan also sets
minimum lots size areas that are allowed through the subdivision process consistent with the "Elbow Room' principle. The minimum lot
sizes are more restrictive than the maximum densities in order to reflect historic small lot development densities and to allow for new
planned development projects that incorporate smaller lot sizes with innovative design concepts.
" Density is adjusted by performance standards in this land use designation. The maximum density may be lower based on the
application of performance standards.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
4.) Setbacks From Accessways
Chapter 11 of the Atascadero Municipal Code includes requirements for subdivisions,
including required setbacks from accessways. The code currently requires a 10 -foot
minimum setback from accessways such as flag lots and access easements. The
proposed Text Amendment would change the 10 -foot required setback to 5 feet,
consistent with the standard side property line setback. A 5 -foot setback would allow
adequate distance from the accessway to any structures on the adjacent property. The
setback would be changed in section 11-6.26 (the Subdivision Ordinance) and would be
added to Title 9, Chapter 4, section 9-4.107 (Side Setbacks).
11-6.26 Flag lots (deep lot subdivisions).
(a) Flag lots may be approved for subdividing deep lots subject to the following findings:
(1) the subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood; (2) the
installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with neighboring properties
is not feasible; and (3) the flag lot is justified by topographical conditions. Such
subdivisions shall conform with the following:
(1) The accessway serving the flag lot(s) shall not be included in the determination of
required lot area for any lot.
(2) The original lot shall have frontage on a dedicated street.
(3) The accessway to the rear shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to City
standards) for residential zones, except where the accessway is more than one hundred
fifty (150) feet long, it shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet wide with twenty (20) feet of
pavement, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. For all other zones,
the accessway shall be at least thirty (30) feet wide with a paved roadway at least twenty-
four (24) feet wide.
(4) Each lot shall have yards as required by the zoning regulations, including a five5 ten
0 -0)) -foot setback along any accessway, whether easement or lot line.
(5) The lot farthest from the street shall own the accessway in fee. Other lots using the
accessway shall have an access and utility easement over it, unless otherwise approved by
the advisory agency.
(6) Lots utilizing the accessway of a flag lot may be required to enter into a road
maintenance agreement to insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
(7) A reflectorized house number master sign shall be located at the intersection of the
street and accessway and individual reflectorized address signs shall be placed on the
right-hand side of the driveway to each individual lot. (Ord. 370 § 2 (part), 2000)
9-4.107 Side setbacks.
The side setback is measured at right angles to the side property line to form a setback line
parallel to the side property line, which extends between the front and rear setback areas.
The minimum side setback is to be as follows:
(a) A, RS, RSF, LSF and RMF Zones and Residential Uses in Commercial and Industrial
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
Zones. All residential uses except for second story dwellings over commercial and
industrial uses shall have a minimum side setback of five (5) feet, except as follows:
(1) Corner Lots. The side setback on the street side of a corner lot is to be a minimum of
ten (10) feet.
(2) A Corner Lot Adjacent to a Key Lot. A side setback equal to one-half the depth of the
required front setback of the key lot shall be provided, except that:
(i) Where the corner lot is less than fifty (50) feet in width, the setback is to be a minimum
of ten (10) feet.
(ii) Where an alley is between the corner lot and a key lot, the setback on the street side of
the corner lot is to be five (5) feet.
(3) Accessory Buildings. A side yard may be used for an accessory building no greater
than twelve (12) feet in height, provided that it is not used for human habitation or the
keeping of animals and is either:
(i) Located no closer than three (3) feet to any property line; or
(ii) Located on the rear half of the lot; or
(iii) Established on the property line as a common wall structure pursuant to subdivision
(4) of this subsection, or as a zero lot line structure, provided that all applicable Uniform
Building Code requirements are satisfied for a property line wall.
(4) Common Wall Development. Any two dwelling units, and/or their accessory garages,
may be constructed on adjoining lots without setbacks between them provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated through subdivision map or conditional use permit
approval; and
(ii) A common wall or parry wall agreement, deed restriction or other enforceable
restriction has been recorded; and
(iii) The side setbacks opposite the common wall property line are not less than two times
the minimum width required by this section; and
(iv) Common wall construction is in compliance with the Uniform Building Code.
(5) Zero Lot Line Development. A group of dwelling units on adjoining lots maybe
established so that all units abut one side property line, provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated for an entire block through subdivision map or
conditional use permit approval; and
(ii) The modified setback requirements for the block are recorded as part of a land division
map, deed restriction, or other enforceable restriction; and
(iii) The side setback shall not be eliminated or reduced on the street side of a corner lot;
and
(iv) Side setbacks opposite the zero setback property line are not less than twice the
minimum required by this section.
(b) CN, CP, CR, CS, CT, CPK, IP, I and P Zones. No side setbacks are required. Ground
floor residential uses are subject to the setback requirements of subsection (a) of this
section.
(c) L and LS Zones. A minimum five (5) foot side setback is required. (Ord. 303 § 2 (Exh.
C), 1996; Ord. 68 § 9-4.107, 1983)
(6) Access easements. All access easements shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet,
measured from the edge of the easement.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
Proposed Environmental Determination
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15061.(3) Review for
Exemption) exempts activities which are covered by the general rule that CEQA applies
only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment. The proposed Text Amendment will not have any significant adverse
environmental impacts associated with this project application.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed Text Amendments are consistent with the General Plan, which is
implemented by the Zoning Ordinance. The first portion of the proposed changes will
change the required processing time for Precise Plan and Conditional Use Permit
applications to be consistent processing time stated in the State of California's Permit
Streamlining Act. The Second portion of the code update will extend the life of planning
entitlements, allowing up to 2 years for work to begin on a site, consistent with the time
limit allowed for maps. The third portion of the proposed Text Amendment will change
the minimum lot size in the RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning districts from gross area to net
area, thereby making the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the requirements of the
General Plan. The last portion of the text change would change the required minimum
setback along accessways from 10 feet to 5 feet.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may recommend modifications of the Text Amendments to the
City Council.
2. The Commission may determine that more information is needed on some
aspect of the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to
develop the additional information. The Commission should clearly state the type
of information that is required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The Commission may recommend the City Council deny the project. The
Commission should specify the reasons for denial of the project and recommend
an associated finding with such action.
PREPARED BY: Callie Taylor, Assistant Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Notice of Exemption
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution 2007-0077
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
ATTACHMENT 1: CEQA Exemption; Notice of Determination
CITY OF ATASCADERD
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
6707 EI Camino Rcal Atascadero, CA 93422 805.461.5000
TO: File Date Received for Filing
FROM: City of Atascadero R EC E i V i_i
Community Development Department
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with CEQA See 'CO0L t1T
Proiect Title
ZONING ORDINANCE CODE TEXT AMENDMENT
Project Location (Include County)
City Wide, Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project Description
The project consists of a revision to portions of Title 9 Planning and Zoning, of the Atascadero Municipal
Code (AMC). The proposed text updates consist of three amendments that encompass the following:
1.) Amend the processing timeframe for a determination ofcompleteness for Precise Plan and Conditional
Use Permit applications to be consistent with the requirements of the State ofCallfornia's Permit
Streamlining Act. Amend time limit for processing application to allow applicant up to one year before
application is deemed withdrawn (AMC 9.2-102).
2.) &tend the permit approval period for planning entitlements from 12 months to 24 months, so that all
planning applications have an approval timeline consistent with the approval period of Tentative Tract
Maps. Additional amendments to substantial site work definition and what constitutes progress towards
work on an entitlement. (AMC 9-1.104. AMC 9-2.113, AMC 9-2.114, AMC 9-2.119).
3.) Change RSF-Mand RSF Z minimum lot sire front net area to gross area in order make the Zoning
Ordinance consistent with the General Plan requirements (AMC 9-3.154).
4.) Change the l0 foot minimum setback from an access way to 5 feet in order to be consistent with a side
property line setback (AMC 11-626, AMC 9-4.107)..
Name of Public Agency Approving Project
City of Atascadero
Name of Person or A gency Carry i nOut Pro 0ect
Community Development Department, City of Atascadero
Exempt Status:
Reasons why project is exempt:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15061.(3) Review for Exemption) exempts
activities which are covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
Date: August 30, 2007
Callie Taylor
Assistant Planner
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0077
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0077
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL
CODE BY APPROVING PLN 2007-1238 (ZONE CHANGE 2007-0138)
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider Zone Change Text Amendments regarding the review period for a
determination of completeness, the minimum lot size in the RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning districts,
setbacks from accessways, and the time period to obtain building permits on planning
entitlements; and,
WHEREAS, a Notice of Exemption was 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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to Title 9 Planning and Zoning of the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Planning and
Zoning Text Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero
at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Planning and
Zoning Text Amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing
held on September 18, 2007, studied and considered PLN 2007-1238; and,
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Text Change. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
1. The Planning and Zoning Text Change is consistent with General Plan policies and
all other applicable ordinances and policies of the City.
2. This Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance will provide for the orderly and efficient
use of lands where such development standards are applicable.
3. The Text Change will not, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on September 18, 2007, resolved to recommend that
the City Council introduce for first reading by title only, an ordinance that would amend the City
Planning and Zoning Code Text with the following:
EXHIBIT A: Text Change Amendments
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by
the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
EXHIBIT A: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Changes
PLN 2007-1238
9-1.104 Applicability of the zoning regulations.
(a) Proposed Uses. The provisions of this title apply to all lots, buildings, structures and
uses of land created, established, constructed or altered subsequent to the adoption of this
title, unless specifically exempted by this section.
(b) Existing Uses. The provisions of this title are not retroactive in their effect on a use of
land lawfully established before the effective date of this title, unless an alteration,
expansion or modification to an existing use is proposed which requires approval pursuant
to this title. A use lawfully established before the effective date of this title shall become a
nonconforming use subject to all applicable provisions of Chapter 9-7 unless the use is
determined to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of this title.
(c) Completion of Approved Uses. Nothing in this title shall require any change in the
plans, construction or approved use of a building or structure for which a permit has been
issued or a zoning approval has been granted before the effective date of this title, as
follows:
(1) Building Permits. Site work has progressed beyond grading and completion of
structural foundations within one hundred eighty (180) days after building permit issuance.
(2) Zoning Approvals. Projects authorized through the approval of departmental reviews,
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances., and development plans shall ehtai*-apply
for construction permits within
one-two years of the effective date of the approval of a depaftmental feview, conditional
use permit, precise plan, variance, development plan, or- any unless an extension of time
granted such entitlements has been approved as provided under Section 9-2.118. befefe
effeetive date -of this title; provide', tha4 Any project that was approved for phased
construction under- the r r-egulations-may continue under the approved
phasing schedule.
granted an extension of time after the effMtive Ae�ftlhiss tiflee ee,�--Pept as pr-ovided by
ceetion 9 2.118.
(d) Nonexisting Use. A use of land not completed as provided by Section 9-1.104(c) as of
the effective date of this title shall be prohibited unless the use is determined to be in
compliance with all applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 68 § 9-1.104, 1983)
9-2.102 Determination of completeness.
Within the time periods specified by subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the
Community Development -Planning Director or their designee shall determine whether an
application includes the information required by this chapter, and shall notify the applicant
if the application is incomplete of the r -exults of that dete fffli atter. The applicant shall be
informed by a letter that the
application is incomplete and that additional information, specified in the letter, must be
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
provided to make the application complete.
(a) Plot Plans. A plot plan application shall not be accepted for processing unless it is
determined to be complete at the time of filing.
(b) Precise Plans and Conditional Use Permits. The timeframe for determination of
completeness shall be consistent with the State of California's Permit Streamlining Act.
oeettf within fifteen (15) days of the filing of a pr-eeise plan or- eanditional use peffflit
applieation. -In the event that the Director or their designee does not make such a
determination, the application shall be considered complete and processing of the
environmental document required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
shall commence.
When an applicant is notified that a submitted application is incomplete, the time used by
the applicant for preparation and submittal of the required additional information shall not
be considered part of the period within which the Planning Director or their designee must
complete the determination of completeness. The time available to an applicant for
preparation and submittal of additional information is limited by Section 9-2.121. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.102, 1983)
9-2.121 Applications deemed withdrawn.
Any application received and processed shall be deemed withdrawn if it has been held in
abeyance or continuance, awaiting the submittal of additional required information by the
applicant, and if the applicant has not submitted such information within 12 months nye
(90) days of the last written notification to the applicant requesting additional information
in advance of either a decision to accept the application for processing or review by the
Planning Commission or City Council, to which the applicant has not responded.
When an application is deemed withdrawn, or has been withdrawn by the applicant, the
Community Development Director or their designee shall return the entire
application package to the applicant, including accompanying information and any portion
of the filing fee is not used in processing up to the point of withdrawal. The return
application shall also be accompanied by a letter explaining the requirements for refiling.
A withdrawn application may be refiled at any time, provided that it shall be received and
processed as a new application. (Ord. 68 § 9-2.121, 1983)
9-2.113 Permit time limits.
An approved plot plan is valid for the time limits established by Title 8 governing building
permits. An approved precise plan or conditional use permit is valid for twen . four (24)
twelve (12) after its effective date, unless otherwise provided by adopted
conditions. At the end of the twen . four (24)*welve-0-2*months the approval shall expire
and become null and void unless:
(a) Building, permits have been applied for and have not expired Substantial site ,.,od.E.
; or
(b) The project is completed (Section 9-2.115); or
(c) An extension has been granted (Section 9-2.118); or
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(d) A building moratorium is imposed on the project site.
Nothing in this title shall be construed as affecting any time limits established by Title 8 of
this Code regarding work authorized by a building permit or other construction permit
issued pursuant to Title 8, or time limits relating to the expiration of such permit. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.113, 1983)
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained.
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established (Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2) The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
1101
1piwl
Sr
MWEN•_
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained.
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established (Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2) The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(3) A use or structure authorized through precise plan or conditional use permit approval
remains vacant and unused for its authorized purpose, or is abandoned or discontinued for
a period greater than twenty-four (12) consecutive months; or
(4) The entitlement is revoked in accordance with Section 9-8.105.
.:.�::A..:.: �� .�e.ev�e:. �a..��s�:: a:i:• nom.. a:�:.:�.ro:.o:....v.v�: -
(Ae) Condition Declared Void. The conditional use permit shall cease to be valid in the
event that a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction declares one or more of the
conditions of a conditional use permit approval to be void or ineffective, or enjoining or
otherwise prohibiting the enforcement or operation of one or more of such conditions.
(Ord. 68 § 9-2.119, 1983)
Article 4. RSF (Residential Single Family) Zone
9-3.154 Minimum lot size.
The minimum lot size in the Residential Single Family Zone shall be one-half ('/2) acre
and may range up to two and one-half (2'/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with
the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the
symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the official zoning maps
as provided by Section 9-3.104(d).
Symbol Minimum Lot Size
X One-half ('/2) acre net area (excluding
land needed for street rights of way
whether publicly or privately owned).
Y One (1) acrerg oss nes area eXGluiding
whether publiGly GF privately ewned).
Z One and one-half (1'/2) to two and one-
half (2'/2) acresrg oss based on
performance standards set forth in this
section.
(a) Performance Standards. The following performance standards shall be evaluated for
each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lot size:
(1) Distance from the Center of the Community. Using the Atascadero Administration
Building as the center of the community, the lot size factor based on this performance
standard shall be:
Distance] Lot Size Factor
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
0--4000' 0.08
4000'--6000' 0.10
6000'--8000' 0.12
1. To be measured as radial distance using map maintained in the Planning Department.
(2) Septic Suitability. Using generalized soils data from the Soil Conservation Service
Reports, the lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be:
SCS Ratingl Lot Size Factor
Well suited 0.30
Moderate or slow 0.50
Severe 0.70
1. Refer to map maintained in Community Development Department.
Percolation tests may be substituted for the Soil Conservation Service Reports. These shall
be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed sanitarian. The following conversion
chart shall be used to determine the appropriate lot size factor:
Percolation Rating Minutes Per Inch
Well suited Less than 20
Moderate 20 to 39
Slow 40 to 59
Severe Greater than 60
(3) Average Slope. Using the Basic, Sectional or Contour Measurement Method, the lot
size factor based on this performance standard shall be:
Slope Lot Size Factor
0--20% 0.30
21--30% 0.50
31%+ 0.70
(4) Condition of Access. Using the road right-of-way with the shortest accessible distance
between a lot and an improved collector road, the lot size factor based on this performance
standard shall be:
Condition Lot Size Factor
paved with slope of less than 15% or
City -accepted 0.15
paved with slope of greater than
15% 0.20
all-weather surface with slope of
less than 15% 0.25
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
all-weather surface with slope of
greater than 15% 0.30
unimproved surface 0.40
(5) General Neighborhood Character. Using the average lot size of existing lots (except
that lots larger than five (5) acres shall be excluded unless they constitute more than
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total number of lots) within a one thousand (1,000) foot
radius, the minimum lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be
determined by multiplying the average lot size by point zero two (0.2).
(b) Determination of Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size shall be determined by the
sum of each of the lot size factors for the performance standards set forth in subsection (a)
of this section.
(1) The most current information shall be used to determine the lot size factor. Where
information is not available, the Planning Director shall determine which lot size factor
shall apply,
(2) If more than one (1) lot size factor can be applied to a lot, the less restrictive factor
shall be used.
(3) Lot size factors shall be based on conditions in existence at the time of filing an
application unless information is included with the application which will alter a lot size
factor. (Ord. 412 § 3, 2003: Ord. 184 § 2, 1989; Ord. 175 § 2 (part), 1988; Ord. 154 § 2,
1987; Ord. 152 § 2, 1987; Ord. 145 § 3 (part), 1987; Ord. 113 § 2 (part), 1985; Ord. 68 §
9-3.154, 1983)
11-6.26 Flag lots (deep lot subdivisions).
(a) Flag lots may be approved for subdividing deep lots subject to the following findings:
(1) the subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood; (2) the
installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with neighboring properties
is not feasible; and (3) the flag lot is justified by topographical conditions. Such
subdivisions shall conform with the following:
(1) The accessway serving the flag lot(s) shall not be included in the determination of
required lot area for any lot.
(2) The original lot shall have frontage on a dedicated street.
(3) The accessway to the rear shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to City
standards) for residential zones, except where the accessway is more than one hundred
fifty (150) feet long, it shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet wide with twenty (20) feet of
pavement, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. For all other zones,
the accessway shall be at least thirty (30) feet wide with a paved roadway at least twenty-
four (24) feet wide.
(4) Each lot shall have yards as required by the zoning regulations, including a five5 te-a
0 -0) -foot setback along any accessway, whether easement or lot line.
(5) The lot farthest from the street shall own the accessway in fee. Other lots using the
accessway shall have an access and utility easement over it, unless otherwise approved by
the advisory agency.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
(6) Lots utilizing the accessway of a flag lot may be required to enter into a road
maintenance agreement to insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
(7) A reflectorized house number master sign shall be located at the intersection of the
street and accessway and individual reflectorized address signs shall be placed on the
right-hand side of the driveway to each individual lot. (Ord. 370 § 2 (part), 2000)
9-4.107 Side setbacks.
The side setback is measured at right angles to the side property line to form a setback line
parallel to the side property line, which extends between the front and rear setback areas.
The minimum side setback is to be as follows:
(a) A, RS, RSF, LSF and RMF Zones and Residential Uses in Commercial and Industrial
Zones. All residential uses except for second story dwellings over commercial and
industrial uses shall have a minimum side setback of five (5) feet, except as follows:
(1) Corner Lots. The side setback on the street side of a corner lot is to be a minimum of
ten (10) feet.
(2) A Corner Lot Adjacent to a Key Lot. A side setback equal to one-half the depth of the
required front setback of the key lot shall be provided, except that:
(i) Where the corner lot is less than fifty (50) feet in width, the setback is to be a minimum
of ten (10) feet.
(ii) Where an alley is between the corner lot and a key lot, the setback on the street side of
the corner lot is to be five (5) feet.
(3) Accessory Buildings. A side yard may be used for an accessory building no greater
than twelve (12) feet in height, provided that it is not used for human habitation or the
keeping of animals and is either:
(i) Located no closer than three (3) feet to any property line; or
(ii) Located on the rear half of the lot; or
(iii) Established on the property line as a common wall structure pursuant to subdivision
(4) of this subsection, or as a zero lot line structure, provided that all applicable Uniform
Building Code requirements are satisfied for a property line wall.
(4) Common Wall Development. Any two dwelling units, and/or their accessory garages,
may be constructed on adjoining lots without setbacks between them provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated through subdivision map or conditional use permit
approval; and
(ii) A common wall or parry wall agreement, deed restriction or other enforceable
restriction has been recorded; and
(iii) The side setbacks opposite the common wall property line are not less than two times
the minimum width required by this section; and
(iv) Common wall construction is in compliance with the Uniform Building Code.
(5) Zero Lot Line Development. A group of dwelling units on adjoining lots may be
established so that all units abut one side property line, provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated for an entire block through subdivision map or
conditional use permit approval; and
(ii) The modified setback requirements for the block are recorded as part of a land division
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 9-18-07
map, deed restriction, or other enforceable restriction; and
(iii) The side setback shall not be eliminated or reduced on the street side of a corner lot;
and
(iv) Side setbacks opposite the zero setback property line are not less than twice the
minimum required by this section.
(b) CN, CP, CR, CS, CT, CPK, IP, I and P Zones. No side setbacks are required. Ground
floor residential uses are subject to the setback requirements of subsection (a) of this
section.
(c) L and LS Zones. A minimum five (5) foot side setback is required. (Ord. 303 § 2 (Exh.
C), 1996; Ord. 68 § 9-4.107, 1983)
(6) Access easements. All access easements shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet,
measured from the edge of the easement.
\\Cityha11\cdv1pmnt\- 07 PLNs\PLN 2007-1238 Zoning Code Amendments\PLN 2007-1238 SR.PC.ct.doc
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 9-18-07
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
PLN 2007-1200
Road Abandonment / Lot Line Adjustment
6305 Morro Road
(Giessinger)
REPORT -IN -BRIEF:
Consideration of a request to have the City of Atascadero abandon a portion of
Marchant Avenue right-of-way and allow a Lot Line Adjustment between one legal lot of
record (Tesoro Gas Station / Car Wash) located at 6305 Morro Road and adjacent
Marchant Avenue right-of-way. The project is proposed to accommodate an 850 square
foot car wash adjacent to an existing car wash / gas station.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Planning Commission adopt PC Resolution 2007-0079 recommending City
Council summarily vacate an undeveloped portion of Marchant Avenue right-of-
way (Road Abandonment 2007-0018) based on findings and subject to
Conditions of Approval.
2. Planning Commission adopt PC Resolution 2007-0080 recommending City
Council approve Lot Line Adjustment 2007-0082, based on findings and subject
to Conditions of Approval.
2. Planning Commission recommend City Council seek market rate compensation
for the undeveloped portion of Marchant Avenue right-of-way.
DISCUSSION:
Situation and Facts:
1. Owner/ Applicant: Donald A. Giessinger
P.O. Box 791, Atascadero, CA 93423
City of Atascadero, Steve Kahn
6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
2. Project Address: 6305 Morro Road, Atascadero, CA 93423 (APN 030-212-
016) (San Luis Obispo County)
Marchant Avenue right-of-way
3. General Plan Designation: GC (General Commercial) / Marchant right-of-way
4. Zoning District: CT (Commercial Tourist) / Marchant right-of-way
5. Site Area: 25,500 sq. ft. existing / 29,630 sq. ft. after adjustment
6. Existing Use: Gas Station / Car Wash and
Public Roadway / Landscaping
7. Environmental Status: Categorical exemption: CEQA Section 15305; Minor
Alterations in Land Use Limitations: Class 5
Surrounding Land Use and Setting:
North: Highway 101 East: Residential Multi -Family— 10 (RMF -10)
South: Commercial Tourist (CT) West: Commercial Tourist (CT)
The Marchant Avenue right-of-way is adjacent to the Tesoro Gas Station which has a
General Plan Land Use Designation of General Commercial and is zoned Commercial
Tourist (CT). The surrounding neighborhood is developed with Commercial, Residential
Multi -Family and U.S. Highway 101.
Background
The planned U.S. Highway 101 / State Route 41 interchange improvements include the
closure of Marchant Avenue between Morro Road and Tecorida. This is necessary to
remove conflicting vehicle movements in the interchange and will reduce congestion
and the potential for accidents. Both closed roads will be landscaped, and a pedestrian
and bicycle path will be installed. Marchant will be closed from SR 41 to Tecorida
Avenue. A knuckle will be installed at the intersection of Tecorida Avenue and Marchant
Avenue. The improvements are to be constructed by Caltrans; however the ultimate
maintenance will be returned to the City.
I PIN'dRU
19 BAC PILI' ;,I' PLA RACE'
5 CEA COLI
.any n
11 CEA GRI
14 CIS SKA_21 C P14 —9 CIS 5
ROUTE 41 3 PRU 'C R
P
w
4 BAC PIL255 20'C;S SIS/ 256
9 CIS SKA ;4 PRU.CER 1 BAC PI
- 3CEAGR1 -. 12 BAC PIL 3 PRU CE
:„, ••::._ _- ;, .. :...::: :._.: 3S2 MUH
4 CEA CON /
11 PLA ACE�� 2
393 M2 EROSION CONTROL _
16 ARC GLA PLAPLA RAC -
;o.. rr - C ARC GLA
RA
1 PIN BRU 1 PIN SRU
Q
6 CAL DEC --- O 12 DUE AGR
220 M2 EROSION CONTROL
2 OUE AGR, I O OJ2 22CACI
LSI�ECA
14 NET ARB 0; � i � 15 17I0 PUM
24 NET ARB ,�S 2S SQL HET
12 R A ALT
1110 MUH RI
3 CEA CON y1/PIN SRU
21 CIS SKA 37 �� f ARC GLA .
PLA RAC
3 CEA CRI ; = ---o E,
1 I
Cis
rECORfj , i B NET
IOq SKA ARBr
1 3 CAL DEC '
PIN A-` 3 PRU CER
345 MUH RIG
M 1 BRU , �- 4 PRU CER
47 -PLA- 340 MUH RIG
SHF' RAC a
On October 24, 2006, the owner of the adjacent Tesoro Gas Station (Giessinger)
offered to maintain the subject area in return for a portion of the property to enable an
expansion of his car wash facility and parking area. The City Council directed staff to
proceed with a request from the applicant to process a Road Abandonment and Lot
Line Adjustment in return for a binding commitment from the applicant to landscape and
maintain the Marchant Avenue frontage along the north side of the property; which
would reduce the total construction cost of the project for Caltrans and reduce the
landscape maintenance cost for the City.
On February 13, 2007, the City Council approved a Wayfinding Program which
identified a Wayfinding monument sign along Morro Road within the Marchant Avenue
right-of-way. This approval would only affect the above-mentioned landscape
improvements in terms of pedestrian walkway alignment and plant materials to
accommodate the sign placement.
,Y
_- •DOWNTOWN ✓Y TA S CA D E RO 7.00 n PARK•
z' WELCOMES YOU i
Solid masom� oonstratnat ssith pee<ast C=rcw = and east broae behmit.
Gn S ate mdi=V moonad dmxnriorA east btontt 6ea n. Cttr sal to be
east broom set into cast coocmte &ametocck Erma! orotmd-nootmted iUu=nadon.
At present, the owner of the adjacent Tesoro Gas Station (Giessinger) is requesting to
receive only the back -of -sidewalk portion of the Marchant Avenue, without having to
landscape and maintain the Marchant Avenue frontage along the north side of the
property.
Road Abandonment Analysis
The applicant is requesting the City abandon a 4,130 square -foot portion of Marchant
Avenue. The purpose of the requested right-of-way abandonment is to increase the
size of the adjacent Tesoro Gas Station property to accommodate the construction of a
second 850 square -foot car wash, adjacent to the existing car wash. The requested
abandonment is for a portion of the existing right-of-way on Marchant Avenue which is
approximately 28.5 feet by 191 feet, currently serving as back -of -sidewalk landscaping.
x
r� I rr xT
x
s
�1
D.
s Proposed
Abandonment 1 i
Area I
� g
�— — u4ft,chant
andscape Area
` T`
.�•'•= � �_ � _ _ It
In order for the City to abandon the subject right-of-way, a finding of General Plan
consistency and California Streets and Highway Code Requirements compliance would
have to be made by the Planning Commission. In addition, a Resolution would have to
be adopted by the City Council and recorded.
As specified in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and California Streets and
Highway Code Requirements, the following specific findings for the proposed Road
Abandonment shall be made in order to approve the proposed project:
Right-of-way abandonments are governed by the following code sections from the
California Streets and Highways Code and the Atascadero Municipal Code. In order for
the proposed abandonment to be approved, the project must comply with all of the
provisions and requirements set forth in each code section.
California Streets and Highway Code Requirements
Requirements for summarily vacating a road are found in the Streets and Highways
Code, Section 8331, that states:
"The legislative body of a local agency may summarily vacate a street
or highway if both of the following conditions exist:
(a) For a period of five consecutive years, the street or highway
has been impassable for vehicular travel.
(b) No public money was expended for maintenance on the street
or highway during such period."
The portion of Marchant Avenue proposed for abandonment is at the back -of -sidewalk
that has been impassable by vehicular travel for more than five years and no public
money has been expended for maintenance.
Lot Line Adjustment Analysis
There is no minimum lot size for commercial property in the Commercial Tourist Zone.
Only building and zoning standards must be met. The State Subdivision Map Act
(Section 66412(d) of the California Government Code) takes precedence over any local
California jurisdiction's subdivision regulations, and that act states that Lot Line
Adjustments may be reviewed for compliance with building and zoning codes only. If
they meet those codes or can be conditioned to meet them (or come as close as
possible to meeting them), then they must be approved. Therefore, any specific
standards in the City's subdivision regulations that do not relate to building or zoning are
not applicable. As noted below, the Lot Line Adjustment, as conditioned, is consistent
with zoning and building codes.
The Lot Line Adjustment is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and
the Building Code. The site is designated General Commercial (GC) in the General Plan
and is presently zoned Commercial Tourist (CT). The Lot Line Adjustment will not result
in a change to the land use designations of the site.
General Plan Consistency
Pursuant to the CA Government Code1, "If a general plan or part there of has been
adopted... no real property shall be ... vacated or abandoned... until the location, purpose
and extent of such ... street vacation or abandonment... has been submitted to and
reported upon by the planning agency as to the conformity with said general plan or part
thereof."
Staff believes the abandonment itself will not diminish any circulation goal of the City,
particularly since adequate street right-of-way will be reserved. Marchant Avenue is
considered a local street and according to the General Plan, "local streets have the sole
function of providing access to adjoining land uses." Marchant Avenue will maintain its
function as defined by the General Plan.
Property Value
Staff is recommending that the applicant pay the City the fair market value of the
property. Staff has added a condition to the project requiring the applicant to pay the
City the property value as determined by an appraiser.
Zoning Designation
Staff has determined that when a right-of-way or portion thereof is abandoned, the
zoning shall become the same as the adjacent zoning designation. The requested
abandonment will be for the benefit of the adjacent parcel and will become part of the
Commercial Tourist zoned parcel. No new parcels will be created as a result of this
abandonment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As conditioned, the applicant shall pay all fees and expenses to abandon the right-of-
way. No significant fiscal impact is anticipated on the City with this Road Abandonment.
Environmental Review
The Road Abandonment and Lot Line Adjustment qualifies for a Class 5 Categorical
Exemption under CEQA: minor change in land use limitations.
Analysis
City Council direction was to establish an agreement with the applicant to construct and
maintain the subject area in return for a portion of the property to enable an expansion
of a car wash facility and parking area. The applicant is requesting that the City
abandon a portion of Marchant Avenue for the expansion of a car wash facility and
parking area, and eliminate the previous Council direction to construct and maintain
landscaping.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend the City Council summarily
vacate the undeveloped portion of Marchant Avenue right-of-way (Road Abandonment
2007-0018) and approve Lot Line Adjustment 2007-0082, based on findings and subject
to Conditions of Approval; and, seek market rate compensation for the undeveloped
portion of Marchant Avenue right-of-way.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed abandonment meets both criteria of the State requirements, since this
section of the Marchant Avenue right-of-way, has been impassable for vehicular travel
for five consecutive years. In addition, no public money has been expended for
maintenance on the subject right-of-way during the stated time period.
The abandonment is also consistent with the City's Circulation Element of the General
Plan and will not reduce or interfere with necessary improvements to the road at build-
out, future bikeways, or planned trails.
This small section of the Marchant Avenue right-of-way is not necessary for existing or
future road purposes. Marchant Avenue, as constructed, provides sufficient circulation
in the area. Adequate provisions for public utilities and future road purposes will be
retained by the City to serve future commercial development. As development occurs in
this area the burden of improvements will be administered with the building permits.
If approved, the Lot line Adjustment will be consistent with City zoning and General Plan
policies.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may recommend modifications to the project and/or Conditions
of Approval for the project to the City Council.
2. The Commission may determine more information is needed on some aspect of
the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to develop the
additional information. The Commission should clearly state the type of
information required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The Commission may recommend denial of the project. The Commission should
specify the reasons for denial of the project.
PREPARED BY: Scott Kaiser, Planning Intern
Steve McHarris, Deputy Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Location Map, General Plan, and Zoning
Attachment B: Draft Planning Commission Resolution 2007-0079
Attachment C: Draft Planning Commission Resolution 2007-0080
Attachment A: Location Map, General Plan, and Zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Setting:
North: Highway 101 East: Residential Multi -Family — 10 (RMF -10)
South: Commercial Tourist (CT) West. Commercial Tourist (CT)
Attachment B: Draft Planning Commission Resolution 2007-0079
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2007-0079
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
ROAD ABANDONMENT 2007-0018 TO SUMMARILY VACATE A
PORTION OF MARCHANT AVENUE PURSUANT TO SECTION 8331 OF
THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE
(GIESSINGER)
WHEREAS, Donald A. Giessinger, PO Box 791, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Owner /
Applicant) applied to request the City of Atascadero abandon an approximate 4,130 square -foot
portion of Marchant Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the current General Plan Designation and Zoning Designation is right-of-
way; and,
WHEREAS, the abandoned portion of the road will become a part of the adjacent
property currently zoned Commercial Tourist; and,
WHEREAS, the project is in conformance with the Circulation Element of the General
Plan and all other applicable General Plan policies; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed right-of-way abandonment is exempt from CEQA review per
section 15305: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
proposed Road Abandonment on September 18, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. and considered testimony,
reports from staff, the applicants, and the public; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings of Approval for the Road Abandonment. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.
2. The portion of Marchant Avenue right-of-way proposed to be abandoned has been
impassable for vehicular travel for a period of five consecutive years and no public
money has been expended for maintenance on the street during such period.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on September 18, 2007 resolved to recommend that
the City Council approve Road Abandonment 2007-0018 subject to the following:
EXHIBIT 1:
Zoning and Location Map
EXHIBIT 2:
Road Abandonment Diagram
EXHIBIT 3:
Conditions of Approval
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith
by the Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Exhibit 1: Zoning and Location Map
Surroundina Land Use and Settin
North: Highway 101 East: Residential Multi -Family — 10 (RMF -10)
South: Commercial Tourist (CT) West: Commercial Tourist (CT)
Exhibit 2: Road Abandonment Diagram
'411 0
01
Exhibit 3: Conditions of Approval
Conditions of Approval
Timing
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PLN 2007-1200/1-1-A 2007-0082
PS: Planning Services
BL: Business License
BS: Building Services
GP: Grading Permit
FD: Fire Department
Address: 6305 Morro Road
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
FI: Final Inspection
CE: City Engineer
TO: Temporary Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
F0: Final Occupancy
CA: City Attorney
Standard Planning Conditions
1. Prior to City Council approval of the Road
Final Map
CEPS
Abandonment, the applicant shall have the
application reviewed by all applicable public and
private utility companies (cable, telephone, gas,
electric, Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The
applicant shall obtain a letter from each utility
company which indicates their review of the
application. The letter shall identify any new
easements which may be required by the utility
company. A copy of the letter shall be submitted to
the City. New easements shall be recorded prior to
or concurrently with the Road Abandonment.
2. The Applicant shall pay all plan check and right -of-
Final Map
CE/PS
way abandonment costs.
3. The applicant shall submit a Final Parcel Map, per
Final Map
CEPS
the requirements of the subdivision Map Act and
California Streets and Highway Code, merging the
abandoned right-of-way and the existing parcel.
The Final Parcel Map shall be submitted after City
Council approval of the right-of-way abandonment.
The Final Parcel Map shall be in substantial
conformance with the City Council's action and
shall be approved by the City Council prior to
recordation.
Attachment C: Draft Planning Commission Resolution 2007-0080
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 2007-0082, ALLOWING THE ADDITION OF
49130 SQUARE FEET TO A COMMERCIAL LOT
AT 6305 MORRO ROAD APN 030-212-016
(GIESSINGER)
WHEREAS, an application was received from Donald A. Giessinger, PO Box 791
Atascadero, CA 93423 (Owner/Applicant), to consider a Lot Line Adjustment to establish the
addition of 4,130 square feet on an existing commercial lot, APN 030-212-016; and,
WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption (Class 5) Section 15305, Minor Alterations in
Land Use Limitations was prepared for the project in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
and,
WHEREAS, the site's current General Plan Designation is General Commercial (GE);
WHEREAS, the site's current zoning district is Commercial Tourists (CT); and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Lot Line
Adjustment 2007-0082 application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero on June 19, 2007, at which both oral and documentary evidence was admitted on
behalf of said project; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for approval of Tentative Lot Line Adjustment Map. The
Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed map, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan and
applicable zoning requirements; and,
2. The design and improvement of the proposed map, as conditioned, is consistent
with the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements; and,
3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed; and,
4. The design and improvement of the proposed map will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or
their habitat; and,
5. The map is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood; and,
6. The design of the Lot Line Adjustment will not conflict with easements acquired
by the public at large for access through, or the use of property within, the
proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternative easements are
provided; and,
7. The proposed Lot Line Adjustment design and type of improvements proposed
will not cause serious public health problems.
SECTION 2. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a
regular session assembled on September 18, 2007 resolved to approve Tentative Lot Line
Adjustment 2007-0082 (AT 07-0080) subject to the following:
EXHIBIT 1: CEQA Exemption
EXHIBIT 2: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT 3: Tentative Lot Line Adjustment Map 2007-0082 (AT -AL- 07-0080)
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Joan O'Keefe
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Exhibit 1:
Categorical Exemption
Lot Line Adjustment 2007-0082 (ATAL 07-0080)
6305 Morro Road
r� z
CITY OF ATASCADERO
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 805.461.5000
TO: File Date Received for Filing
FROM: City of Atascadero
Community Development Department
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
SUBJECT: F71ing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code
Protect Title
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND ROAD ABANDONMENT, 6305 MORRO ROAD
Project Location (Include Countyl
6305 Morro Road
Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project Description
Adjustment of boundary lines between two existing lots of record and road abandonment of 4,130 square feet of
Marchant Avenue.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project
City ofAtascadero
Name of Person or_Aitencv Carrvin¢ Out Proiect
Donald A. Giessinger, and the City of Atascadero
Exempt Status:
❑ Ministerial (Sec. 21080 (bxl); 15268)
❑ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a))
❑ Emergency Project (Sec.21080 ftil); 15269(b)(c))
® Categorical Exerrption (Sec. 15305, Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitations)
Reasons why project is exempt:
Class 5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15305, Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations) exempts lot line adjustments on slopes of less than 20% when the parcels have previously been
improvcd.
Date: June 12, 2007
Steve McHarris
Deputy Director
Exhibit 2:
Conditions of Approval
Lot Line Adjustment 2007-0082 (ATAL 07-0080)
6305 Morro Road
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed Lot Line Adjustment is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guideline 15305, Class 5.
MAP FINDING:
The application as submitted conforms to all applicable building and zoning regulations of the
City of Atascadero and is consistent with the City's General Plan.
CONDITIONS:
The Lot Line Adjustment as generally shown on Attachment A, provided herein shall be
submitted as a final parcel map or in a record of survey with Certificates of Compliance,
or deeds to be approved by the Community Development Department and City Engineer
prior to recordation. If the Lot Line Adjustment is to be recorded through the use of
deeds, the deeds shall be submitted in the City's Certificate of Compliance standard
format for review and approval prior to recordation.
2. Approval of this Lot Line Adjustment shall expire two years from the date of approval
(date of this correspondence) unless a time extension has been granted in response to a
written request received prior to the expiration date.
3. The applicant shall show the ATAL number issued by the County of San Luis Obispo (on
the record of survey map or included in "Exhibit B" of the Certificates of Compliance);
plat all plottable easements with recording information, list all unplottable easements, and
show the legal description for the properties being adjusted.
4. If a record of survey is submitted, a mylar copy of the survey shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for approval prior to recordation.
Exhibit 3:
Tentative Lot Line Adjustment
Lot Line Adjustment 2007-0082 (ATAL 07-0080)
6305 Morro Road
9
i
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
PLANNING COMMISSION NORMS
PLN 2007-1188
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission Norms are intended to provide rules of decorum and conduct
for the Commission. The Commission reviewed draft norms earlier this year and
forwarded comments to the City Council. The Council then determined the previous
version of the norms were inadequate and created an entirely new set of norms. These
new norms are now being forwarded to the Commission for review and comment. The
Commission's comments will be forwarded to the Council for consideration and final
action.
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMISSION NORMS AND PROCEDURES (2007)
GENERAL
• All Commission Members get the same information concerning upcoming issues,
training opportunities, etc.
• Return unwanted reports and documents to staff for distributing to the public or
for recycling.
• Commission chairs meet quarterly with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem to provide
feedback and be kept informed.
• Commission needs:
- To know Council vision, community vision, and General Plan 2025
- Understanding of their roles and authority
- To know annual prioritized goals of the City Council
- All commissioners should receive annual training
• Criteria for commissioner re -appointment (and in extreme cases, removal) shall
include:
- Issues of conflicts of interest
- Attendance (Absence from 3 consecutive meetings, or from 4 meetings
during a calendar year without formal consent of the Commission)
- Support of General Plan
- Respect for staff/public
- Working for community versus personal purposes
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
COMMISSION VALUES
• The Commission values active participation and open mindedness.
• Commission Members will have respect for each other as individuals.
• Commission Members will be apolitical, and straightforward; with no hidden
agendas.
• The Commission Members value humor.
• Traditions are respected, but not binding.
COMMISSION INTERACTION AND COMMUNICATION
• Individuals are responsible to initiate resolution of problems A.S.A.P. and not let
them build up.
• Commission Members will not direct personal attacks at each other during public
meetings, in the press, or any other place/time.
• Relationships should be professional and courteous [beware of impact on, and
perception of public].
• Substantive Commission / Department Director items are to receive advance
notice and public notification.
COMMISSION INTERACTION AND COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF
Department Director
• Staff will provide essential information to all Commission Members. Staff will
support the Commission to make the best decision or recommendation possible.
Staff in General
The Commission and staff will not blind side each other in public; if there is an
issue or a question a Commission Member has on an agenda item, that member
will contact staff prior to the meeting.
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
COMMISSION OPTIONS FOR KEEPING INFORMED
• Read Council Minutes in order to keep up to date on current issues facing the
City. (Available on City website)
• Read documents pertaining to agenda items.
• Commission Members will do their homework (Read agenda packets prior to
meetings, make site visits, etc.)
CHAIR AND VICE -CHAIR SELECTION
Each Commission shall elect a Chair and Vice -Chair to serve a one-year term at
its first meeting in February.
CHAIRPERSON'S ROLE
• Each Chairperson is unique; the role is defined by the person, based on that
person's style.
• The Chairperson is the spokesperson for the Commission on actions approved
by the Commission as a whole. The Chairperson shall not share his or her
personal views while representing the Commission.
• The Chairperson shall ensure fairness, and strive to expedite the meetings in an
efficient and professional manner.
• The Commission Chairs communicate with the Mayor at quarterly meetings and
at other times as necessary.
PUBLIC MEETINGS
• Department Director sets the Agenda for regular Commission meetings, with
direction from the City Manager.
• Public comment shall be received on all action items.
• Any Commission Member can place an item on the agenda under Commission
Announcements and Reports. No action will be taken on the item unless it is
placed on a future agenda by a majority of the Commission.
• Commission Members will treat everyone equally and with courtesy.
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
• Corrections to minutes are passed to the Commission Secretary before the
meeting.
• Each Commission Member may share his/her views about the issue and the
reasons for his/her vote.
• Consent Calendar
- The Consent Calendar should be used for minutes, routine Commission
business, and items already approved in the budget.
- If a Commission Member has a personal question on a Consent Calendar,
they are to ask staff ahead of time, rather than having it pulled off for
discussion during the meeting.
- Staff is prepared to report on every agenda item.
• Public Comment
- Hearing items will be organized as follows:
1. Staff Report
2. Questions from Commission
3. Open public comment
4. Applicant's report (may exceed 5 minutes)
5. Public comment (limited to 5 minutes)
6. Close public comment
7. Staff response
8. Commission deliberations
9. Motion and vote
- Once public comment is closed, further public input will not be allowed unless
re -opened by Chair.
- Applicant's comments shall be limited to a reasonable time.
- Public comments shall be limited to 5 minutes per speaker; per Municipal
Code.
- It is acceptable to ask questions of a speaker for clarification.
- Each speaker will be thanked.
- Commission will not respond until all public comment has been received.
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 9-18-07
- Chair allows other members to speak first and then gives his/her views and
summarizes.
• Voting
- Each Commissioner has an opportunity to speak before a motion.
- Attempts will be made to get consensus on significant issues.
- Commission Member discussions will not be redundant.
\\Cityhall\cdvlpmnt\- 07 PLNs\PLN 2007-1188 PC Norms\PC Norms Staff Report 9-18-07 wmf.doc