Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2004-01-20_AgendaPacketCITY OFATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Regular Meeting January 20, 2004 — 7:00 P.M. City of Atascadero Pavilion on the Lake 9315 Pismo Ave. - Atascadero, California CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairperson Fonzi Vice Chairperson Kelley Commissioner Bentz Commissioner Beraud Commissioner Jones Commissioner O'Keefe Commissioner Porter APPROVAL OF AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Commission has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your presentation. The Commission may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda) 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 DECEMBER 16, 2003. 2. APPROVAL OF THE REVISED 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS 3. TRAFFIC CALMING ON SAN DIEGO WAY, SOUTHSIDE VILLAS 4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2004-0043, MIKE POULIN Request to remove thirty-one (31) native oak trees, six of which are over 24 -inches in diameter, in conjunction with the development of a 2,775 square foot single-family home with 400 square foot detached garage located at 2145 San Fernando Rd. 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 . COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be February 3, 2004, at the Pavilion on the Lake, 9315 Pismo Avenue, 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 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 the Pavilion on the Lake, 9315 Pismo Ave., 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). \\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\— PC Agendas\PC Agenda - Welcome and meeting information rev. 11-03.am.doc ITEM NUMBER: 1 DATE: 01/20/04 I77a�w CITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting December 16, 2003 — 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and Commissioner Jones led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bentz, Beraud, Jones, O'Keefe, Porter, Vice Chairperson Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Warren Frace, Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris, Associate Planner Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner Kerry Margason, Civil Engineer Jeff van den Eikhof and Recording Secretary Grace Pucci. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Porter to approve the agenda. AYES: Commissioners Jones, Porter, Bentz, Beraud, O'Keefe, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7:0 by a Noll -call vote. PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON DECEMBER 2, 2003. 2. APPROVAL OF THE 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve the Consent Calendar. AYES: Commissioners Bentz, Jones, Beraud, Porter, O'Keefe, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7: 0 by a roll -call vote. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS 3. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2003-0036,2135 SAN FERNANDO ROAD Request to amend Tree Removal Permit 2003-0036 to allow for the removal of 2 additional native oak trees, in conjunction with the development of a 4,000 square foot single-family home located at 2135 San Fernando Rd. Staff recommends: The Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC 2003-0120 to approve the request to amend Tree Removal Permit 2003-0036 to remove two additional native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance, and subject to project conditions. Associate Planner Kelly Gleason provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT George Molina, 5000 Marchant, urged the Planning Commission to forward a recommendation to the City Council to make the process for tree removal more user friendly and less costly. Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period. Commissioner Beraud asked staff to address the tree removal issues raised during the Public Comment period. Community Development Director Warren Frace explained the process for this tree removal and discussed the way in which the Tree Ordinance could be revised. MOTION: By Commissioner Porter and seconded by Vice Chairperson Kelley to adopt Resolution PC 2003-0120 to approve the request to amend Tree Removal Permit 2003-0036 to remove two additional native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance, and subject to project conditions. AYES: Commissioners Porter, Jones, Beraud, Bentz, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi NOES: Commissioner O'Keefe ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 6:1 by a roll -call vote. Commissioner O'Keefe stated she voted no because the applicant did not meet the findings for tree removal; that the applicant must submit practical design alternatives and provide cost comparisons. When she checked the record this information was not on file. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. 4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2003-0051,3600 MARICOPA ROAD Applicant: Ron Shores, 6700 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422; 466-2767 Owner. Richard F. Radke c/o Applicant Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0051 (AT 03-0262) Project 3600 Maricopa Road, Atascadero, 93422; San Luis Obispo County Location: APN 054-041-012 Project A proposed subdivision of an existing 5.28 -acre lot into two individual parcels of 2.51 acres and Description: 2.77 acres, gross. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence, which will be confined to one lot to allow for future development of the new lot. The parcel is slight to moderately sloped and contains several native oak trees. The property will be served by onsite septic and water is available from Atascadero Mutual Water Company. General Plan Designation: Rural Estate (RE) Zoning District: Residential Suburban (RS) Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. Environmental The proposed Negative Declaration is available for public review from 11/17/03 through 12/7/03 Determination: at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Ken Wilson, representing Ron Shores, applicant, addressed issues raised by the Commission and requested a reduction of the width of the flag portion driveway from 20 feet to 12 feet as it currently exists. Mr. Wilson answered questions of the Commission. Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Jones to adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0118, certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0050 and approving Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0051, a request to subdivide two parcels totaling 5.28 acres into two parcels of 2.51 and 2.57 acres, gross, based on findings and subject to conditions with the following modifications: 1. The overlay on Maricopa will only go to the center of the road, and 2. Of the 24 -foot easement going to the rear lot, 16 feet of that is to be paved. AYES: Commissioners Jones, Beraud, Porter, Bentz, O'Keefe, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote. Commissioner O'Keefe asked the record to reflect that she would have liked to follow the City Engineer's requirements with regard to the overlay, but as it is a very reasonable lot split, she is voting yes. 5. RAB 2002-0009/TPM 2002-0028: CHALK MOUNTAIN CELL SITE PARCEL Applicant: Michael Frederick, P.O. Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423; 466-5060 Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map 2002-0028 (AT01-0091), Road Abandonment 2002-0009 Project Location: South side of Vista Bonita, North of El Bordo Avenue, East of El Camino Real Project A proposed subdivision of one existing lot, totaling 4.33 acres (gross) into two lots of 1.87, Description: and 2.46 acres. Proposed parcel 1 is currently developed with cellular facilities. Proposed parcel 2 would be available for single-family residential development, however development is not proposed with this application. The proposed new parcels will receive water service from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and will connect to the City's sewer facilities. General Plan Designation: SFR -Z (Single Family Residential, 1.5 to 2.5 acre minimum) Zoning District: RSF-Z (Residential Single Family, 1.5 to 2.5 acre minimum) Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is Environmental proposed. The proposed Negative Declaration is available for public review from 12/03/03 Determination through 12/24/03 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Community Development Director Warren Frace provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Ken Wilson, applicant's representative, questioned the request for the sewer as they had planned to use a septic system. He stated that the applicant has no objection to a restriction for no buildings to be placed on Parcel 1, however, if and when the cell site facilities are removed, he would like to be allowed to apply for a building permit for the site. Michael Frederick, applicant, stated that in order to hook up to sewer, there must be, by state law, a ten -foot separation from sewer to a water main, and the water company has two large water mains going down the main road making it impossible to get a ten -foot separation. Perk tests on done on the site were very good. Mr. Frederick reiterated that he would like to be able to apply for a building permit for the site if the cell facilities are removed. Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period. There was Commission discussion regarding sewer versus septic for this site, future grading for the parcel containing the cell facilities and the height and colors for the proposed home(s). Director Frace clarified that staff has never looked at the cell site for a house; there are issues with septic, grading, fire department requirements, etc. He suggested if the Commission chooses to allow this site for future residential development, they should refer it back to staff for a preliminary layout with proper conditions. Michael Frederick stated that if the open space easement covers the entire area of Parcel 1, he feels the City would in essence be taking that parcel away from him. He would like to send this item back to staff if the entire parcel will be taken away in the future. MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0121 recommending the City Council certify the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0066 and approve Tentative Parcel Map 2002-0028 (AT 01-091), a request to subdivide one parcel totaling 4.33 acres, gross, into two parcels of 1.87 and 2.46 acres gross, based on findings and subject to conditions; and, adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0122 recommending the City Council approve a request to abandon Vista Bonita from its intersection with El Bordo Avenue to its westerly terminus, and modifying the conditions as follows: 1. Condition No. 8: All ftitufe development fef- both par -eels shall e6fifteet to the City's wastewater- f edit or. Septic systems to be allowed on these parcels due to the fact they have an excellent perk rate. 2. Parcel 1 be retained as a residential building lot and any future grading on that lot to be restricted to within the footprint of the proposed residence, with the approval of the Atascadero Building Department. AYES: Commissioners Bentz, Jones, Porter and Kelley NOES: Commissioners O'Keefe, Beraud and Chairperson Fonzi ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 4:3 by a roll -call vote. Commissioner O'Keefe asked that the record reflect she is voting no because she does not think the Commission should create entitlements if all the impacts haven't been analyzed. Commissioner Beraud stated that she is voting no because she thinks further study would have been wise and she does not believe Parcel 1 can be built safely without further grading, to which she is opposed. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS There was Commission discussion regarding agendizing review of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. There was Commission consensus to proceed with agendizing this item. Director Frace stated this item would likely be placed on the January 20, 2004 Planning Commission agenda. Chairperson Fonzi asked about the safety issue of the intersection at El Camino Real and Santa Rosa raised at the last Commission meeting. Director Frace stated he would discuss this issue with the City Engineer and indicate that the Commission would like to receive a report on the topic. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Community Development Director Frace stated that copies of the Appearance Review Manual have been included in the staff report package. He asked the Commission to review the document, as it needs to be updated. Director Frace provided an update on the stop sign for the apartment complex on San Diego Road and reviewed the next Commission agenda. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Fonzi adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on January 6, 2004. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary \\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\— PC Minutes\PC Minutes 03\PC Draft Minutes.12-16-03.gp.doc Planning Commission Meeting Schedule 2004 All meetings will be held at the Pavilion on the Lake 9315 Pismo Ave., Atascadero, until further notice. MEETING DATE January 6 MEETING TYPE TIME CANCELLED January 20 Regular 7:00 p.m. February 3 Regular 7:00 p.m. February 17 Regular 7:00 p.m. March 2 March 16 Regular Regular 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. April 7 Wednesday Regular 7:00 p.m. April 20 Regular 7:00 p.m. May 4 Regular 7:00 p.m. May 18 Regular 7:00 p.m. June 1 Regular 7:00 p.m. June 15 Regular 7:00 p.m. July 6 Regular 7:00 p.m. July 20 Regular 7:00 p.m. August 3 Regular 7:00 p.m. August 17 Regular 7:00 p.m. September 7 Regular 7:00 p.m. September 21 Regular 7:00 p.m. October 5 Regular 7:00 p.m. October 19 Regular 7:00 p.m. November 3 Wednesday Regular 7:00 p.m. November 16 Regular 7:00 p.m. December 7 Regular 7:00 p.m. December 21 Regular 7:00 p.m. Atascadero\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\PC Meeting Schedule\PC Meeting Schedule 2004.am.doc ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 01/20/04 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Public Works Department Traffic Calming on San Diego Way Southside Villas RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends: No all -way stop be installed on San Diego Way. DISCUSSION: On October 21, 2003, the Planning Commission approved an 88 -unit apartment complex at 9190 San Diego Way. The Planning Commission also directed the City Engineer to work with the Traffic Engineer for the project and come back with a mitigation for the merging traffic out of the project onto San Diego Road, with the preference of a stop sign being put in place. The project Traffic Engineer submitted a report to the City Engineer with an analysis of two traffic calming measures and recommendations. The traffic calming measures analyzed were a choker/curb bulb out and an all -way stop. The analysis found that the only a choker/curb bulb out would be viable alternative. An all -way stop is not warranted, or appropriate because San Diego Way does not meet the minimum traffic volumes required by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Additionally, studies have found that the violation rate at unwarranted stop sign locations for 3 -way stops (such as the one being considered) is as high as 93%. The City Engineering recommends that no additional traffic calming measures be implemented on San Diego Way at this time. ATTACHMENTS: Traffic Calming Report PREPARED BY: Jeff van Den Eikhof, ACE Exhibit A CUP 2003-0095 9190 San Diego Way Traffic Calming Report 10= Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. 1627 Calzada Avenue Santa Ynez, California 93460 Phone/FAX 80S-688-7814 :mall oeglquixnet.net December 19, 2003 Mr. Steven Kahn, PE, LS Public Works Director City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Traffic Calming Along San Diego Way — Southside Villas Dear Mr. Kahn: OEG Reference 50203 Orosz Engineering Group, Inc (OEG) has prepared the following analysis of traffic calming options as requested by the Planning Commission. Two options were to be evaluated. The first option was a traffic calming option to create a comfortable physical environment to slow traffic using San Diego Way. The second option was to consider installing an All -Way Stop controlled intersection at the project driveways. Traffic Calming There are several traffic calming tools that can be used to slow or discourage traffic on a particular street. Typical tools include raised intersections, curb bulb outs, speed humps, roundabouts, diverters, chokers, etc. For this project, the street is already fairly narrow at 34 feet for parking on one side only. The installation of a roundabout would take too much right of way. Diverters and speed humps are not appropriate for a connector road between a freeway ramp and the main City street. The most appropriate tool would be a choker/curb bulb out. The intent of this traffic calming tool is to reduce the paved roadway section over the basic road section to narrow the area between curbs. This gives drivers the feeling of being squeezed and therefore, normally vehicles slow 5-15 mph from their previous speed based actual studies. Attached to this letter are two sketches of how the choker/curb bulb out could look from a aerial perspective for the north and south project driveways. Once approved, landscaping and civil engineering/drainage issues will be specifically addressed. The intent of the landscaping is to make it consistent with the proposed project, while the civil engineering needed will address site and roadway drainage issues. Both of these areas are manageable and do not impact the technical ability to slow traffic on San Diego Way. Two street lights have been added per your request, one at each driveway. All -Way Stop An All -Way Stop controlled intersection at the project driveways was asked to be considered to slow traffic on San Diego Way. Our research has found that the installation of an all -way stop is not warranted, nor appropriate, at these locations for the following reasons. Mr. Steven Kahn December 19, 2003 Page 2 According to the Federal Highway Administration publications, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices or MUTCD, All -way stop sign installations are appropriate where each approach volume is approximately equal. The minimum traffic volumes required to meet the warrants for installation of an all -way stop are: 1. Minimum of 500 vehicles per hour average for 8 hours of the day, AND 2. The combined vehicle and pedestrian volume on the minor street is at least 200 units during the same 8 hour period, and the average delay is at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the peak hour, AND 3. If the average speed is 40 MPH or greater, the requirements are 70% of 1 and 2, above. For this project, the peak hour volumes on San Diego Way are 85 AM and 100 PM in the peak direction. The volume on the project driveways are approximately 12 vehicles per peak hour. These volume levels are significantly below those required to meet the minimum warrants. The volume differential between the driveway and the volume on San Diego Way is not balanced. The posted speed limit on San Diego Way is 25 MPH. Therefore, the installation of an all -way stop sign is not warranted. According to the Traffic Calming Primer', Stop Signs are not traffic calming tools, but devices to assign right-of-way at intersections. Compliance is also a concern with implementing unwarranted stop signs. Studies have shown that, the violation rate at unwarranted stop sign installations for 3 -way stops (such as those being considered) is as high as 93%. Recommendation At minimum, the project proposed installation of stop signs for the traffic exiting the project driveways should be installed. In our opinion, the all -way stop sign concept should not be considered as a viable alternative. It would be our recommendation, that the project as proposed be constructed and traffic flows evaluated after six months of occupancy. Should the City determine that traffic calming is needed, the chocker/curb bulb outs could be installed. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Q%pfESS1 $0��*_ N A. 0 0 m Stephen A. Orosz, PE, PTCE ti o N s Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. 9Cr 04 Attachments cc. Tim Roberts, Roberts Engineering 'rECF A ,LEON 1 Traffic Calming Primer, Pat Noyes & Associates, 1998, pages 8 and 9 (attached) SAN DIEGO WAY •=� NORTH ® DRIVEWAY SOUTHSIDE VILLAS Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. 40' REVERSE 3p V\ CURVE 0' 01 E 7 vl� 0 _L10' 40' REVERSE CURVE rj�ROp- �o. i i PROP. CURB CURB ---------N ----- -Y--LIGHT --------- -- PROP. EXIST. STREET �+ EXIST. a CURB N( CURB -� LIGHT CURBS SAN DIEGO WAY SOUTH •�� DRIVEWAY � SOUTHSIDE VILLAS Orosz Engineering Group. Inc. ® ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Community Development Department Tree Removal Permit TRP 2004-0043 (2145 San Fernando Rd: Poulin) SUBJECT: Request to remove thirty-four (34) native oak trees, six of which are over 24 -inches in diameter, in conjunction with the development of a 2,775 square -foot single-family home with 400 square -foot detached garage located at 2145 San Fernando Rd. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: The Planning Commission make finding #5 that the project cannot be reasonably redesigned to avoid the need to remove the identified 31 native oak trees and adopt Resolution PC 2004-0001 to approve the removal of thirty-one native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance, and subject to project conditions. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant: Mike Poulin, 814 E. Foster Rd., Santa Maria, CA 93455 2. Representative: Mark Davis, 5100 Fresno Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 3. Certified Arborist: Steven G. Alvarez; Arbor Tree Surgery, 802 Paso Robles Street, Paso Robles, CA 93446. Phone: (805) 239-1239 4. Project Address: 2145 San Fernando Rd., Atascadero, CA 93422; APN 049-281-005 ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 ANALYSIS: The applicant has proposed a 2,775 square foot single-family residence on the project site. The project site is comprised of steep slopes between 13 and 50 percent with a steep bank along the San Fernando Road frontage. The project is designed to share access with the adjacent parcel. The majority of the parcel contains steep slopes and heavy concentrations of oak trees. The area proposed for the building site is located on slopes of approximately 24%. The residential site will be pad graded with the residence stepped above the garage and driveway terminus. The front of the residence will incorporate stem wall construction to eliminate fill and reduce the amount of cut at the rear of the residence. The proposed septic system has been located adjacent to the driveway in an area with minimal trees to avoid additional tree removals. Grading for the proposed driveway and residence site will result in the majority of the proposed tree removals. The project is currently under staff review through the City's Precise Plan permit process. The City of Atascadero's Tree Ordinance requires that a certified arborist prepare an accurate and appropriate Tree Protection Plan, and that appropriate mitigation for native tree removals be implemented as a condition of the project. The applicant submitted a Tree Protection Report and staff is in the process of reviewing the recommendations, which will be incorporated into the site plan, landscape plan, and conditions of approval for the project once the plan is accepted as complete. The arborist's report findings conclude that the native oak trees to be removed are restricted to within the building site and driveway location in addition to graded areas necessary for the proposed improvements. In addition, the arborist has recommended the use of retaining walls for trees that will be significantly impacted by cut and fill amounts within the dripline. Staff has conditioned the project to retain trees #52, #53, and #54 which are located at the westerly portion of the house. In addition, staff has added a condition that requires the applicant to include retaining walls along the driveway to minimize impacts to trees in this area. Mitigation for the proposed tree removals is outlined in the attached tree mitigation table (Attachment 3, Exhibit B). The applicant and staff have reviewed the existing site conditions and proposed project grading/tree removal and believe the proposed access and residential building site represents an acceptable site plan which meets tree removal finding #5. The Planning Commission may either approve the requested tree removals which would allow the application process to continue with the curren( building and driveway proposal, or the Commission determine that site development alternatives that result in less grading and tree removals are reasonably feasible and direct the applicant to present such alternatives prior to Planning Commission consideration for tree removal. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 FINDINGS: Pursuant to the Tree Ordinance (Ordinance No. 214), "decisions on native tree removals of 24 -inch dbh-size or larger shall be made by the Planning Commission." In considering any tree removal request, at least one of the following findings must be made: 1) The tree is dead, diseased or injured beyond reclamation, as certified by a tree condition report from an Arborist; 2) The tree is crowded by other healthier native trees, thinning (removal) would promote healthier growth in the trees to remain, as certified by a tree condition report from an Arborist; 3) The tree is interfering with existing utilities and/or structures, as certified by a report from the Site Planner; 4) The tree is inhibiting sunlight needed for existing and/or proposed active or passive solar heating or cooling, as certified by a report from the Site Planner; 5) The tree is obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: • Early consultation with the City, • Consideration of practical design alternatives; • Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; • If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property; or • If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. It is staff's opinion that finding #5 is most applicable to this request, if the Planning Commission finds the proposed improvements cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for the requested tree removal. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Planning Commission can direct the applicant to consider modifications and alternative site configurations for the proposed project. CONCLUSION: The applicant has a submitted tree protection plan with findings from a Certified Arborist. The project as proposed requires the removal of 34 native oak trees. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission make finding #5 to approve the removal of 31 native oak trees requiring that the applicant the retain tree #52, #53, and #54. PREPARED BY: Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Location Map Attachment 2: Site Plan Attachment 3: Site Photos Attachment 4: Arborist Report Attachment 5: Draft Resolution ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 1/20/04 Attachment 7 Location Map 2145 San Fernando Rd. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Attachment 2 Site Plan Proposed Leach Field -`� Proposed %:%�Ei Residence I i III � �It Proposed Garage \ \ \ \\\ \\ \ \\ \\ y\\ 1 I 1 1 y\\ 1 I 1 1 .4 Jly Ilk 'i , A t, 4.'; r , /;. O.. ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 1/20/04 Attachment 3 Site Photos View of slope along the San Fernando frontage. F-1 i ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 1/20/04 Attachment 4 Arborist Report 802 PASO ROBLES STREET PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446 805/239-1239 FAX 805/239.3742 ARBOR TREESURGERY Date: 7-22-03 To: Mike Poulin From: Steven Alvarez Chip Tamagni Certified Arborists, Arbor Tree Surgery Re: Poulin Residence, San Fernando Road This report is in regards to the proposed new home located on San Fernando Road in Atascadero, California. The site consists of a steep oak woodland consisting mainly of Coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) with a few Valley oaks (Quercus lobala) and Toyon (Herreomeles arbulifo ia). There will be areas of cut and fill that will have to be mitigated in order to limit any impact to the trees. The owner/general contractor shall be solely responsible in providing a copy of this tree protection plan to any and all contractors that encroach within the drip line of any native tree. It is highly advised that the owner has each contractor sign his copy also. Any damage to the oak trees shall be reported to the city representative. The following mitigation measures/methods must be fully understood and followed. Any necessary clarification will be provided by us (the arborists) upon request. 1. Fencing: Must be a minimum of 4' high chain link, snow or safety fence staked at the drip -line or line of encroachment for each tree or group of trees. The fence must be up before any construction or earth moving begins. The owner shall be responsible for maintaining an erect fence throughout the construction period. The arborist(s) shall inspect the fence placement once it is erected. This is mandatory for this project. 2. Soil Aeration Methods: Soils under the drip -lines that have been compacted by heavy equipment and/or construction activities must be returned to their original state before all work is completed. Methods include water jetting, adding organic matter, and boring small holes with an auger (18" deep, 2-3' apart with a 24" auger) and the application of moderate amounts of nitrogen fertilizer. The arborist(s) shall advise. 3. Chip Mulch: All areas within the drip -line of the trees that cannot be fenced shall receive a 4-6" layer of chip mulch to retain moisture; soil structure and reduce the effects of soil compaction. 4. Trenching Within The Drip -line: All trenching under the drip -lines of native trees shall be hand dug, augured or bored. All major roots shall be avoided whenever ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 1/20/04 possible. All exposed roots larger than 1" in diameter shall be clean cut with a sharp pruning tools and not left ragged. 5. Grading Within The Drip -line: Grading should not encroach within the drip -line. If grading is necessary, construction of retaining walls or tree wells or other protection measures may be necessary to insure the survivability of the trees. Chip mulch 4-6" in depth may also be required in these areas. Grading should not disrupt the normal drainage pattern around the trees. Fills should not create a ponding condition and excavations should not leave the tree on a rapidly draining mound. 6. Exposed Roots: Any exposed roots shall be recovered the same day they were exposed. If they cannot, they must be covered with burlap or another suitable material and wetted down 2x per day. 7. Paving Within The Drip -line: Pervious surfacing is preferred within the drip -line of any oak tree. Arborist(s) will advise. 8. Equipment Operation: Vehicles and all heavy equipment shall not be driven under the trees, as this will contribute to soil compaction. 9. Existing Surfaces: The existing ground surface within the drip -line of all oak trees shall not be cut, filled, compacted or pared. 10. Construction Materials And Waste: No liquid or solid construction waste shall be dumped on the ground within the drip -line of any oak tree. 11. Arborist Monitoring: An arborist shall be present for selected activities (trees identified on spreadsheet) and pre -construction fence placement. The monitoring does not necessarily have to be continuous but observational at times during the above activities. 12. Pre -Construction Meeting: An on-site pre -construction meeting with the Arborist(s), Owner/General Contractor, Planning Staff, and the earthy moving team shall be required for this project. Prior to final occupancy, a letter from the arborist(s) shall be required verifying the health/condition of all impacted trees and providing any recommendations for any additional mitigation. The letter shall verify that the arborist(s) were on site for all grading and/or trenching activity that encroached into the drip -line of the selected native trees, and that all work done in these areas was completed to the standards set forth above. In order to save trees #6, 7, 26, 35, 36 a retaining wall is needed to protect against either cut or fill. Arborist(s) will advise. 'free 13 has a massive cavity, however, it is down slope from the driveway. Tree 51 is situated where it doesn't need to be removed for construction, however, it has rot and leans towards the proposed home and will be a harard in the future. Tree 57 has rot in the main stem and should be monitored as it is near the parking area. Tree 60 is already dead. The leach field will be constructed in ITEM NUMBER DATE: 1/20/04 close proximity to trees #14, 15, 64, and 65. All root pruning methods described above shall be in place. The arborist(s) shall be present during portions of this activity. Total number of trees for removal is 34 with a total diameter of 597 inches. This averages to 17.6 inches per tree. The included spreadsheet(s) includes trees listed by number, species and multiple stems if applicable, diameter and breast height (4.5'), condition (scale from poor to excellent), status (avoided, impacted, removed, exempt), percent of drip line impacted, mitigation required (fencing), construction impact (house, road, etc.), and individual tree notes. Please let us know if we can be of any future assistance to you for this project. Steven G. Alvarez Certified Arborist #0511 Chip Tamagni -� Certified Arborist #6436-A �409Z71- ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 ---------------------- o��w��#u��o ��w»m#w�§ m 9§§!2 ! � �\\rrrerre»/re�re/�# ------------------- 00000000\00000/\m � ,/\� /\// «e G ®e <& 3 A 3 G e=-�� e o = _ ®w ©� = c w - e ®= 2( w i }\/ \\--------------------- Ge � u w � � » u u � = w � � _ � a a � � � § ) # m§; „ @m % \! 2 . fYl \ \ ) > 2 . . ., • . yq " 9 9 9 9 e 9 ® 9 5 9 ® 2 wJsw (§ m l e m } §!7(\ f7/fƒ7$7ƒ/ƒ/7f//ffƒ7tG §§}\) EEErEf/&\EEEEE\EEEE&)\ m \ ) % _ -- 2§!/ % -Ti% 2 % 2\ 2% 2% 2 2% � j \ - \ - \ - R - \ \ - - / G / 3 m §\\co e== - e - 3 2 2 3 � 2 B �- $ \// F7F/F/{%ƒzzzz¢¢zzzzz(§� § 0 0 0 o m, o 0 0 0 o m/ \\ § n7_ \§� 0 /$ 2 \2 �» )�� < ± , m ff a�� 2. 2co � && (D zm && /$ 2 �» )�� ± ff a�� && && ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 ---------------------- � Oc00o�l�Ch�a W N�OtD00'V OU11a W N -►#m m yy A 6 A A A x T O O r OOr00000000r-r-OOOOr-r-Om� r r r r r r r r r r r r r r� C o m y X X O X X X X X X X X O O X X X X O O X n m N a = z (T N .A N N N A W W N N N A W W i m 71 r A ~O y li 0 r H ° N OD -i N W W J N N N A --� W N co W W W (p -. N N O N W W -P W -� N N� -i 00 N 0= O S W A o - 0 Z o m p t n A A O D m 'a o W W (T W W Cl) W W .p N co A .p W W W N W .p O� z � T O D Z m -+ m A O Z F N n 1 O C � cn cn cn cn cn v, �_ v cn 0 cn 0 cn 0 cn 0 cn 0 v, 0 cn 0 0 o 3 v n Z d% m n n -i m Ou o � O m wo" y y m N H 0 ff1 Q 0 tll Q 0 N Q 0 v Q 0 N Q 0 fl) Q 0 fl1 Q 0 A7 Q 0 Q1 a 0 Al Q 0 O Q 0 a) Q 0 N Q 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 SU 0 A D Z n - p? T Z W Q Q Q Q Q Q Q nin O O O c W 2 Z C m N c n e n n n n n � � p 00 4 m i t0 c0 c0 cQ cp c0 c0 D O D H n rZ O O p O 3 R=1 a i U) (n O O O O O O O O O O O O O� Z� p o m � 0 2 A - 2 n 2 IR-T A 7 � Cl C -------------- A C 2 7 fl1 N V/ v v Q O rn m r � -a O m m a a a E m m Z3 a' Q a ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 rn cn cJ+ cn Ut (1t c1t cn to tl� to l� A A ,A A A A A J� A OCfl00�10(77� W N-�Oc00oVO>Ch�W 1 m A O p r ° a rrrOOrrrrrrrOrr00r-r- T ° O m � o� m T _ O O O X X O O O O O O O X O O X X O O O m m m N n 2 p " _o z � W N N .A W V Ul o " z ° z 3 8 0 N V O N W A' Ut 01 O coO W p � W C a- 2 Z O O % ° _ O - ° F m L n O -i m - y O W A W A �A W W N -� N W N W W N W W .P CT Z � O p m --� m O g -- N n �O � cZn cn cn cn u, cn cn cn ' � cn 0 cn 0 cr 0 cn 0 0 "-` 0 o D r Q% m m A o () Z O Q 9 N 2 n A D �7 3 n o 0 ��� 0 0 0 3� 0 0 3 0 3� 0 0 3��� 0 0 0 0 3� 0 0 3 0 3� 0 0 3� 0 0 v 0 D Z y n 3 C)- a m m m m m m m m m m cu m m rn m m m Cl- �� = cD z W i p o " n m m m m m m p3 a ~ H o N n cTo A O� D� y c A m0 o _O 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 O� D yy A y n z r Z ° i c Z Z Z� Z Z Z Z Z Z� Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z p p m m o A f O O O � O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Z O� � 2 o N Z m '1 ---------------------o O z C1 � 5 a x b r c azo j S 4> n F � �o� m v v C O Cl 7 Q' � iv 7 S O � CD (D 3 (n 0) (1)om Z m a a -j- (D F � �o� m v v S O (D ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 %?q2±mak \)k) / \ � \ � § ) /x o x o e m e w m° \\k§\ \ 9 § w §p \} n� )k )( � � � � �) k # §� ` § ) - - = 2 2 a ° E3 /g m \\ \ \\{{/ ® ®®_ � ° % 7 / G S G / \ § , ; 3& wee / 22 7] a \ /\k 3[ _\$ ` ^\(k \) \!( � \§ m \ %} » U) (n $� 0 n7 \\ o }[ � § =G $� 0 n7 \\ � § =G ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Attachment 5 Draft Resolution DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2004-0001 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT TO ALLOW THE REMOVAL OF THIRTY-FOUR NATIVE OAK TREES LOCATED AT 2145 SAN FERNANDO RD, APN 049-281-005. (TRP 2003-0043/POULIN) WHEREAS, an application for a Tree Removal Permit has been received from Mike Poulin, 814 E. Foster Rd., Santa Maria, CA 93455 to allow the removal of thirty-four native oak trees located at 2145 San Fernando Rd.; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project is located within the Rural Estate land use designation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use Diagram; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project is located in the Residential Suburban zoning district; and, WHEREAS; the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Tree Removal application on January 20, 2004 and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public; and, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of Tree Removal Permit. The Planning Commission finds as follows: The tree is obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: ■ Early consultation with the City; ■ Consideration of practical design alternatives; ■ Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; ■ If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property; or ■ If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 SECTION 2. Approval. The Planning Commission hereby approves Tree Removal Permit 2004-0043 subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits: Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval Exhibit B: Tree Protection Plan Exhibit C: Site 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: (0) NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Roberta Fonzi Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Warren M. Frace Planning Commission Secretary (0) (0) (0) ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 1/20/04 Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval Tree Removal - TRP 2004-0043 Conditions of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TRP 2004-0043 /Monitoring Measure PR: Pnorto Removal PS: Planning Services BL: Business License BS: Building Services BP: Building Permit FD: Fire Department TO: Temporary Occupancy PD: Police Department FO: Final Occupancy CE: City Engineer WW: Wastewater CA: City Attorney Planning Services 1. The applicant shall pay $5,058.33 into the tree fund as FO PS mitigation for the tree removal as shown in the attached table. Should the number of necessary tree removals be decreased or increased through project alteration, the total fee shall be recalculated based on the requirements set forth in the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 2. No tree removals shall be allowed prior to the issuance of a BP PS grading permit. 3. The proposed driveway shall incorporate retaining walls to PPN PS minimize native tree impacts. 4. The project design shall incorporate the retention of trees PPN PS #52, #53 and #54 5. All underground utilities shall be routed with the proposed BP PS driveway. 6. Native trees with greater than 40% dripline encroachment BP PS shall require a mitigation deposit consistent with fee requirements set forth in the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. Deposits shall be refunded after the completion of the project once a certified arborist establishes a high chance of survivability for such impacted trees. 7. A Pre -construction meeting shall be required prior to BP PS grading/building permit issuance. 8. Monitoring of construction activities by a certified arborist BP PS shall be required throughout the entirety of the project. 9. Prior to building permit final, a letter from the certified project BP PS arborist certifying construction activity in relation to on-site trees shall be required. Tree Mitigation Table 1 Evergreen Native Trees (inches) Mitigation Requirement Tree Fund Payment: $ ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Deciduous Native Trees (inches) notes dbh notes 3 10 -inches Total 10 -inches 4,891.67 Tree Fund Payment: $ 166.67 Totals 597 -inches $ 5,058.33 dbh 1 23 -inches 2 21 -inches 4 9 -inches 5 12 -inches 6 15 -inches 7 7 -inches 8 26 -inches 9 18 -inches 10 5 -inches 11 22 -inches 12 31 -inches 13 21 -inches 14 19 -inches 15 39 -inches 16 13 -inches 17 6 -inches 18 12 -inches 19 6 -inches 20 75 -inches 21 35 -inches 22 4 -inches 23 13 -inches 24 32 -inches 25 9 -inches 26 22 -inches 27 5 -inches 28 13 -inches 29 11 -inches 30 15 -inches 31 6 -inches 32 10 -inches 33 22 -inches 34 10 -inches Total 587 -inches Mitigation Requirement Tree Fund Payment: $ ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Deciduous Native Trees (inches) notes dbh notes 3 10 -inches Total 10 -inches 4,891.67 Tree Fund Payment: $ 166.67 Totals 597 -inches $ 5,058.33 ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 1/20/04 Exhibit B: Tree Protection Plan Tree Removal - TRP 2003-0036 ��� �� ! � �I . YY.YpYY�YYYYY11ii. YYYYY it r i � r rrrr_Orr ��r Pr, r, � .ll Irr . � � +d `i� ds SII !! nun�tl� tt+ .a..c�..�. .., .. . i ,'t t`rlf ;ili 1;i1� {ihr�1 � } , {,! �•,i ,+ .�,y 1 f, tf' ' ,x ITEM NUMBER DATE: 1/20/04 Exhibit C: Site Plan Tree Removal - TRP 2003-0036 r;� I II 11 \\Cityhall\cdvlpmnt\- TRP - Tree Removal Permits\TRP 04\TRP 2004-0043. 2145 San Fernando\TRP 2004-0043 2145 San Fernando Rd.PC-SR.doc