The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC_2006-02-07_AgendaPacketCITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 7, 2006 — 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, California CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairperson Porter Vice Chairperson Beraud Commissioner Fonzi Commissioner Jones Commissioner Kelley Commissioner O'Keefe Commissioner Slane PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS A. ELECTION OF NEW CHAIR AND VICE -CHAIR B. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson will administer the Oath of Office to Planning Commissioner, Roberta Fonzi. APPROVAL OF AGENDA DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS: Planning Commission Members must disclose prior to a project hearing, 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. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda PUBLIC COMMENT Regular Meeting February 7, 2006 Page 2 of 5 (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.) CONSENT CALENDAR (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 JANUARY 17, 2006. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS 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).) 2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2005-0080, NAVAJOA / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0151 AMENDMENT Owner/ Applicant: Terry Otis, 6480 Alta Pradera, Atascadero, CA 93422 Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 2005-0080, Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2005-0151 Project 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa, Atascadero, CA 93422 APN 031-153-014 Location: Project The proposed project consists of an application to create 4 airspace condominiums on one common lot. Description: The units are currently under construction. The Conditional Use Permit amendment changes the condition requiring one unit at the low-income rate to requiring one unit at the moderate income rate, consistent with State Density Bonus Law. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family — 10 (RMF -10) Proposed Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15301) exempts alterations or Environmental conversions of existing facilities which create no or negligible expansions of use. Determination: City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-0071 AMENDMENT Regular Meeting February 7, 2006 Page 3 of 5 Applicant: Atascadero Calvary Chapel, 6955 Portola, Atascadero, CA 93422 Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 2002-0071 Amendment Project 6955 Portola Road, Atascadero, CA Location: APN 054-071-001 and 054-083-004 Project An Amendment to Conditional Use Permit # 82-0331 to modify the Master Plan of Development to include Description: overflow parking area adjacent to the church site. Description: General Plan Designation: Single -Family Residential (SFR) Zoning District: Residential Single Family -Z (RSF-Z) Proposed CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The project qualifies for a Class 3 Categorically Exemption under the Environmental provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA section 15303. Class 3.c. New construction Determination or conversion of small structures. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0158 Applicant: Cingular Wireless, 12900 Park Plaza Drive, Cerritos, CA 90703 Owner: Atascadero Mutual Water Company, 5005 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158, Telecommunications Facility Project Location: Serena Court (Pine Mountain Reservoir), Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County) APN 028-221-007 and 029-105-041 Project The proposed project is a shared wireless communication facility site consisting of the installation of Description: twelve (12) panel antennas mounted in three (3) separate sections. Four (4) antennas will be mounted to four (4) proposed steel poles measuring fifteen (15) feet in height located on the southwest portion of the hillside. Eight (8) antennas will be mounted to four (4) new steel poles measuring fifteen (15) feet in height located on the northwest section of the hillside. A four (4') foot in diameter microwave dish will be mounted to a fifteen (15) foot pole. An eleven and a half (11.5') foot by twenty eight (28) foot equipment shelter will be located north of the existing equipment shelter. The site currently contains a nine (9) foot by twelve (12') foot utility structure and four (4) pole mounted antennas. The site is surrounded by existing low lying chaparral. Additional drought tolerant landscaping is proposed. General Plan Designation: Rural Residential Zoning District: Rural Residential Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. The Environmental proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review from 1/19/06 through 2/07/06 at Determination 6907 El Camino Real, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda 5. VARIANCE 2005-0009 Regular Meeting February 7, 2006 Page 4 of 5 Applicant: Eric Roy, 9186 Palomar Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 Project Title: Variance 2005-0009 Project Location: 9186 Palomar Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 Project A variance request to allow a front yard fence to be five (5') to six (6') feet in height. Fencing within the Description: front setback is currently limited to three (3) feet in height. General Plan Designation: SFR -Y Zoning District: RSF-Y Proposed CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The project qualifies for a Class 5 Categorically Exemption under the Environmental provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA section 15305. Minor Alterations in Land Determination Use Limitations. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be on February 21, 2006 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 February 7, 2006 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: 2-7-06 CITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES Regular Meeting Tuesday, January 17, 2006 — 7:00 P.M. Chairperson Porter called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and Commissioner Jones led the Pledge of Allegiance Rr)l I rAl I Present: Commissioners Fonzi, Jones, Kelley, O'Keefe and Chairperson Porter Absent: Vice Chairperson Beraud Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace, City Engineer/Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris, Associate Planner Kelly Gleason and Recording Secretary Grace Pucci. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Administration of Oath of Office The City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson administered the Oath of Office to new Planning Commissioner Greg Slane. Chairperson Porter welcomed Commissioner Slane. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Commissioner O'Keefe and seconded by Commissioner Fonzi to approve the agenda. Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote. PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 1 of 8 DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS: None PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON JANUARY 3, 2006. Commissioner Fonzi referred to her remarks at the bottom of page 6 of the Minutes of January 3rd and asked that the first paragraph under Commissioner Comments and Reports be revised to read: "Commissioner Fonzi asked for Commission discussion regarding conversion of multi family zoned lots to PD's and the impact of this conversion on affordable housing." Commissioner Fonzi also requested that the second paragraph under Commissioner Comments and Reports be amended to read: "There was lengthy Commission discussion and it was suggested that the issue be discussed at a future joint session of the Planning Commission and City Council." MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Fonzi to approve Item #1 as amended. Motion passed 3:0 by a roll -call vote. (Slane, Kelley and Porter abstained) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS Community Development Director Warren Frace announced that Item #3 will be continued to a date certain of February 7, 2006. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0148,4180 EL CAMINO REAL Applicant: CKE Restaurants, Inc., 401 W. Carl Karcher Way, Anaheim, CA 92801 Owner• K -Mart Corporation, 3100 W. Big Beaver Rd., Troy, MI 48084 Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 2005-0148 Project 4180 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 2 of 8 Location: APN 049-221-063 Project The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a drive - Description: through restaurant located on 0.83 acres within the Commercial Retail Zone. The proposal includes a main dining building with outdoor patio areas for restaurant patrons and a drive- through facility along the El Camino Real and San Anselmo frontages. The site is currently vacant and located within the existing K -Mart Shopping Center. General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) Zoning District: Commercial Retail (CR) 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 El Camino Real, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Associate Planner Kelly Gleason and City Engineer Steve Kahn gave the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Lorenzo Reyes, applicant's representative, stated the applicant is in favor of alternative C and explained why he thinks the improvements recommended by the City are not necessary. Mr. Reyes answered questions of the Commission. Debra Gerand, Project Architect, spoke about the wall proposed for the project. Lorenzo Reyes spoke about the circulation on the site and their preference of moving rather than eliminating the driveway at the intersection with EI Camino Real. Richard Mullen spoke about traffic mitigation at this site and in favor of requiring the full widening of San Anselmo Road. Joann Main, Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, stated she was conflicted about this situation as development is necessary to grow the city, but thinks it is unfair to ask this applicant to assume the entire cost. Jim Merzon stated that some sort of traffic control is needed at the north bound off ramp when making a left turn onto San Anselmo. Lorenzo Reyes reiterated his view that the traffic impacts from this project would be minimal and requested a decision be made tonight. Chairperson Porter closed the Public Comment period. There was extensive Commission discussion regarding possible options for the improvement of San Anselmo Road. PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 3 of 8 Commissioner Jones urged the Commission think more about the concept of funding for this corridor, and thinks the city has an obligation for this project in this area to bring something to the table for its failure to execute on the original developer. MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Chairperson Porter to adopt Resolution PC 2005-0075 certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0047 and approving the Master Plan of Development (CUP 2005-0148) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring, and using Improvement Plan B with the bulb, and the applicant will work with staff to move the driveway further away from the intersection of EI Camino Real. Motion passed 5:1 by a roll -call vote. (O'Keefe opposed) Commissioner O'Keefe stated for the record that she voted no because she thinks option A would benefit the City and that the applicant has already budgeted $110,000 for the traffic impact costs and for an additional $20,000 option A could be built. Chairperson Porter recessed the hearing at 8:35 p.m. Chairperson Porter called the meeting back to order at 8:48 p.m. Commissioner Jones left the meeting at 8:40 p.m. 3. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2005-0080, NAVAJOA Owner/ Terry Otis, 6480 Alta Pradera, Atascadero, CA 93422 Applicant: Project Tentative Tract Map 2005-0080 Title: Project 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: APN 031-153-014 Project The proposed project consists of an application to create 4 airspace condominiums on one Description: common lot. The units are currently under construction. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family — 10 (RMF -10) Proposed Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 1530 1) exempts Environmental alterations or conversions of existing facilities which create no or negligible expansions of Determination: use. This Item is continued to February 7, 2006. PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 4 of 8 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2005-0015, ZONE CHANGE 2005-0104, 0105, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0170, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2005-0076 Applicant: JRW Group, Inc., 1900 Spring Street, Paso Robles, CA 93446, Phone: 226-9306 Owner: Arthur & Mary Jazwiecici, P. O. Box 547, Atascadero, CA 93423 Project El Camino Court - General Plan Amendment 2005-0015 / Zone Change 2005-0104 / Zone Title: Change 2005-0105/ Conditional Use Permit 2005-0170/ TTM 2005-0076 Project 4705, 4711, 4713 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: APN: 029-271-001 Project The proposed project consists of an application for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Description: Change, and Conditional Use Permit for a commercial/residential mixed-use development located on a 1.71 -acre parcel within the Commercial Retail (CR) zoning district. A 0.62 - acre portion of the site along El Camino Real will retain the CR zoning. The remaining 1.08 acres will require a General Plan Amendment to High Density Residential (HDR), a zone change to Residential Multi -Family (16 units/acre) (RMF -16) with a Planned Development Overlay Zone, and a vesting tentative condominium subdivision map. The site is accessed along El Camino Real. Proposed buildings consist of two multi -family residential buildings and two mixed-use buildings designed for commercial use on the lower floor and residential use on the upper floor. A maximum of 40 dwelling units and 8,000 square feet of commercial space are proposed. Three native trees are proposed for removal. General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) Zoning District: Commercial Retail (CR) 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 El Camino Real, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris and City Engineer Steve Kahn gave the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. Staff added an additional finding not in the staff report to read: "The characteristics of a use, this use, or its immediate vicinity do not necessitate the number of parking spaces type of design improvements required by the parking code, that reduced parking will be adequate to accommodate on the site all parking needs generated by the use." PUBLIC COMMENT Chuck Treach, applicant's representative, spoke about the project and stated the applicant is in agreement with all conditions of approval. Mr. Treach answered questions of the Commission. Scott Vincent, project architect, addressed several issues raised by the Commission including grading, tree protection and placing a recreation use at the front of the project rather than utilizing that space for commercial/retail. Mr. Vincent answered questions of the Commission. PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 5 of 8 Jim Merzon stated he owns property just north of this site and that this is a great project which he hopes will move forward. Mr. Merzon asked several questions about the project. Julie Motts stated she owns property near this site and asked if the power lines for this project would be underground. Jim Merzon asked if the project buildings along EI Camino Real could be made commercial retail. Chairperson Porter closed the Public Comment period. Commissioner Fonzi indicated that she likes the project very much but feels it must comply with the City Council's recommendation for commercial space. She stated she would feel more comfortable if this was all some other kind of commercial use and the recreation use was moved further back in the project. Commissioner O'Keefe stated that this is attractive project providing affordable units and a good transition from residential to commercial. She likes the recreation room at the front on the main floor, and though a strong supporter of commercial, she does not think this project will draw the walking public. Commissioner Kelley agreed with Commissioner O'Keefe stating there is a tradeoff with affordable workforce housing which is much needed, and as this is going to the City Council they can pursue the commercial retail use if they so choose. Chairperson Porter agreed that there is a tradeoff for the loss of commercial retail and the affordable units at the back are important, and indicated this was a high quality project and good for the community and the neighborhood. MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to adopt Resolution PC 2006-0001 recommending that the City Council certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0063; and, adopt Resolution PC 2006-0002 recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2005-0015 based on findings; and, adopt Resolution PC 2006-0003 recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for first reading by title only, to approve Zone Text Change 2005-0104 establishing a PD -26 overlay district based on findings; and, adopt Resolution PC 2006-0004 recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for first reading by title only, to approve Zone Change 2005-0105 based on findings; and, adopt Resolution PC 2006-0005 recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 2005-0170 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 6 of 8 Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Resolution PC 2006-0006 recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2005-0076 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring, and with the staff finding added. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. Commissioner Fonzi asked for the record that the City Council look at this carefully in terms of commercial retail and consider whether this is the best way to go. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS Commissioner O'Keefe asked about the vote on the Navajoa project at the last Planning Commission meeting which indicated the 3:2 vote as a negative recommendation to the City Council. Community Development Director Warren Frace stated that the City Attorney researched this and in this case, a zone change, a 3:2 vote would be an affirmative recommendation, and it will go forward to the Council as such. He further explained that General Plan Amendments would require 4 votes to go forward as a positive recommendation. Commissioner Kelley asked about a potential project for Del Rio Road and EI Camino Real. Director Frace stated that no application has yet been received for any project at that location. Commissioner Fonzi asked when the City Council would be meeting to set their priorities. Director Frace reported that the Strategic Planning Session is scheduled for January 27t" and 28t". In addition, staff is looking at February 28t" for a joint session with the City Council to discuss condominium conversions, rental housing stock, affordable housing stock, etc. Director Frace gave an update on the inclusionary housing program. Commissioner Kelly asked if there is a moratorium on existing apartments being converted to Condos. Director Frace stated there is no legal moratorium but rather a general plan inconsistency issue that prevents this from happening at this time. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Community Development Director Warren Frace spoke about the issue of Linda Vista, which came up at previous meeting, stating that he went with the Fire Chief and Public Works Director to look at the street and staff will be reporting back to the Commission on their findings in February. PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 7 of 8 ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Porter adjourned the meeting at 9: 57 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on February 7, 2006. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary PC Draft Minutes 01/17/06 Page 8 of 8 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 Planning Commission Staff Report Public Hearing Tentative Tract Map 2005-0080 (TR 2793) Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2005-0151 Navajoa Avenue (Otis) SUBJECT: The project consists of a proposed condominium map to create four (4) airspace units on one common lot with an amendment to the previously established Conditional Use Permit consistent with State Density Bonus requirements. The lot is currently under construction. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Resolution PC 2006-0014 approving Tentative Tract Map 2005-0080, to establish four airspace condominium units on one common lot, based on findings and subject to conditions; and, 2. Adopt Resolution PC 2006-0016 approving Conditional Use Permit 2005-0151 Amendment consistent with State Density Bonus Law. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant/Owners: Terry Otis, 6480 Alta Pradera Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422 2. Project Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422, APN: 031-153-014 3. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential 4. Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family -10 (Maximum 10 du/ac) 5. Site Area: 0.31 acre 6. Existing Use: Under construction 7. Environmental Status: Class 1 Categorical Exemption ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 DISCUSSION: Background: The property is located on Navajoa Avenue within the RMF -10 Zoning District. The parcel is currently under construction with four detached units taking access off of Navajoa Avenue. City sewer serves the property, and water is available from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. On June 21, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to grant the applicant a Density Bonus for the proposed project allowing the construction of the fourth unit. The unit was deed restricted at the Low -Income Rate at that time per a specific condition. Staff is recommending that the condition be modified to allow the unit to be deed restricted in accordance with State Density Bonus Law. Under this scenario, a condominium project allows deed restriction of the unit at the Moderate -Income rate. Analysis: The proposed map will create four (4) airspace units on one legal lot of record. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation and Residential Multi -Family Zoning regulations. The site was reviewed during the building permit process and meets all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. State Density Bonus Law provides incentives to applicants who choose to integrate deed restricted units into their development. The applicant applied for the State Density Bonus to allow the construction of a deed restricted unit at the project site raising the density from 3 -units to 4 -units. The applicant did not receive additional market rate units based on the size of the project and the site design constraints. The applicant intended to file a condominium map with the City prior to final of the project however, a CUP amendment was also triggered as the condition for the deed restricted unit was written to be specific in terms of the income level rather than open ended to allow for the variations allowed under State Law for the provisions of deed restricted units based on product type. Because this project is becoming a condominium project, State Law requires that the unit be deed restricted at the Moderate Income rate. Environmental Review: As proposed, the project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption (Section 15301) which exempts alterations or conversions of existing facilities which create no or negligible expansions of use. CONCLUSION: ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 The proposed condominium map, as conditioned, is consistent with the 2002 General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, State Density Bonus Law, and the airspace configurations are consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Tentative Tract Map and Conditional Use Permit Amendment as conditioned. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Commission may continue the hearing and refer the item back to staff for additional information or analysis. Direction should be given to staff and the applicant on required information. 2. The Commission may deny the map if it is found to be inconsistent with the General Plan or any of the other required findings. The Commission may deny the Conditional Use Permit amendment if it is found to be inconsistent with State Density Bonus Law. The Commission's motion to deny must include a finding basis for denial. PREPARED BY: Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 -- Location Map (General Plan & Zoning) Attachment 2 -- Draft Resolution PC 2006-0014 Attachment 3 — Draft Resolution PC 2006-0016 ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 ATTACHMENT 1: Location Map (General Plan / Zoning) TTM 2005-0080 Navajoa Avenue Zone: Residential Multi -Family - 10 du/ac (RMF - 10) Land Use Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR) ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution PC 2006-0014 TTM 2005-0080 Navajoa Avenue DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2006-0014 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2005-0080, ESTABLISHING FOUR AIRSPACE UNITS ON ONE COMMON LOT AT 76659 76759 76859 7695 NAVAJOA AVENUE APN 031-153-014 (OTIS) WHEREAS, an application was received from Terry Otis, 6480 Alta Pradera Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 (Owner/Applicant), to consider a Tentative Tract Map to establish four (4) airspace units on one common lot on APN 031-153-014; and, WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption (Class 1) was prepared for the project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and, WHEREAS, the site's current General Plan Designation is Medium Density Residential (HDR); and, WHEREAS, the site's current zoning district is RMF -10 (Residential Multi -Family -10); 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 on February 7, 2006, 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 Tract (Condominium) 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, ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 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 condominium map 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 condominium map 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 February 7, 2006 resolved to approve Tentative Tract Map 2005- 0080 (TR 2793) subject to the following: EXHIBIT A: CEQA Exemption EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT C: Tentative Tract Map 2005-0080 (TR 2793) 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: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ABSTAINED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Greg Porter Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 EXHIBIT A: Proposed Categorical Exemption TTM 2005-0080 r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CEQA REVIEW Finding of Exemption TO: ® File Date Received for Filing ❑ Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 FROM: City of Atascadero 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 SUBJECT: Piling of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resomces Code Proiect Title TTM 2005-0080 Proiect Location (Include County) 7665 NavajoaAve Atascadero, CA 93422 (Sat lads Obispo Cow*) Project Description Creation of 4 airspace units on one common lot. Mudti family project currently under construction. Name of Public Agency Avvroving Project City ofAlascadero Name of Person or Agency Can dM Out Project Terry Otis Exempt Status: ❑ Ministerial (Sec. 21080 (bxl);15268) ❑ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3k 15269(a)) ❑ Emergency Project (Sec.21080 (bx4); 15269(b)(c)) ® Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301, Existing Facilities) Reasons why project is exempt: Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15301) which exempts alterations or conversions of existing facilities which create no or negligible expansions of use. Date: January 9, 2006 Kelly Gleason Associate Planner CmtactPerstar Warren Frace, Community Development Director, Cityof Atascadero SM461.5035 ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring TTM 2005-0080 Conditions of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TTM 2005-0080 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave. BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department FI: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer TO: Temporary WW: Wastewater Occupancy CA: City Attorney F0: Final Occupancy Standard Planning Conditions 1. The approval of this application shall become final, subject to FM PS the completion of the conditions of approval, fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission approval 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. Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall be valid for two FM PS years after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall expire and become null and void unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to the expiration date. 3. The Community Development Department shall have the FM PS authority to approve minor changes to the project that (1) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or (2) address a construction design issue that is not substantive to the Tentative Tract Map. 4. A tract map drawn in substantial conformance with the FM PS approved tentative map, and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 5. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Ongoing CA City of Atascadero 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. 6. The tract map shall be subject to additional fees for park or FM PS recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) as required by City Ordinance. 7. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit CC&Rs for review FM PS/PW and approval by the Community Development Department. The CC&R's shall record with the Final Map and shall include the following: a. Exclusive use easements for private yard areas. b. Provisions for maintenance of all common areas including access, parking, street trees, fencing and ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 Conditions Of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TTM 2005-0080 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave. BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department Fl: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer TO: Temporary WW: Wastewater Occupancy CA: City Attorney F0: Final Occupancy landscaping. C. Provisions for financing maintenance and upkeep of all common areas. d. A detailed list of each individual homeowner's responsibilities for maintenance of the individual units. e. Individual unit's responsibility for keeping all trash receptacles within the unit's garage. f. A provision requiring that individual garages be maintained for vehicle parking. g. 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. 8. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit FM PS/PW a condominium plan for recording concurrently with the final map. A qualified licensed professional shall prepare the final map and the condominium plan. City Engineer Standard Conditions 9. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance FM PW with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings and/or as directed by the City Engineer. 10. In the event that the applicant is allowed to bond for the public FM PW improvements required as a condition of this map, the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City Council. 11. An engineer's estimate of probable cost shall be submitted for FM PW review and approval by the City Engineer to determine the amount of the bond. 12. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall record FM PW concurrently with the Final Map. 13. An encroachment permit shall be obtained prior to the BP PW issuance of building permit. 14. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/inspection BP PW ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 Conditions Of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TTM 2005-0080 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave. BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department Fl: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer TO: Temporary WW: Wastewater Occupancy CA: City Attorney F0: Final Occupancy agreement with the City. 15. A six (6) foot Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be provided FM PW contiguous to the Santa Ysabel Avenue property frontage. 16. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or BP PW alteration of existing utilities. 17. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas, electric, BP PW cable TV and telephone) underground. Utilities shall be extended to the property line frontage of each lot or its public utility easement. 18. The applicant shall monument all property corners for FM PW construction control and shall promptly replace them if disturbed. 19. The applicant shall acquire title interest in any off-site land that FM PW may be required 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. 20. Slope easements shall be provided as needed to FM PW accommodate cut of fill slopes. 21. Drainage easements shall be provided as needed to FM PW accommodate both public and private drainage facilities. 22. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for FM PW review in conjunction with the processing of the parcel map. 23. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other FM PW easements are to be shown on the parcel map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the parcel map. The applicant shall show all access restrictions on the parcel map. 24. The final map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to the FM PW map being placed on the agenda for City Council acceptance. 25. Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall submit a FM PW map drawn in 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. 26. Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall set FM PW monuments at all new property corners. A registered civil ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 Conditions Of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TTM 2005-0080 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave. BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department Fl: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer TO: Temporary WW: Wastewater Occupancy CA: City Attorney F0: Final Occupancy 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. 27. Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall pay all FM PW outstanding plan check/inspection fees. 28. Prior to recording the map, the applicant shall complete all FM PW improvements required by these conditions of approval. 29. Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall have the FM PW map 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 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. 30. Upon recording the final map, the applicant shall provide the FM PW City with a black line clear Mylar (0.4 mil) copy and a blue line print of the recorded map. 31. Prior to the final inspection of any public improvements, the BP PW applicant shall submit a written statement from a registered civil engineer that all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans. 32. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit a written BP PW certification from a registered civil engineer or land surveyor that all survey monuments have been set as shown on the final map. Atascadero Mutual Water Company Project Conditions 33. Before recordation of the final map, the applicant shall FM AMWC submit plans to AMWC for the water distribution facilities needed to serve the project. AMWC shall review and approve the plans before construction begins on the water system improvements. All new water distribution facilities shall be constructed in conformance with AMWC Standards and Details and the California Waterworks Standards (Code of Regulations Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 16). All cross -connection devices shall conform to AWWA and California Department of Health Services standards. ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 Conditions Of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TTM 2005-0080 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Address: 7665, 7675, 7685, 7695 Navajoa Ave. BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department Fl: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer TO: Temporary WW: Wastewater Occupancy CA: City Attorney F0: Final Occupancy 34. Before the start of construction on the water system improvements, the applicant shall pay all installation and connection fees required by AMWC. Subject to the approval of AMWC, the applicant may enter in to a "deferred connection" agreement. 35. Before issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain a "Will Serve" letter from AMWC for the newly created lots within the subdivision. 36. The applicant is responsible for designing and constructing water system improvements that will provide water at pressures and flows adequate for the domestic and fire protection needs of the project. 37. Separate water meters for domestic water service are required for each individual lot within the subdivision. ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 EXHIBIT C: Tentative Tract Map TR 2793 TTM 2005-0080 ATTACHMENT 3: Draft Resolution PC 2006-0016 a �: aaaa bil'-! 0 . 1 s A6 E5z b r M IL z Z ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 CUP 2005-0151 Amendment Navajoa Avenue RESOLUTION PC 2006-0016 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0151 ON APN 031-153-014 (7685 Navajoa Ave. / Terry Otis) WHEREAS, an application has been received from Terry Otis (6480 Alta Pradera Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422) Applicant and Property Owner to consider a project consisting of a Density Bonus Request to exceed the base site density by one unit consistent with the State density bonus program (CUP 2005-0151); and, WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is MDR (Medium Density Residential); and, WHEREAS, the site's current zoning district is RMF -10 (Residential Multi -Family -10); and, WHEREAS, a Conditional Use Permit is required for density bonus requests under the provisions of the State density bonus program; and, WHEREAS, the State Density Bonus program allows for deed restricted moderate income units for condominium projects; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project qualifies for an Categorical exemption consistent with CEQA section 15332 for infill development; 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 entitlements; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed Public Hearing held on June 21, 2005, studied and considered Conditional Use Permit 2005- 0151; 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 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 2-7-06 Appearance Review Manual; and, 2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning Ordinance); 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. That the proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and, 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. 6. The density bonus provides for affordable housing costs for moderate -income persons that cannot be otherwise obtained SECTION 2. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on February 7, 2006, resolved to approve an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit 2005-0151 to, subject to the following: EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: (0 ) NOES: (0 ) ABSTAIN: (0 ) ABSENT: (0 ) ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Greg Porter Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary the ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2-7-06 EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program Master Plan of Development (CUP 2005-0151) Conditions of Approval / Timing Responsibility Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Navajoa Ave Multi -Family BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department Density Bonus Request BP: Building Permit FI: Final Inspection PD: Police Department CE: City Engineer CUP 2005-0151 TO: Temporary Occupancy WW: Wastewater CA: City Attorney FO: Final Occupancy Planning Services 1. This conditional use permit shall be for a density bonus to allow one FM PS density bonus unit for a maximum of four units on a multi -family site located on parcel 031-153-014 regardless of owner. 2. The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective for the FM PS purposes of issuing building permits fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to BP/FM PS, CE approve 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. The Planning Commission shall have the final authority to approve any other changes to the Master Plan of Development and any associated Tentative Maps unless appealed to the City Council. 4. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for twelve (12) BP/FM PS months 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. 5. The applicant and/or subsequent owners shall defend, indemnify, and On going PS hold harmless the City of Atascadero 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 proposed development. 6. All subsequent Tentative Map and construction permits shall be BP/FM PS, CE consistent with the exhibits and requirements contained herein. 7. The applicant/owner shall deed restrict one unit consistent with State BP PS Density Bonus requirements. ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 2-7-06 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Community Development Department 6955 Portola Road Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2002-0071 (Calvary Chapel) SUBJECT: The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to establish an overflow parking area adjacent to an existing church on a single-family residential parcel. zMK*11WV41:40 157011119 10101 Staff Recommends: Adopt Resolution PC 2006-0017 approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2002- 0071 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Owners/Applicants: Calvary Chapel, 6955 Portola Rd., Atascadero, CA 93422 Steven Shively, 5260 Cabrillo Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 2. Project Address: 6855 Portola Rd, Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County) APN 054-071-001 3. General Plan Designation: Single -Family Residential - Z (SFR -Z) 4. Zoning District: Residential Single -Family - Z (RSF-Z) 5. Site Area: 0.93 acres 6. Existing Use: Single -Family Residence 7. Environmental Status: Categorical Exemption: CEQA section 15303 Class 3.c. DISCUSSION: Project Definition The proposed project consists of a request to expand an existing church facility to allow overflow parking on an adjacent single-family residential parcel. The application includes a decomposed granite parking area, drainage facilities, and landscaping. Backaround Location of proposed overflow parking area J � 4 41' 1 F. y f i .0 Existing church property Ss�Alpttos Read The project site is within the Residential Single -Family -Z Zoning District. The existing church received a Conditional Use Permit in 2002 to establish a Master Plan of Development. The proposed parking area is an expansion of the existing church and is proposed on the adjacent single-family residential parcel. The applicant constructed the proposed facilities in late 2005. Calvary Chapel was notified of the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit Amendment for the adjacent site improvements are submitted an application on January 4, 2006. Site Plan The proposed overflow parking area is located behind an existing single-family residence adjacent to the existing Calvary Chapel church site. The proposed parking area is constructed of decomposed granite. Staff has conditioned the project to require the design of adequate drainage facilities at the northern portion of the site to detain stormwater in accordance with the Atascadero Municipal Code and to ensure that neighboring properties to the north are not affected by the site improvements. The applicant is also proposing landscaping along the northern portion of the parking area to minimize visual impacts to the adjacent residential properties. General Plan Consistency The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Land Use Element Policy: Land Use Program 1.3.2: "Require landscaping and/or screening to buffer non- residential uses from residential areas". Implementing General Plan programs requires appearance review to ensure that proposed development fit with the existing setting and natural environment. As analyzed above, the proposed project, as conditioned is consistent with the General Plan. Findings Conditional Use Permit A Conditional Use Permit Amendment is required for the expansion of the church facilities to ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and mitigatable impacts such as drainage, noise, and overall project appearance. The Conditional Use Permit process provides the opportunity for the public and the Planning Commission to review the specifics of land use proposals, such as architectural design, site design, landscape, signage, and specific standards of the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission must make the following five findings to approve a Conditional Use Permit: 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 1.3.2. 2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning Ordinance). Staff Comment: provisions. As conditioned, the project satisfies all conditional use permit 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 overflow parking area will not be detrimental to the general public or working persons 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: As conditioned, the proposed project expansion is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Conditions include landscaping to buffer the proposed use from adjacent single-family residences, drainage mitigation, limitations of duration and frequency of use, and lighting restrictions. 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. Based on staff's analysis in the preceding sections, and with conditions included, it appears that all of the required findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit can be made. Proposed Environmental Determination The proposed project qualifies for a Class 3 Categorical exemption under CEQA (New construction of small structures). Conclusion The proposed project represents a minor expansion to an existing church facility to allow for an overflow parking area on an adjacent single-family residential parcel. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Commission may recommend modifications to the project and/or conditions of approval for the project. 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 deny the project. The Commission should specify the reasons for denial of the project and make an associated finding with such action. PREPARED BY: Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Location Map, Zoning and General Plan Attachment 2: Draft Resolution PC 2006-0017 Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan and Zoning � W A -4011i MIA Zoning: Residential Single -Family - Z (RSF-Z) General Plan Designation: Single -Family Residential - Z (SFR -Z) ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution PC 2005-0082 DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2006-0017 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-0071 AT 6855 PORTOLA RD APN 054-071-001 (Calvary Chapel / Steven Shively) WHEREAS, an application has been received from Calvary Chapel (6955 Portola Rd, Atascadero, CA 93422) Applicant and Steven Shively (5260 Cabrillo Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422) Property Owner to consider a project consisting of a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to construct an overflow parking area as an expansion to existing church facilities (CUP 2002- 0071); and, WHEREAS, the site's current General Plan Designation is Single -Family Residential - Z (SFR -Z); and, WHEREAS, the site's current Zoning is Residential Single -Family - Z (RSF-Z); and, WHEREAS, the Calvary Chapel has an existing Conditional Use Permit that established a Master Plan of Development for the church use and property; and, WHEREAS, the proposed expansion of church facilities qualifies for a Class 3 categorical exemption per the requirements of 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 Amendment 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 February 7, 2006, studied and considered the Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2002-0071, and, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit Amendment. 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); 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. That the proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and, 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. SECTION 2. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on February 7, 2006, resolved to approve the Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2002-0071 (Master Plan of Development) subject to the following: EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT B: Site Plan / Drainage Plan 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 Greg Porter Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval (CUP 2002-0071 Amendment) Conditions of Approval / Timing Responsibili Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Program ty Measure /Monitoring 6955 Portola Rd BL: Business License PS: Planning Services BS: Building Services CUP 2002-0071 Amendment GP: Grading Permit FD: Fire Department PD: Police Department BP: Building Permit CE: City Engineer FI: Final WN: Wastewater CA: City Attorney Inspection TO: Temporary Occupancy F0: Final Occupancy Planning Services 1. This conditional use permit shall be for an overflow parking area as an FM PS expansion of an existing church facility as described on the attached exhibits and located on parcel 054-071-001 regardless of owner. 2. The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective for the FM PS purposes of issuing building permits fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve 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. The Planning Commission shall have the final authority to approve any other changes to the Master Plan of Development and any associated Tentative Maps unless appealed to the City Council. 4. 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. Phase II shall be constructed within 5 -years of this approval. Approval of Phase 11 shall expire at that time and become null and void, requiring a Conditional Use Permit amendment to reinstate. Any such proposal shall comply with all future zoning ordinances standards. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Ongoing Atascadero 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. 6. Any subsequent Tentative Map and construction permits shall be consistent BP/FM PS, CE with the Master Plan of Development contained herein. 7. All site work, grading, and site improvements shall be consistent with the BP/FM PS, BS, CE Master Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT B. 8. This approval shall be for occasional use only as an overflow parking lot. Any more frequent use shall require Conditional Use Permit Amendment and will Conditions of Approval / Timing Responsibili Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Program ty Measure /Monitoring 6955 Portola Rd BL: Business License PS: Planning Services BS: Building Services CUP 2002-0071 Amendment GP: Grading Permit FD: Fire Department PD: Police Department BP: Building Permit CE: City Engineer FI: Final WW: Wastewater CA: City Attorney Inspection TO: Temporary Occupancy F0: Final Occupancy require paving of the lot and additional site improvements. 9. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be approved prior to the issuance of BP PS, BS building permits and included as part of site improvement plan consistent with EXHIBIT B, and as follows: ■ Landscaping screening including evergreen trees and shrubs shall be installed along the North, South, and east property lines. 10. No lighting shall be permitted within the overflow parking area. 11. No storage of vehicles or other church related items is permitted within the overflow parking area. 12. All conditions of the original Conditional Use Permit application to establish the Master Plan of Development for the church site shall remain in effect and shall requirement a subsequent amendment for any proposed alterations inconsistent with that approval. PUBLIC WORKS City Engineer Standard Conditions 13. Drainage easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to GP, BP CE accommodate both public and private drainage facilities. 14. Slope easements shall be obtained by the applicant as needed to GP, BP CE accommodate cut or fill slopes. City Engineer Project Conditions 15. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall provide a GP, BP CE drainage report for site drainage and detention basin sizing in accordance with City Engineering Standards. Report shall be signed and stamped by a registered engineer. Report shall include an evaluation of downstream facilities to safely convey run off from this project. 16. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall provide a GP, BP CE grading and drainage plan detailing how storm water runoff will be conveyed from parking areas to the storm water detention basin. Plans shall include details for construction of detention basin, overflow structures, piping, etc„ for all drainage improvements. 17. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall provide an GP, BP CE erosion control plan depicting both temporary and permanent erosion control measures and any details for implementation. Conditions of Approval / Timing Responsibili Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Program ty Measure /Monitoring 6955 Portola Rd BL: Business License PS: Planning Services GP: Grading BS: Building Services CUP 2002-0071 Amendment Permit FD: Fire Department BP: Building PD: Police Department Permit CE: City Engineer FI: Final WW: Wastewater Inspection CA: City Attorney TO: Temporary Occupancy F0: Final Occupancy 18. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall provide GP, BP CE copies of both an access and drainage easement, from the property owner to the applicant, for acceptance of storm water runoff from this project and maintenance of the detention basin. EXHIBIT B: Site Plan / Drainage Plan MJ, _wr �'�r• i K rM^II. M •�. IJ►.I�w l.r..� W."� '• MSO S�.r Tr.•�T,�{.J� ..y.. 1 . �•uAP r.. r. Buffer landscaping to be installed I • mss.. I . _ .:r. t.�.,....... .l�Drf 6btu •y1t-Y -E't' �+ f 17� •.fY,• -„mow 1`li[ iSr.. r Existing z Overflow Church site parking area ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Community Development Department Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158 Serena Court Telecommunications Site 7125 Serena Court (Atascadero Mutual Water Company / Cingular Wireless) SUBJECT: The proposed project consists of twelve (12) panel antennas located on eight (8) separate poles at fifteen feet (15') in height and one (1) microwave dish measuring four feet (4') in diameter, mounted on a fifteen foot (15') pole. The application also includes an eleven and a half foot (115) by twenty eight foot (28') equipment shelter. The site currently contains an eight foot (8) by twelve foot (12') utility structure and seven (7) pole mounted antennas. Landscape screening is proposed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-0015 approving Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicants: Cingular Wireless, 12900 Park Plaza Drive Cerritos, CA 90703, Phone: (562) 468-6249 2. Property Owner: Atascadero Mutual Water Company 5005 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 Phone: 466-2428 3. Project Address: 7125 Serena Court, Pine Mountain Reservoir APN 028-221-007 and 029-105-041 4. General Plan Designation 5. Zoning District: 6. Site Area: 7. Existing Use: 8. Environmental Status Background: ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 Rural Residential Rural Residential 34+/- acres Water reservoir and wireless telecommunication facilities. Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0002 The subject site is located east of Highway 41 adjacent to the Pine Mountain water reservoir (Attachment 1). The site is owned by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) and contains previously approved telecommunication facilities, including an eight (8') foot by twelve foot (12') utility structure and seven (7) pole mounted antennas. Low lying chaparral, scattered oak and pine trees surround the site. V Existing equipment shelter (facing south). Existing poles (facing northeast). On October 1 2002, the Planning Commission approved a co -located telecommunication facility for six (6) panel antennas on five (5) new poles, ranging in height between fifteen (15') and seventeen feet (17'), and the installation of an equipment shelter with smaller utility cabinets. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 Analysis The subject site is partly visible from Highway 41 and locations to the north and south. The applicant has submitted visual simulations to demonstrate the profile appearance of the proposed antennas and vegetative screening (Attachment 2). As proposed, the wireless telecommunication facilities are contained in three separate locations below the ridgeline. Four (4) of the proposed antenna poles and a microwave antenna face the southeast portion of the property. The remaining four (4) poles are located on the northern portion below the ridgeline (Attachment 3). The proposed equipment shelter is located to the north opposite of the existing equipment shelter (Attachment 3). The proposed locations are currently staked for viewing purposes. uc r .moi mwo/ ucrw .^f' — � �(4u st uwa.• r..... a �, SECTOR 'C' (020'). ror a wr . SECTOR '8' (0277), East Proposed locations The project proposal includes native drought tolerant landscaping surrounding the equipment shelter (Condition 11). Each pole and pole -mounted antenna will be painted brown or a similar color to camouflage the structures with the hillside (Condition 9). Staff has conditioned additional landscape and/or screening as needed to camouflage an existing plastic tank that is visible from the south. Access The proposed project is an unmanned facility and will not generate significant traffic trips. The project site is accessed from an existing Atascadero Mutual Water Company driveway off Serena Court and is currently gated. To access the project site, please contact Glenn Small with the Atascadero Water Company, at (805)466-2628. Findings Under Section 9-2.109 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, conditional uses require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In order to approve the Conditional Use Permit the Planning Commission is required to make the following findings: ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. Staff Comment: The use is consistent with the Rural Residential land use designation. 2. The proposed use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff Comment: As conditioned, the project satisfies all zoning code provisions. 3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use should not, because of the circumstances and conditions applied in this 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 of injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the use. Staff Comment: The pole -mounted antennas and equipment shelter should not be detrimental to the general public or working persons health, safety, or welfare. 4. The proposed use will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development. Staff Comment: Conditions of approval have been added so that the proposed project will not be inconsistent with the neighborhood character, including landscape screening and the removal and restoration of the site in the event the use is no longer necessary. 5. The proposed use 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. Staff Comment: The proposed facility will be unmanned and the maintenance visits are anticipated to be insignificant. Environmental Determination The Initial Study concluded that there would be no significant harm to the environment as a result of this Conditional Use Permit, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project and certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0002 is included in draft Planning Commission Resolution 2006-0015. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 CONCLUSION: The project site is currently designated as Rural Residential on a water reservoir site and has previously been approved for telecommunication use. The site is surrounded by vacant undeveloped hillside land and surrounded by low-density residential uses. The project will provide additional landscaping in order to screen proposed ground equipment. Staff believes the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the findings required for Conditional Use Permit approval. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Planning Commission may approve Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158 with modified conditions of approval. 2. The Planning Commission may deny Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158 based on appropriate findings. To deny the application, the Commission must find that it is inconsistent with one of the required findings. The motion to deny must include a finding for denial. 3. The Planning Commission may continue the application and refer the project back to staff for additional information or analysis. Direction should be given to staff and the applicant. PREPARED BY: Lisa Wilkinson, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Zoning and General Plan Designation Attachment 2: Photo Simulations Attachment 3: Site Plan Attachment 4: Elevations Attachment 5: Site Photos -Existing Conditions Attachment 6: Draft Resolution PC 2005-0045 ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 ATTACHMENT 2: Photo Simulations CUP 2005-0158 I.ocn .— E.I.TINo LOCATION VIEW 2 E.Ie — ATTACHMENT 2: Photo Simulations CUP 2005-0158 Y 1, •� a • i i -. emw nwn.. sm iii EXIBTIN. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 2-7-06 ATTACHMENT 3: Site Plan CUP 2005-0158 ATTACHMENT 4: Elevations CUP 2005-0158 SECTOR 'C' (02(r). SECTOR 'B. (0 -27R). WEST ELEVATION SECTOR W (0190'). •".�'rr.�` �'• F' cin. �_si V I '.^ ^�� .f YY+�,A•� L^nt .:rim Iter �I — — — — — — �� + � � i, •y: �'" —.. ATTACHMENT 4: Elevations CUP 2005-0158 SEC -CR -A- (0190•). r...+..+e.�.a..+.o. SSEECCTTOpR� -C- (020''). IMS O O�� MSI vows rs ..sosz ..�nr �SECTOR *8�- x(02701). EAST ELEVATION w" 2 �n'-r-0• o r SECTOR P - (0270•). SEC -CR -A- w � w. �+. +'v` r� apse se �'•°�'. o.rw SECTOR -C- (027). `IrLA moo,: a+o.sri.+au b •�1� M �a nn �u NORTH ELEVATION y"` ATTACHMENT 5: Site Photos 4 Ok It ' 1� { 91 °!`{ `� 1NC ATTACHMENT 5: Site Photos ATTACHMENT 6: PC Resolution 2006-0015 DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2006-0015 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-0158, A REQUEST BY CINGULAR WIRELESS TO INSTALL A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT 7125 SERENA COURT (7125 Serena Court /AMWC/ Cingular Wireless) WHEREAS, an application has been received from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company, P.O. Box 6075 Atascadero, CA 93422 (Property Owner), and Cingular Wireless, 12900 Park Plaza Drive, Cerritos, CA (Applicant), to consider Conditional Use Permit 2005- 0158, allowing the installation of more wireless telecommunication facilities at 7125 Serena Court (APN 028-221-007 & 029-105-041); and, WHEREAS, the proposed project is located within the Rural Residential land use designation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use Diagram; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project is located in the Rural Residential zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Conditional Use Permit application on February 7, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, hereby certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0002 based on the following findings: 1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and, 2. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project; and, 3. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project; and, 4. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project; and, 5. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. SECTION 2. Findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission finds as follows: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan; and, 2. The proposed project satisfies all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and, 3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions applied in this 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 will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and, 5. The proposed 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 the full development in accordance with the Land Use Element. SECTION 3. Approval of Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2005-0158 allowing the installation of a wireless telecommunication facility at 7125 Serena Court (APN 028-221-007 & 029-105-041) consistent with the following Exhibits: EXHIBIT A: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0002 EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT C: Site Plan EXHIBIT D: Elevations EXHIBIT E: Landscape Plan EXHIBIT F: Proposed Condition Photos On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) ADOPTED: ( ) CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Greg Porter Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A: Mitigated Negative Declaration / CUP 2005-0158 Draft Resolution PC 2006-0015 Pease refer to next page. EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval Draft Resolution PC 2006-0015 CUP 2005-0158 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2005-0158 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Wireless Telecommunications Facility BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department FI: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer Serena Court / Cingular Wireless TO: TemporaryOccupancy WW: Wastewater F0: Final Occupancy CA: City Attorney Standard Conditions/Mitigations 1. The approval of this use permit shall become final and BP PS effective for the purposes of issuing building permits, provided the required conditions of approval have been satisfied, fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9- 1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid BP PS for twelve (12) months after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall expire and become null and void unless the applicant has received a building permit or applied for an extension of entitlement. 3. The granting of this Conditional Use Permit shall apply Ongoing PS to APN 028-221-007 & 029-105-041 regardless of owner. 4. The Community Development Department shall have BP PS the authority to approve minor changes to the project that (1) increase the square footage of the 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 Conditional Use Permit. 5. This Conditional Use Permit is for eight (8) poles, fifteen (15') feet in height, an eleven and a half (11.5') foot by twenty eight (28') foot equipment shelter, and one (1) pole mounted microwave antenna, no greater than fifteen (15') feet in height. Project Conditions/Mitigations 6. All antenna, landscaping, utility placement, and exterior BP/FO PS, BS elevations shall be consistent with Exhibit C through Exhibit E. 7. Cellular provider shall be limited to that area which is Ongoing PS, BS shown on Exhibit C. All future carriers will be required Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2005-0158 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Wireless Telecommunications Facility BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department FI: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer Serena Court / Cingular Wireless TO: Temporary Occupancy WW: Wastewater F0: Final Occupancy CA: City Attorney to obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 8. The City of Atascadero shall be allowed reasonable Ongoing access to the site and shall be allowed use of the site for the purposes of installing, operating and maintaining telecommunications equipment. 9. Each pole and pole -mounted antenna, and equipment BP/FO PS, BS 1.c.1 shelter building shall be painted brown or a similar color to camouflage the structures. 10. No exterior lighting shall be installed on any structures BP PS, BS 1.c.2 11. The telecommunications poles/pole-mounted antenna BP/FO PS, BS 1.c.3 shall not exceed fifteen (15') feet, as identified on Exhibit D. 12. The shelter building shall be surrounded by native BP/FO PS, BS 1.c.4 landscaping as provided in Exhibit E. 13. All construction activities shall comply with the City of BP/FO PS, BS 11.d.1 Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation. 14. The noise level of any equipment on the site shall not BP/FO PS, BS 11.d.2 exceed 50db at any property line. The applicant shall provide an acoustical analysis verifying that the site will be in compliance with this standard prior to the issuance of the building permit. 15. The equipment shelter shall be pit set and BP/FO BS surrounded by natural vegetation and/or rock features in order to camouflage the site from view of surrounding residences and/or view from Highway 41. 16. At which time the proposed facilities are no longer BP/FO BS required, all such facilities shall be removed and the site restored to its pre-existing condition. 17. Any gates located along the driveway are to be Knox- BP/FO BS type providing Fire Department access. 18. All public improvements shall be constructed in BP/FO BS conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings and/or as directed by the City Engineer. 19. The applicant shall monument all property corners for BP/FO BS construction control and shall promptly replace them if disturbed. 20. The existing plastic tank identified on Exhibit E BP/FO PS (Landscape Plan) shall be screened by landscaping, Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2005-0158 /Monitoring Measure PS: Planning Services Wireless Telecommunications Facility BL: Business License GP: Grading Permit BS: Building Services FD: Fire Department BP: Building Permit PD: Police Department FI: Final Inspection CE: City Engineer Serena Court / Cingular Wireless TO: Temporary Occupancy WW: Wastewater F0: Final Occupancy CA: City Attorney rock feature, or removed entirely. 21. The equipment shelter shall be no closer than five (5) BP/FO PS feet to a side or rear property line. A setback inspection will be required prior to foundation placement. 22. Prior to final, the applicant shall call for a landscape, BP/FO PS color, and material inspection. The inspection will determine if additional screening is required. 23. The proposed landscape and irrigation shall be Ongoing PS monitored and maintained and provide sufficient screening of the wireless facilities. 24. Utilities will be installed underground. Common utility BP/FO PS trenches will be used where feasible. Atascadero Mutual Water Company Conditions 22. Before the issuance of building permits, the applicant BP AMWC shall submit plans to AMWC for the water distribution and site work facilities needed to serve the project. AMWC shall review and approve the plans before construction begins. All water distribution facilities shall be constructed win conformance with AMWC Standards and Details and the California Waterworks Standards (Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 16). 23. Before the start of construction on the water system BP AMWC improvements, the applicant shall pay all installation and connection fees required by AMWC. 24. Before issuance of building permits, the applicant shall BP AMWC obtain a "Will Serve' letter from AMWC for the new facility EXHIBIT C: Site Plan EXHIBIT D: Elevations SECTOR 'C" (02(r). w� �T90f' on.. r.r�r =ser. r.ea rwnr► . awwe SECTOR W (027(r)- ,,-�llul 7-V- C� < WEST ELEVATION SECTOR W (0190•`. wwm rri�. n'aa. ons • s� r.ra• ' J ' ;,, 'y►•' :' ' �i ,� ,;, ,�' is �'r � `' =T! • w_ ice'' .�. is ry v. _ � • �'w7.i�r t EXHIBIT D: Elevations SECTOR 'A' (0197). SECTOR 'C (07(Y). SECTOR 'B' (0270r). EAST ELEVATION v' - a• o e EXHIBIT E: Landscape Plan EXHIBIT F: Proposed Condition Photos E XISTINC3 EXHIBIT F: Proposed Condition Photos ITEM NUMBER: k, DATE: 2-7-06 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Community Development Department Variance 2005-0009 Front Yard Fence Height (9186 Palomar Avenue/Roy) SUBJECT: A variance request to exceed the 3'-0" fence requirement within the front setback area to allow a 6'-0" fence. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends: 1. Adopt Resolution PC 2006-0013 denying Variance 2005-0009 based on findings. Situation and Facts: 1. Applicant / Owner: Eric Roy, 9186 Palomar Avenue, Atascadero, CA 2. Project Location: 9186 Palomar Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County) APN 029-201-026 3. General Plan Designation: Single -Family Residential —Y (SFR -Y) 4. Zoning District: Residential Single -Family —Y (RSF-Y) 5. Existing Use: Single -Family Residence 6. Environmental Status: Categorical Exemption 15305. Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. Background: In July 2005, the City of Atascadero received a complaint concerning the construction of a solid wood fence located within the front setback at 9186 Palomar Avenue. On August 9 2005, planning staff met with the property owner concerning the constructed six (6) foot fence and discussed potential alternatives. The alternatives to the existing fence included landscape screening or an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) application to allow a five (5) foot fence (provided that the remaining two (2') feet were 80% visible and subject to AUP findings (AMC 9-4.104)). The aforementioned alternatives did not meet the owner's criteria for privacy and necessary screening of the front setback (Attachment 4 and 5). Consequently, the owner has requested a Variance to the fencing and screening height limitations in the Planning and Zoning Ordinance (AMC 9-4.128 (c)(1)). Discussion: According to City records, the single-family residence was constructed in 1975. Based on submitted photos and a letter from the owner (Attachment 4), juniper bushes that once screened the front portion of the residence were planted with the construction of the residence. The juniper shrub barrier has since been removed and replaced with the subject six (6') foot solid fence. The subject site is located at the confluence of a T -intersection; where vehicular traffic approaching Palomar Avenue from Valle Avenue either turns right or left at the stop sign. There are many T -intersections, full intersections, and cul-de-sacs within the City limits and within the vicinity of the subject site (Attachment 1). Approving a variance to allow a six (6') foot fence may set precedence for properties with similar site layouts and locations. Findings Analysis: Fencing and screening is subject to conform to the Zoning Ordinance for fence height limitations, regardless of existing illegal and nonconforming fences within City limits. In order to approve an exception to the standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission must make the required findings for a Variance to allow the existing fence. The findings for the requested Variance are analyzed individually below. 1. The Variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zoning district in which such property is situated; and, Staff Comment: The property is zoned for single-family use which allows front fencing. Other properties within the vicinity and zoning district are subject to a three (3) foot maximum fence height within the front setback. Staff believes this request would be a grant of special privilege. 2. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, and because of these circumstances, the application of this title would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; and, Staff Comment: The owner has analyzed various T -intersections within the City (Attachment 7). Staff recognizes that there are T -intersections, cul-de-sacs, and full intersection within the City and within the general vicinity where property fronts vehicular traffic. Staff does not find that the location nor the topography merit a special circumstance for Variance approval. 3. The Variance does not authorize a use which is not otherwise authorized in the zoning district; and Staff Comment: A single-family residence is an allowed use on the subject site. 4. The granting of such Variance does not, under the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of persons, is not materially detrimental to the public welfare, nor injurious to nearby property or improvements. Staff Comment: According to the Public Works Department, the fence meets the sight distance requirements set forth in the Engineering Standard Minimum Sight Distance for Driveways and Intersecting Roads with Stop Control. The applicant has provided a petition from nearby neighbors concerning the fence (Attachment 4). Excluding the initial code enforcement complaint, the fence does not appear to be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to nearby property or improvements. CONCLUSION: Based on staff analysis, the requested Variance does not meet required findings #1 and #2 for approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the required findings for denial of the Variance request. ALTERNATIVES: The Commission may approve the request. 2. The Commission may conditionally approve the request. 3. The Commission may deny the request. PREPARED BY: Lisa Wilkinson, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Location and Vicinity Map Attachment 2: Site Plan Attachment 3: Aerial of Property Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant/Owner Attachment 5: Screening Alternative Attachment 6: Site Photos Attachment 7: Draft Resolution 2006-0013 Attachment 1: Location and Vicinity Map t, s 'y t - o Project Site 9186 Palomar Ave. General Plan Designation: -General Plan: Single Family Residential - Y Zoning Desi aQn tion: -Zoning District: Residential Single - Family — Y Attachment 2: Site Plan 3 r. - Lill Sri tl s. 3 r. - Lill Sri Attachment 3: Aerial of Property Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant I. History A. House at 9186 Palomar Avenue in Atascadero built in 1975 1. House oriented so that the Front Entrance is adjacent to the driveway - South. 2. The Master bedroom is facing West toward Palomar Ave. and is NOT an acceptable entrance to the home. a. The room was designed with French doors facing West as the only ventilation. b. If you are in the room you can be seen from the street — it is a tiny room with no place to hide from the double doors. c. The way the doors faced required a large screen or barrier along the West side of the front of the property to direct foot traffic to the Main Entry of the home and away from the bedroom door. d. The screen or barrier must be at least 6 feet high in order to provide very necessary and basic bedroom privacy needs from eyeballs and headlights looking directly in from Palomar Street and the T intersection of Valle and Palomar pointing directly into the bedroom. (Exhibit B. C, D) e. Palomar Avenue takes a 90 degree turn about 250 yards South of intersection of Valle and Palomar. People sit at the intersection and try to figure out why Palomar has a dogleg left. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic increased at the intersection because of the set of 5 mailboxes. f. "Peepers" have idled at stop sign for several minutes, several times prior to fence installation — we suspect these may be the ones who filed the complaint. g. The young neighborhood boys who play in the street and intersection are also subject to witness bedroom activities. (Exhibit C) B. The initial juniper shrub barrier that was planted in 1975 had become a nuisance to the neighborhood. 1. It had grown to an unruly 8' plus in height and at least 10' wide. 2. It had been repeatedly burnt by summer sun reflecting off the pavement so that the West side (street side) was brown. I We had seen and knew the shrubs were harboring rats. 4. When we contacted the Realtors we bought the house from for pictures of the old Juniper wall for this variance request we were told that, "we never took any pictures of the Junipers because we were trying to sell the house, not get it condemned." We have two similar pictures (Exhibit E, F) but this is after Eric had already removed the entire South and South West corners of the wall. But you can see how dense, tall and disgusting it was. C. We wanted an attractive front to our house to provide the basic level of privacy enjoyed by everyone in the neighborhood to our bedroom doors. Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant (continued) 1. Went to considerable expense to design and build an attractive redwood fence that was architecturally compatible with the neighborhood. (See Exhibits G, H, I, J) 2. Not understanding the setback rule at the time we talked to the neighbors and set the fence back generously (12 feet) matching the precedent set by the neighborhood. (See Exhibits G, H, I, J, K, L) 3. Once built we received praise by ALL neighbors (one neighbor tied their fence into ours — Exhibit M) and those walking the neighborhood as to the beauty of the fence. 4. Once we knew we were complained against we took down the rising arbor so as not to cause offense. So initial picture from Fire Marshall is no longer accurate (Exhibit N). H. The Law A. The setback ordinance was enacted in 1983, eight years after our house was designed and built. 1. The setback ordinance was written to provide for visibility and traffic safety; access to and around buildings; access to natural light, ventilation and direct sunlight; separation of incompatible land uses; and space for privacy, landscaping and private recreation. (9-4.103) a. The fence does not in any way interfere with the visibility, traffic safety, access, or light. (Exhibit -K, L) b. Neighborhood readily has agreed to this statement (Exhibit A -petition). c. Access is not an issue. Gates are un -lockable with a hinged piece of wood as the only thing keeping the gates closed. (Exhibit O, P) electrical employee gets in easily each month since February 05 and water meter is outside the fence. d. Many fences -over 25% of the neighborhood are breaking the letter of the law of the ordinance and thus setting a precedent for the neighborhood. (Exhibit G, H, I, J and L) Our fence is architecturally compatible with existing structures on the property and consistent in character and appearance with other fences and structures in the neighborhood. B. Variance 1. We hope to apply for a variance for this fence and believe it should be granted because there are special circumstances applicable to our property that without the fence deprive our property of privileges enjoyed by the other properties in the vicinity. a. The unusual orientation of the home, which was built and designed before the ordinance requires a minimum 6' barrier to protect the basic privacy of the bedroom. Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant (continued) b. Its location downhill from a T intersection. (Exhibit — map of grades in Site Plan and Exhibit D) c. The circumstance of a West facing area that prohibits an appropriate shrub barrier because of intense reflective heat from the road. (Exhibit Q - write up on shrubs verified by Head of Biology Dept at California Polytechnic University and owners of Bay Laurel '.Nursery) d. Our situation is the definition of unique. We can find no other T intersection in our zone inside the City of Atascadero limits has the T intersection directly in front of and thus pointing directly into their bedroom door with the elevation sloping downward from the street toward the house. We took pictures of about 50 T intersections in Atascadero and will provide as many as necessary upon request. (Exhibit R with pictures attached) III. Closing Remarks A. Keeping and maintaining this fence, as the front of our home to protect the sanctity of our bedroom is very important to us. 1. We have had to borrow against the equity of our house (which we had to beg and borrow to get into) in order to apply for this variance. 2. Before the fence was built and when the shrubs were down, we had experienced people knocking on our bedroom door thinking it was the entrance to the home. Catherine has experienced the humiliation of trucks and SUVs repeatedly pulling up to the T intersection as she changes or undresses for bed at night and prolonging their stop as their headlights shine directly into our bedroom. 3. We think the person who complained may have been the same party who looked into our bedroom at night. 4. We implore you to consider this variance, as it is necessary to maintain basic sanctity in our bedroom and direct traffic to the main entrance. Our unique situation does not adversely affect the health or safety of persons, is not materially detrimental to the public welfare, nor injurious to nearby property or improvements. 5. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, fJ4P CA-'� 177 Catherine and Eric Roy Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant (continued) Plat Map AlL PRoP�/2r1r5 ��tLi�� O - Borrower Clent ROY Pro en Address 9186 PALOMAR AVE. C ATASCADERO County SAN LUIS OBISPO State CA Tip Code 93422 Lender BLUE SKY MORTGAGE THE OI2y o�Fs wHort� aye FF,rrc� Gam[ D /Ous-9462 y IjRi 4=C -T - NHk;6- s/4 -NCV 101---717-70e. - P�cUioUS F �hq/l fl waz ocnrr v m O � � J F N Q / Q�u 'n J �: t Iz Attachment 4: Letter from Applicant (continued) ExhIh; f R I, the undersigned, agree that the fence located on 9186 Palomar Ave, in Atascadero, CA does not interfere with visibility, traffic safety; access to and around buildings; access to natural light, ventilation or direct sunlight. I agree that the fence is architecturally compatible with existing structures on the property and consistent in character and appearance with other fences and structures in the neighborhood; and, The fence does not impair safe sight distance for vehicular traffic nor result in any other potential adverse impact on human health and safety. Signed: / 1 M Address: k z /�� ortiriM %vim Date: Laas� q I -Z' 9L6 Z WaZ/AI a4 Z/a M/ 7/ ox, o v x,r 4vIe OS -7 9 5 Vu lle ave -05 glwTaloauy Aue� 9 ICI I cro 9iSl ?4 wrirx e ave- °l /Zr g ®S �_ Attachment 5: Screen Alternative Shrub screen alternative The shrub screen recommended by the city planner will not be a successful alternative to a fence at this location because of the unique characteristics of the sight. There are three main reasons why this would not be a suitable option. The first is that the sight is West - facing and located in a "T" intersection, which increases the sights exposure to the extremes of afternoon sun and vehicle pollution. During the summer months the asphalt exposed to West facing afternoon sun can reach temperatures exceeding 170 degrees. Any shrub placed near the road will experience reflective heat that will burn the foliage leaving it damaged with an unattractive burnt appearance. This is illustrated with the previous shrub screen that was unsuccessful here previously. Another reason why a shrub border would not be successful is that the planting bed has been used as a car park for years and the soil is so severely compacted that shrub roots would not thrive. Soil compaction renders the plants unable to obtain the required water, air and nutrients required for survival. This is best illustrated on lawns that experience high traffic and subsequent dead spots due to soil compaction. In order to remedy soil compaction it would be necessary to completely dig up and replace the top three feet of soil, or incorporate soil amendments that would require 1-2 years before it would be acceptable for planting. The third reason is that in order to supply an adequate screen to the front yard, it would require a dense bramble of shrubs. Due to the limitations of the sight based on heat and soil problems it leaves a minimal choice of shrubs that would survive in the location. Junipers being some of the hardiest shrubs were not successful there previously and experienced leaf scorch. Any shrub planted here would have to be a weedy type shrub and require at least 10 years to become tall and dense enough to create an adequate screen for the residence and would not blend into the natural beauty of the home or neighborhood. Dense beds of shrubs become prime habitat for rat dens and other disease carrying rodents. Based on an analysis of the residence at 9186 Palomar, planting of a shrub screen in front to create a screen for the West facing bedroom door would not be successful. There are several unique characteristics based on heat exposure, soil limitations and time constraints that would not make this a feasible alternative. Attachment 6: Site Photos (by applicant) Attachment 7: T -Intersections (provided by owner) T intersections in Single Family Zones of Atascadero with pictures attached DISTINCT from 9186 Palomar Ave. -Yesal and Palomar — slope uphill no window view. -Castano and Yesal — house set back at least twice as far, no doors. -Castano and Maleza — no house. -Cortex and Maleza — house 20 ft below grade, sight line above house. -Curbaril and Cortez — no house. -Cortina and Pinal — uphill grade. -Pinal and Maleza — garage at T. -Pinal and Escarpa- uphill grade, house 75ft off road. -Valle and Escarpa — house l 00ft off road. -Sonora and Valle — driveways at T. -Encinal and Valle — uphill, no house. -Sombrilla and Curbaril — uphill, driveway at T. -Sombrilla and Pueblo — uphill, driveway at T. -Sombrilla and Robles — uphill, house angled away from T. -Coromar and Montura - house way below grade, sight line above house. -Coromar and Via Tortuga — uphill, no house. -Coromar and Portola — flat, house cannot be seen. -Cole Ct and Portola — flat, driveway at T. -Atascadero and Alegre — flat, school at T. -Caletta and Santa Rosa — uphill, house cannot be seen. -Mountain View and Santa Rosa — driveway at T, small windows. -Mountain View and Pine Dorado — flat, house cannot be seen. -Mountain View and Portola — uphill, no house. -Azucena and Portola — flat, no house. -Azucena and San Francisco — flat, driveways at T. -Azucena and Curbaril — flat, garage at T. -Atascadero and Marchant — downhill, driveway at T. -Atascadero and Via Tortuga — angled house and wall (wall breaking set back ordinance). -Atascadero and Miranda — flat, no house. -Ticorida and Curbaril — angled house, small windows. -San Marcos and San Clementine — flat, house cannot be seen. -Larga and Pequenia — fence and back of home. -Larga and El Descanso — uphill, fence within set back. -Larga and Navarette — downhill, house set sideway to T. -Los Cerritos and Navarette — uphill, no house at T. -Hermosa and Navarette — uphill, house set way back. -Chauplin and Santa Lucia — angled house. -Santa Andres and Santa Lucia — uphill, house set way up hill. -Santa Andres and Mira Flores — flat, no house. -Violetta and Aquilla — downhill, no house. -Palomar and Castano — downhill, garage at T. ATTACHMENT 7: Draft Resolution PC 2006-0013 Variance DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2006-0013 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FENCE LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK, APN 029-201-026 (9186 Palomar / Roy) WHEREAS, an application has been received from Eric Roy, 9186 Palomar Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422), Applicant and property owner, to consider a variance to allow a six (6') foot fence located in the front setback at 9186 Palomar on APN 029-201-026; and, WHEREAS, the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on February 7, 2006; and, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, hereby resolves to take the following actions: SECTION 1. Findings of Disapproval. The Planning Commission finds that: (i) The variance constitutes a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zoning district in which such property is situated; or (ii) There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, which would, upon application of this title, deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. SECTION 2. Denial. The Planning Commission does hereby deny Variance 2005-0009 from allowing a six (6') foot fence located in the front setback: 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: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Greg Porter Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary