HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2003-10-21_AgendaPacketCITY OFATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Regular Meeting
October 21, 2003 — 7:00 P.M.
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Ave. — 4th Floor - 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 SEPTEMBER 16, 2003.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON OCTOBER 7, 2003.
3. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PC 2003-0091 DENYING A TREE REMOVAL
PERMIT LOCATED AT 8270 TOLOSO ROAD (TRP 2003-0039: MIKE
MESSER).
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).)
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0095: 9190 SAN DIEGO WAY: 88 -UNIT
APARTMENT COMPLEX
Applicant:
JRM Enterprises, 1050 Herdsman Way, Templeton, CA 93465 Phone: 238-5313
Project Title:
Southside Villas Apartments — CUP 2003-0095 for a 86 -unit Multi -Family Residential Development
Project
San Diego Way Lots 9, 11, 12, and 13; Block 66, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 045-352-002, 003, 004, 006, 007.
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit to establish an 86 -unit
Description:
apartment development. The project will include 74 two bedroom units of approximately 857 square
Description:
feet and 12 three bedroom units of approximately 1048 square feet. No native oak trees are proposed
for removal.
General Plan Designation: High Density Multi -Family
Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family — 16
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 through 10/21/03 at 6500
Determination:
Palma Avenue, Community Development Dept., from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
5. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2002-0023: 8805 SAN RAFAEL 5 -LOT
Applicant:
Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422, 461-7504
Owner:
Eagle Ranch LLC, P.O. Box 25010, Ventura, CA 93002, (805) 648-3363
Project Title:
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023
Project
8805 San Rafael Road, 8550 San Gabriel Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 049-311-005 / 056-371-018
Project
The proposed project consists of a tract map subdividing three existing vacant lots into five parcels.
Description:
Five parcels will be created allowing the development of five vacant individual residences. The project
includes building envelopes with proposed driveways for each lot. The project site is located within
the Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district. The new development will take access from San Rafael
Road and from an access easement across lot four. Onsite septic systems will be used for wastewater
and water service will be provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company.
General Plan Designation: RE
Zoning District: RS
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 through 10/21/03 at 6500
Determination:
Palma Avenue, Community Development Dept., from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0100: HOTEL PARK OFFICE
Applicant:
Hotel Park Group, PO Box 1980, Atascadero, CA 93423
Project Title:
Modification to the master site plan established for Hotel Park
Project
5855 Capistrano Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
APN 029-363-024
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the original
Description:
master site plan for the Hotel Park development. The proposed changes relate to phase II building
architecture. One oak tree is proposed for removal.
Proposed
The proposed project is within the scope of the improvements included within the original Master Plan
Environmental
of Development PPN 30-87. No new impacts are associated with the modified building designs.
Determination:
tentative tract map (TTM 2003-0020). The project will include a 45.9 -acre open space parcel that will
7. ZONE CHANGE 2003-0069 / CUP 2002-0072 / TTM 2002-0020
Applicant:
Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422, 461-7504
Project Title:
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Project)
ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2002-0072 / TTM 2002-0020
Project Location:
805 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422: APN 049-043-002
Project Description:
The proposed project consists of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit (CUP 2000-0008)
to allow a 26 unit single family subdivision with a 60 unit seniors complex, know as the Rochelle
Residential Project. A use permit for a 186 -space recreational vehicle park currently exists on the site.
The applications consist of a zoning code text change to PD -9 (ZCH 2003-0069), a Master Plan of
Development for Planned Development 9 (PD -9) (conditional use permit, CUP 2003-0072) and a
tentative tract map (TTM 2003-0020). The project will include a 45.9 -acre open space parcel that will
protect the Salinas River flood plain area and provide a public park site. The site is bordered by the
Union Pacific Railroad to the south, the Salinas River to the north and Paso Robles Creek to the west.
Graves Creek bisects the site. Development areas are limited to flat bluffs above the riparian areas that
have been historically used for dry farming. Project access will be from El Camino Real in the form of a
grade separated railroad crossing bridge which is currently under construction as part of a separate
project. The site has a General Plan Designation of SFR -X (Single Family Residential 1/2 ac minimum),
CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space) and a Zoning District RSF-X (Residential Single
Family 1/2 ac minimum), LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned Development 9
overlay.
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 through 10/21/03 at 6500 Palma
Determination:
Avenue, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be November 4, 2003 at City Hall in
the 4th Floor Rotunda, 6500 Palma 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 atlor prior to this public hearing.
1\CityhaII\CDvlpmnt\— PC Agendas\PC 2003\PC Agenda. 10-21-03.word.am.doc
City ofAtascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADER0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEE TING
The Planning Commission meets in regular session on the first and third Tuesday of each month
at 7: 00 p.m., in the Rotunda of City Hall. 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 business hours at the Permit Center counter. 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 office.
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) 461-5010, or the
City Clerk's Office, (805) 461-5074. 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.
The Chairperson will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public
comments will be heard by the Commission.
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).
Cdvlpmnt/PC Agenda/ -Welcome and meeting information1doc
DRAFT
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 10/21/03
CITY OF A TASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
September 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, City Engineer Steve Kahn, Associate Civil Engineer Jeff van den
Eikhof, Associate Planner Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner Kerry Margason,
Assistant Planner Lisa Wilkinson, Fire Chief Kurt Stone and Recording Secretary
Grace Pucci.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to approve the
agenda.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, Bentz, Beraud, O'Keefe, Porter, Kelley and Chairperson
Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 2, 2003.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to approve the
Consent Calendar
AYES: Commissioners Bentz, Beraud, Porter, O'Keefe, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Jones
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, drew the Commissions attention to the City Council's strategic
planning session and the informal direction given to pursue extending the second units beyond
the current zone in which they are allowed to any area in the City with one -acre lots or more.
Mr. Greening felt this directive would have considerable implications for the General Plan and
its Environmental Review, and in relation to the City's adoption of smart growth principles.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
Community Development Director Warren Frace introduced new Assistant Planner Lisa
Wilkinson to the Commission.
2. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2003-0039: 8270 TOLOSO ROAD
Request to remove thirty-three (33) native oak trees, two of which are in excess of
24"dbh, in conjunction with the development of an 3,416 square foot single-family home
located at 8270 Toloso Road (APN 056-411-023)
Staff recommends:
The Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC 2003-0091 to approve the request to
remove twenty-four (24) native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation
required by the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance.
Associate Planner Kelly Gleason provided the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
Chairperson Fonzi entered into the record a letter frorn Gordon R. Hensley, Executive Director
of Environment in the Public Interest. (Exhibit A)
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mike Messer, applicant, described the home he wishes to construct and spoke about the site and
the process he pursued in an attempt to save more trees on the property. He felt the proposed
project is the best he can do in order to make this home design work on the site. Mr. Messer
answered questions of the Commission.
Commissioner Jones asked the applicant to describe the process he went through with staff to
determine how to save more trees on the site, i.e. the use of stem walls, etc. Mr. Messer stated
that he has not considered the use of stem walls and that originally they had a much larger pad
for the house and allowed for a larger yard in the back which then pushed the toe of the fill
further out and impacted more trees.
Chairperson Fonzi questioned whether the applicant had considered a two story home rather than
a long one story. Mr. Messer stated that he had not, he has a house plan that he has built before
and is pleased with, and this is the house he wants to build.
Vice Chairperson Kelley asked Mr. Messer if he had given any thought to a raised foundation as
it seems on that lot the cost of tree removal and the mitigation fees would be more costly than
just doing a raised foundation, which would create fewer impacts on the lot. The applicant stated
that he is looking at this project from the point of view of either himself or somebody living in
the house and enjoying the area with a little yard to enjoy the view, and he feels the submitted
plan is the best use of the property.
Eric Greening felt that the Commission would be unable to make the findings as required. Many
of the remaining lots in the community are difficult to build upon and as a result many trees are
being removed to accommodate single-family homes. He does not feel that the EIR on the
General Plan countenanced the taking of the thousands of trees that this type of development
would generate given the difficulty of building on those lots. Mr. Greening encouraged the
Commission to be conservative in defining the word "reasonable, " and encouraged some of the
construction alternatives already discussed by the Commissioners. He also reminded the
Commission that most of these trees are in good condition, and the fact that they have a small
diameter does not make them less valuable.
Clement Salvadore, 8240 Toloso Road, stated that he has lived in the area for 12 years and is
taken aback by the number of trees slated for removal on the applicant's lot. He felt this project
is better suited to a flat lot with no trees, and is not suitable for Tolosa Road. Additionally the
removal of this many trees is opposed to the intent of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance.
Galen Little, 8265 Toloso Road, indicated that he lives directly across the street from the subject
property as well as being a contractor and developer. He has looked at this site and felt
something with a raised foundation would be more suitable to the lot. He encouraged the
applicant to hire an architect to design a structure for the site instead of forcing the site to fit the
current house plan. Mr. Little answered questions of the Commission.
Thomas Marks, 8251 Toloso Road, gave a brief history of the development of this area. He
expressed shock over the number of trees to be removed and felt the applicant should design his
home to fit the property.
Robert Johnson, Toloso Road, said he agreed with the other speakers and felt the plan for this
home was not appropriate for the lot. He also felt the home should be built for the lot and felt the
photographs in the staff report misrepresented the terrain of the site, as they made it look flat
when in reality there is in excess of a 30 degree slope.
Ron Kapal, 8165 Casenada Lane, stated that he supports the views of the other speakers.
Commissioner Jones requested that the applicant respond to the concerns addressed by the
previous speakers. Mr. Messer made the following responses: 1) he will live in the home once it
is built, it is not a spec home, 2) this is not just a dollars and cents approach to developing the
property, and 3) he wants the house to work on the site. Regarding stem walls and other designs,
he stated he had looked at doing a two-story house and felt certain constraints such as the
driveway approach, and the buildable area (which is very narrow) would still require grading.
Chairman Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
Vice Chairperson Kelley stated he believes in property rights and feels there is not a lot of area
on this lot to build a house without impacting trees, however, if the applicant would just do the
stem wall and use that type of construction, all tree impact to the right of the site would be
eliminated. He also felt the decision to build a one or two story house should be made by the
applicant.
Commissioner Jones indicated that he would have a difficult time making the findings that would
satisfy the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance as well as those presented by staff. He feels that
the applicant hasn't considered other design alternatives, and it appears hasn't discussed any
alternatives with staff and for this reason he is unable to vote for the project as it currently
stands.
Commissioner O'Keefe thanked the neighbors for coming out and speaking on behalf of a more
site -sensitive design. She indicated that she also was unable to make the finding that practical
design alternatives were looked at, something that is a requirement in the Tree Ordinance. For
this reason she is unable to support this particular design on this lot.
Commissioner Porter felt that there are practical ways through design alternatives to save many
of the trees on the property, and he is hopeful that the applicant will take some of the suggestions
discussed by the Commission and try to implement them on this lot. He also is unable to make
the findings required.
Commissioner Beraud stated that she was in accordance with the views expressed by the
Commission. She reviewed the criteria the applicant must meet to make the findings, and felt the
Commission must set standards for this type of lot that will assist the planning staff in suggesting
design alternatives to future applicants. Commissioner Beraud will vote against the project.
MOTION: By Commissioner O'Keefe and seconded by Chairperson Fonzi to deny the
request for the removal of the 24 trees that the applicant is requesting.
Vice Chairperson Kelley suggested continuing this item rather than denying it so the applicant
could work with staff without paying additional fees.
Chairperson Fonzi asked staff for direction on this suggestion.
Director Frace indicated that the Commission could take either option; both would have the same
effect. If the permit were denied the project would have to be redesigned and reprocessed for
Commission approval. If it is sent back to staff for the applicant to redesign, there would be the
same effect. Director Frace stated that staff understands that the Commission feels the tree
removals and grading are excessive and that they would like to see the project redesigned to
minimize the tree removals. He felt it would be cleaner to just refer the item back to staff with
this direction and staff could work with the applicant to redesign the project and bring it back to
the Commission.
Commissioner O'Keefe withdrew her motion, and Chairperson Fonzi withdrew her second.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to direct the
applicant to go back to staff to work with staff to satisfy the conditions of the Tree
Ordinance to consider alternative designs and also some of the cost comparison
design work that needs to be done and to have staff bring it back at such time that
it is ready for the Commission to hear.
AYES: Commissioners, Jones, O'Keefe, Porter, Beraud, Bentz, Kelley and Chairperson
Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. EL CENTRO PD MPD AMENDMENT
Applicant:
Steve Nino, 910 Monterey St #2, Hollister, CA 95023
Project Title:
EI Centro Oaks: Amendment to the Master Plan of Development (General Plan Amendment
97005, Zone Change 97005, Tentative Tract Map 99008
Project Location:
EI Centro Road and Cascada Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 030-522-030
Project
The proposed project is an amendment to the original Master Plan of Development for EI
Description:
Centro Oaks PD -7 in regards to project fencing design and location.
General Plan Designation: HDR
Zonin District: RMF-16/PD-7
Proposed
CEQA Exempt. The proposed modifications are within the scope of the project Mitigated
Environmental
Negative Declaration certified on October 12, 1999.
Determination
Vice Chairperson Kelley stated that he would be stepping down from consideration of this item
because he will be representing the applicant in the marketing of these homes.
Associate Planner Kelly Gleason provided the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Bob Kelley, applicant's representative, 9955 Calle Refugio, addressed the issues raised by the
Commission, and explained the applicant's reasons for making this request. Mr. Kelley
answered questions of the Commission.
Phillip Knight, 8755 El Centro, stated he lives near the project and feels the existing fence is of
poor quality and sub standard compared with the other fences in the area. He has no objections
to putting in the fence, but would like to see quality of materials and workmanship. Regarding
the drainage basin, he suggested it would be better to continue the fence to El Centro Road.
Bob Kelley addressed the issues raised by Mr. Knight. 1) The warped boards will be replaced
and the fence will be of high quality when complete, 2) fences are not complete because they are
awaiting a determination on how to address the drainage area, and 3) the applicant would like to
continue the wooden fence along the drainage barrier and continue it to the street.
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
There was Commission discussion regarding the payment of development impact fees if the park
area were fenced.
Mr. Kelley came forward to state that he has been instructed by the applicant that the purpose of
this request was to protect the homeowners and their liabilities, however if it is to become a
major issue he will waive that part of the application and will put in the park as originally
planned.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Porter to adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0074 subject to the findings in Section 1, Section 2 and
Section 3, but with the removal of the drainage basin fence plan, also that in light
of the comments made by the neighbor as well as the applicant's agent that the
solid wood fence be appropriate to be placed there, that it be in a quality condition
and that the existing wooden fence that has some problems with it either be
replaced or repaired.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, Porter, O'Keefe, Beraud, Bentz and Chairperson Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote.
4. ZCH 2003-0048, CUP 2003-0098, TTM 2003-0032: 4900 OBISPO 8 -LOT PD -17
Applicant:
Ron Shores, 2940 Ardilla Way, Atascadero, CA 93422 Phone: 805/466-2767
Project Title:
Zone Change 2003-0048, Conditional Use Permit 2003-0098, Tentative Tract Map 2003-
0032 for an 8 -lot single-family residential subdivision.
Project
4900 Obispo Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 049-102-055
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Planned Development Overlay Zone,
Description:
Conditional Use Permit, and Tentative Tract Map. The proposed project consists of a 2.36 -
acre parcel consisting of seven new single-family homes and the retention of one existing
single-family home located on individual lots that will be developed under the requirements of
PD -17 overlay district with the Residential Single Family -X (RSF-X) zoning district. The
project will include 8 lots ranging approximately from 0.25 of an acre to 0.39 of an acre. The
new homes will range in size from 2,090 square feet to 2,110 square feet. The existing home
will remain in its present size and location. The project includes one home per lot each with a
two car attached garage and driveway. The project will not require removal of any native oak
trees.
General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential -X
Zoning District: Residential Single Family -X
Vice Chairperson Kelley rejoined the hearing.
Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris provided the staff report and answered questions of
the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Russ Thompson, R. Thompson Consulting, applicant's representative, expressed the following
concern with the Conditions of Approval: Final alignment of sewer connection, the applicant
would like a clause added at the end of Condition No. 31 in the P.D. and Condition No. 20 in the
Tract Map, to read "or other suitable easements as approved by the City Engineer." This would
allow the applicant to pursue obtaining a sewer easement from the adjacent property owner
through the commercial property down to El Camino Real. Mr. Thompson answered questions
of the Commission.
Larry Thibault, Beauwest LLC, property owner in the area of this project, felt the Commission
should look at future development of surrounding properties and whether they would like to tie
into the sewer. He felt it would be in the City's best interest to bring the sewer down Del Rio
Road.
Mike Lewis, property owner on adjoining lot, expressed the following concerns: 1) over
trimming of trees by arborist when applicant took possession of the site, 2) traffic impacts on
Obispo Road, 3) RFX zone is only one street away from his home and he feels type of zoning
will spread thus defeating the City's plan of providing larger lots away from the town center, and
4) major impact with 1/4 acre lots which are out of character with the community. Mr. Lewis
disagrees with the project and feels it does not conform to the neighborhood or the General Plan.
Eric Greening questioned the consistency of this project with the neighborhood character. He
questioned the drainage on one side of the property and how it was to be handled.
Ron Schmelzer, 4800 Obispo Road, felt the project is not in character with the rural aspect of the
neighborhood. He also stated that Obispo Road is too narrow as it now stands and is in need of
repair.
Dan Higanbothom, 4820 Obispo Road, stated his agreement with his neighbors in that this
project does not fit with the character of the neighborhood. He felt approving this project would
start a precedent with 1/4 acre lots. He would like to see the zoning remain as it is or at the most
go to 1/2 acre.
Mike Lewis stated that the existing home on the property is 1,600 square feet not inclusive of the
garage. He also stated that he had planted the 30 to 40 cedar trees on the property, which would
be wiped out with this proposal.
Eric Greening expressed concern with site distance from the road junction and asked what the
site distance actually is.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Fonzi asked the applicant's representative and staff to address concerns raised
during the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Fond recessed the hearing at 9:25 p.m.
Chairperson Fond called the meeting back to order at 9:35 p.m.
Commissioner Beraud felt this was a very rural area and for this reason has difficulty with
making the finding that this project is consistent with the General Plan. Commissioner Beraud
referred to the following sections of the General Plan:
1. Pg II -13, Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Goals, Policies and Programs:
Goal l: To protect and preserve the rural atmosphere of the community by assuring
elbowroom for residents, that means the maintenance of large lot sizes, which increase in
proportion in a distance beyond the urban core. (This development is beyond the urban
core)
Program 2 & 3: Concentrate higher density development downtown and within the urban
core and focus master plan commercial uses at distinct nodes along arterial corridors.
Program 4: Outside the urban core—Single-family neighborhoods maintain lot sizes of
2.5 to 10 acres (Residential Suburban).
Commissioner Beraud believes that SFX permits Planned Developments, but in this situation it is
so far from the urban core that she does not feel it is appropriate or consistent with the
neighborhood.
2. Pg. II -22, Preserve residential neighborhoods and the winding tree -lined nature of the
street and road system.
Program l: Require that the appearance, mass and scale of multi -family development is
compatible with adjacent single-family neighborhoods.
Commissioner Beraud commented that there are a large number of lots with livestock on them
and she is uncertain that a development at this scale is compatible with the surrounding uses.
3. Pg. V-7, General Plan Housing Element, Policy 8.A.: Encourage conservation and
preservation of neighborhoods and the housing stock.
She agrees there is a need for affordable housing, but one unit will not make a big difference and
there are more appropriate locations within the city to meet this goal. Again, she stated she has a
difficult time supporting this project as it has been presented. She would prefer the applicant not
do a PD and stay with the density that is allowed in the SXF zone.
Commissioner Jones discussed the zoning in this area and reminded the Commissioners that a
large, dense project was approved at their last meeting to the south of town, far from the core of
the city. He felt there are corridors where higher density is appropriate. Commissioner Jones
felt the project was appropriate for this area.
Commissioner O'Keefe felt this was an attractive Planned Development in the wrong place. She
stated that a more appropriate transition would be % acre lots and is concerned that this
development is not providing inclusionary housing. Commissioner O'Keefe stated she could not
make the finding that this development is compatible with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Bentz stated that the Commission must uphold the laws passed by the City
Council and based on their direction he cannot find any reason to not support the project.
Commissioner Porter felt this project was a good transition from commercially designated
property to the larger 2-'/2 acre estate lots. He felt much thought has been put into this project
and that the developer has followed the inclusionary guidelines set forth by the City Council.
Vice Chairperson Kelley indicated that this project was a fine balance given the several different
zoning designations in the area. He felt the core is moving outward and expressed his agreement
with Commissioner Bentz's comments. Vice Chairperson Kelley suggested including a deeded
disclosure that states properties to the north are large and have the right to have animals and
properties to the west will support commercial activities.
Chairperson Fonzi raised the following issues: 1) workforce housing should be incorporated into
the project, 2) sewer addition must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, and 3) there should
be a site distance analysis for this project. Chairperson Fonzi stated that she likes the housing
proposed for this site, however she feels the density is not compatible with the surrounding
acreage.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by Commissioner Jones to adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0087 recommending that the City Council certify
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0045; and, adopt Resolution No.
PC 2003-0088 recommending that the City council introduce an ordinance for
first reading to approve Zone Change 2003-0048 based on findings; and, adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0089 recommending that the city council approve the
Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0098) based on findings and subject to
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Resolution No. PC
2003-0090 recommending the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map 2003-0032 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and
Mitigation Monitoring, along with a modification on Conditions 29 and 31 adding
the words "or other suitable easement approved by City Engineer," that a site
distance study for the driveway be required for the site, that citizens of Atascadero
have first opportunity to buy the housing for a 60 day period, and that there be a
deed disclosure that there is rural property to the north that allows animals and
also there is commercial property to the west that borders the property.
AYES: Commissioners Bentz, Jones, Porter and Kelley
NOES: Commissioners Beraud, O'Keefe and Chairperson Fonzi
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 4:3 by a roll -call vote.
Chairperson Fonzi polled the audience to determine how many were present for Items No. 5 and
6. Based on this polling there was Commission consensus to switch the order of these two
Items.
5. TTM 2003-0029, RAB 2003-0012 ENCINO/ATAJO 6 LOT Map
Applicant:
Don Messer PO Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93422, 805/466-0549
Project Title:
Road Abandonment 2003-0012
Tentative Tract Map 2003-0029
Project
4.5 vacant acres located at the end of Encino Road between Atajo Road, Atascadero, CA
Location:
93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 031-091-005, 006, 008, 009, 031-092-016
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for Road Abandonment and a six lot tract
Description:
map. The project would result in the abandonment and realignment of a portion of Encino
Road and the adjustment of six existing lots of record, no new lots would be created. The
purpose of the project is to minimize hillside grading and impacts to native trees. The site
is consists of steep wooded slopes with Live Oak and White Oak woodlands and a portion
of an un -named blue line creek. The project includes the removal of 133 native oak trees.
General Plan Designation: SFR -Z (Single -Family Residential 1.5 — 2.5 acre minimum lot
size)
Zoning District: RSF- Z (Residential Single -Family 1.5 — 2.5 acre minimum lot size)
Community Development Director Warren Frace provided the staff report and answered
questions of the Commission.
Commissioner Beraud raised questions regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and made
the following references:
1. Pg. 273, Aesthetics: "Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista."
Commissioner Beraud referred to the aerial photo and questioned if taking out greater
than 30 % of the trees would have an effect on the surrounding neighbors' view of that
property. Director Frace stated that removing the trees would change the viewshed, but
staff did not believe that qualifies as a "scenic vista" under the CEQA thresholds as it
impacts only the surrounding neighborhood and does not have a city-wide impact.
2. Pg 275, Biological Resources: "Have a substantial adverse effect either directly or
through habitat modifications on any species identified as a candidate..."
Commissioner Beraud's concern is the blue -line creek. She agrees it is good that they
changed the lot line, but taking out over 1/3 of the trees may have an effect on the
downhill in terms of the amount of water, siltation, etc. Director Frace responded this
section deals with different candidate species that are listed as threatened or endangered
by U.S. Fish and Wildlife and although the oaks are locally protected, they aren't a
threatened species that is protected at a state or federal level. Within the blue -line creek
there are some endangered species so if the creek were to be filled or significantly
changed, there could possiblY be an impact, but this project doesn't have those impacts
on the creek as it doesn't touch the creek and any development is a good distance from
the actual channel. There are standards that insure any grading and site work doesn't
create off site silt or water population that could impact the blue -line creek.
3. Pg. 278, Geology and Soils: This section addresses landslides and Commissioner Beraud
is uncertain how stable the slopes are in Atascadero, and with the removal of that amount
of root material with the trees being gone, she questioned if that would have an effect on
the stability of that slope. Director Frace indicated that all hillsides have some potential
for slippage, but this site doesn't have any known high potential. There is a requirement
that soil studies be done on all the sites, so they will have to have the soil engineering
done prior to construction on these units.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Ken Wilson, applicant's representative, gave a brief background on the project and discussed the
plans for the site. He made the following requests: 1) that the fire road be build by others, 2) if
there is to be a fire road to return to the agreed upon 20 foot top to toe as opposed to the 28 foot
top to toe as requested by the City Engineer, and 3) would like the option to be able to do an
overhead power line through the trees to get to the road and then go underground. Mr. Wilson
answered questions of the Commission.
Tom Novak, 5740 Encino, stated he is concerned about the impact on Encino Road from the
heavy equipment and would like to have a condition placed on the project that would require the
applicant to repair the road before any of his homes can be sold. He questioned why the fire road
is being required and if it must be built, he asked that a barrier be installed.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to continue past
11:00 P.M.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, O'Keefe, Porter, Bentz, Beraud, Kelley and Chairperson
Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote.
Cindy Sazer, Allemande Lane, stated that her property backs up to the proposed fire road. In
relation to the road she expressed concern with the number of tree removals it will require and
the impact that will have, the steepness of the grade for the road, and soil erosion. She is
particularly concerned with the creation of a through road and the traffic it will bring. Ms. Sazer
stated she is willing to remove three of her oak trees to provide a way to cut across her property
to go from Encino to Allemande in case of an emergency.
Kevin Ashley, 5575 Allemande, stated he is concerned with the removal of trees on his property
for the new road.
Donald Baxter, Encino Road, expressed the following concerns: 1) Narrowness of Encino Road,
2) water runoff from his property to the properties below, and 3) the road should be paved its
entire length.
Ty Christensen stated he is not opposed to the project but felt it is important to preserve the
beauty of the area without increasing traffic and to preserve the trees along the road. He is not in
favor of allowing through traffic, but feels fire department access is important.
Celia Bewley, 5530 Encino, asked if blue oak trees are to be removed and stated her concern
with areas designated as having "no impact" in the negative declaration.
Mark Bewley, 5530 Encino, disagreed with the assertion that turnarounds could not be built, as
there is one in place already. He is not in favor of making Encino a through street.
Esteban Andrade, Allemande Lane, invited the Commission to visit the area to better consider
the impacts this project will have on the neighborhood.
Mike Newsom, 5185 Atajo, was concerned with the number of boxes in the EIR that were
marked as having no impact. He shared his experience with the blue line creek flooding several
years ago and suggested the building sites for lots one and three be pushed up higher on the site.
Mr. Newsom also noted that the blue line creek is the habitat area for this location and is home to
deer, fox, snakes, salamanders, etc., all of which will be impacted by this development. He also
expressed concern for Chauplin Road and asked the City, if it is going to allow additional traffic
through this area, to adopt this road and bring it up to standard.
Elizabeth Romer, 5305 Portola, discussed her concern with the way the road starts from Atajo
and the potential for seasonal flooding.
Eric Greening stated he supports the concerns raised by other speakers and feels the Commission
does not have a valid Negative Declaration in front of them. He is concerned with the section on
biology and tree impacts particularly the future clearance of trees for fire protection.
Debra Bias, 5655 Encino Avenue, made the following points: 1) she is in favor of a paved fire
road if it is gated, 2) impacts to the value of her property if Encino is widened, 3) loss of security
if street becomes a throughway, 4) the danger of additional traffic on the intersection at Encino
and Santa Lucia.
Amy Briskeney, 5935 Encino Avenue, felt Encino Avenue needs turnarounds and is opposed to
the developers plan for mitigating the tree fund fee by preserving small portions of the area.
Sally Baxter, 5705 Encino Avenue, asked if the City will be maintaining the road the developer
is putting in on the Atajo side and if so, would they be willing to bring Encino up to standard and
maintain it.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
Commissioner Jones indicated that he would like to see this item go back to staff. He is
concerned with the fire road and removal of so many trees.
Commissioner Bentz stated he feels the residents have legitimate concerns with making Encino a
through street and if possible he would like the street to remain as is. He is in favor of sending
this item back to staff.
Commissioner O'Keefe felt if there were no fire road, there must be a turnaround and she would
like staff to explore the offer made by Ms. Sazar with regard to using her property as an
emergency exit. Additionally she feels there should be a biological assessment.
Vice Chairperson Kelley agreed with the Fire Chief that there should be something there to fight
fires but feels there should not be a through road on Encino. For this reason he would like to see
this item go back to staff to work out where the fire road can be put, reducing the width of the
road and saving more trees.
Commissioner O'Keefe suggested adding a condition that the road be put back into the condition
it was in prior to construction.
Commissioner Beraud felt the Negative Declaration needs further work. She would like the
Commission to reject the proposal that the segmented tree preservation zones be in lieu of the
fees, as those are impacted zones and she does not believe this is a fair exchange. She would
also like to see what could be worked out as a fire escape route with the offer from Cindy Sazar
and feels this item should be continued.
Commissioner Porter commented that the street must remain closed but with access for the Fire
Department.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Jones to send the
project back to City staff and that staff is to work in conjunction with the Fire
Department and the applicant regarding the fire access road, to get that worked
out as most of the Commission feels it should be there but not open to the public
for daily traffic, with no further EIR testing or biological testing, but rather to just
address the fire road issue and what the tree impact might be for the project.
Commissioner O'Keefe felt there does not need to be an EIR, but that there needs to be
additional information regarding the biological impacts, as the people who live there have raised
these concerns which they feel are serious but have been minimized in the negative declaration.
Commissioner Beraud stated she would be unable to support the motion unless it is modified or
the two issues are separated.
Commissioner Bentz called for the question.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, Bentz, Porter and Kelley
NOES: Commissioners Beraud, O'Keefe and Chairperson Fonzi
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 4:3 by a roll -call vote.
6. ZCH 2003-0045, TPM 2003-0040, CUP 2003-0094: 5516 TUNITAS 4 -LOT PD -7
Applicant:
Beauwest, LLC / Thibeault, Larry, 7400 Balboa, Atascadero, CA 93422.
Phone: 805/550-5857
Project Title:
5516 Tunitas Avenue Colony House; Zone Change 2003-0045, Conditional Use Permit
2003-0094; Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0040 for a 4 -lot PD -7 subdivision
Project
5516 Tunitas Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 (Single Family Residence)
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 029-081-003.
Location:
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit,
Description:
and Tentative Parcel Map. The proposed project consists of three new single-family homes
and the retention of one existing historic single-family home located on individual lots that will
be developed under the requirements of the PD -7 overlay district within the Residential Multi -
Family (RMF -10) zoning district. The two proposed residences nearest Rosario Avenue (Unit
A & B) are approximately 2269 square feet. The third proposed residence nearest Tunitas
(Unit C) is approximately 1287 square feet. The existing 1040 square foot home will remain
in its present size and location. The project includes one home per lot each with a two -car
garage. No native oak trees will require removal.
General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential — MDR
Zoning District: Residential Multiple Family — RMF -10
Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris provided the staff report and answered questions of
the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Larry Thibeault, Beauwest LLC, thanked staff and stated it was his intent that the project should
appear as though it had always been there. Mr. Thibeault answered questions of the
Commission.
Marge Mackay stated she lives two doors away from this site and does not like the way this
project looks. She feels unit C does not look like Colony architecture and she is also concerned
about increased traffic.
Lisa Mifsid, 5550 Bajada, indicated that she has the closest Colony home to this project and is
concerned with the look of the long home proposed. She is concerned with increased traffic and
noise from the project.
Annette Carlin, Tunitas, asked if there was a way to put the entrance on the Rosario side because
of the amount of traffic on Tunitas.
Rob Brown, 5550 Bajada, would like to see this area preserved and feels that the site appears to
be tightly packed especially the area between the Colony home and the proposed long home. He
would like to see fewer units.
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Fonzi asked staff and the applicant to respond to the concerns raised during the
Public Comment period.
Commissioner Jones stated he is pleased that this will not be another apartment project and he
likes the affordable unit offered. He is in favor of the project as designed.
Chairperson Fonzi agreed with Commissioner Jones. She referred to the design of unit C and
questioned whether the door could be placed at the front of the home.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0075 recommending that the City Council certify
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0034; and, adopt Resolution No.
PC 2003-0076 recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for
first reading to approve Zone Change 2003-0045 based on findings; and, adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0077 recommending that the City Council approve the
Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0094) based on findings with the Colony
House parcel parking exception limiting one on site guest parking space and
accepting less than the 40% required landscape area due to an on site driveway
and garage location subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring;
and, adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0078 recommending that the City Council
approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0040 based on findings and subject
to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, O'Keefe, Beraud, Porter, Bentz, Kelley and Chairperson
Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS
None
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Frace referred to an application for Big Bubba's Barbecue to expand into Atascadero.
He asked for Commission direction on the proposed theme building. There was consensus to
have a formal Commission review of the proposed building design.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Fonzi adjourned the meeting at 12:43 a.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting
on October 7, 2003.
MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary
The following Exhibits are available for review in the Community Development Department.
Exhibit A — Gordon R. Hensley, letter
\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\— PC Minutes\PC Minutes 03\PC New Draft Minutes. 09-16-031.gp.doc
DRAFT
ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10/21/03
CITY OF A TASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
October 7, 2003 — 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Commissioner O'Keefe 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, City Engineer Steve Kahn, Associate Civil Engineer Jeff van den
Eikhof, Associate Planner Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner Kerry Margason,
Assistant Planner Lisa Wilkinson, Information Technology Director Andrew
Fruin, Fire Chief Kurt Stone and Recording Secretary Grace Pucci.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairperson Fonzi requested that Item #9 be moved up to Item #5 to accommodate
representatives from Rite Aid who had flown in from Ohio.
There was Commission consensus to approve the amended agenda.
Chairperson Fonzi suggested the Commission revisit the agenda at about 9:30 p.m. to determine
if the hearing should be continued. There were no objections from the Commission to this
suggestion.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2003.
2. APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP 2003-0055: (PARCEL MAP ATAL 99-289)
9123 SAN RAFAEL: WORTHAN
Commissioner Beraud asked that her comments on the Encino project (page 8) and Obispo
project (page 10 and 12) from the meeting of September 16, 2003, be expanded upon for the
Minutes.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by Vice Chairperson Kelley to approve
Consent Calendar Item #2, and the Minutes of September 16, 2003 are to be
amended and presented at the next meeting.
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. BIG BUBBA'S BAD BBQ, 8050 EL CAMINO REAL, APPEARANCE REVIEW
PRESENTATION
Community Development Director Warren Frace and Redevelopment Specialist John Jansons
provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission.
Roger Sharp, applicant, asked for the Commission's support and discussed his restaurant, its
philosophy and distributed a report on his facility to the Commission (Exhibit A). Mr. Sharp
answered questions of the Commission.
Commissioner Beraud indicated that the only issue she has with the project is the tower and
asked if it were negotiable. Mr. Sharp stated that tower was designed to divert attention from the
trash dumpster and the negative aspects of the rear of the building.
Commissioner Bentz felt the applicant had a unique design for his restaurant, which attracts
customers, however he felt there could be room for some modification, but not enough to detract
from the distinctiveness of the building design.
Commissioner Jones stated that the placement of the restaurant on this portion of El Camino
Real was appropriate. He also agreed with Commissioner Bentz and felt there were some small
design modifications that could be done, however, as it is not in the historic downtown area, he
likes the concept.
Vice Chairperson Kelley indicated that he likes the concept and is happy with the design of the
restaurant.
Commissioner O'Keefe stated that she had a problem with the design as it was in a very high
profile location and very different from everything else in the area.
Commissioner Porter thanked the applicant for looking to Atascadero as an expansion location
for the restaurant, and stated he agreed with Commissioner Bentz and felt this project would
catch some of the tax leakage. He feels the concept fits in with the community and likes the idea
as presented.
Commissioner Beraud stated she was concerned with height of the tower and how it will look
from the rear. She feels it will be very massive. Mr. Sharp explained that the tower is 4 1/2 feet
higher than the roofline.
Chairperson Fonzi told the applicant that she is pleased to see them coming into Atascadero. She
felt the design is very original and will be a good addition to the city even though it doesn't
exactly fit in with the existing architecture. She expressed the hope that the applicant would be
willing to work with staff on minor adjustments to the plan. She would like to see the sign and
the landscaping tied in so that it doesn't appear to be totally foreign to the front of Albertson's.
4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2003-0039: 8270 TOLOSO ROAD (MESSER)
Community Development Director Warren Frace provided the staff report and answered
questions of the Commission.
Mike Messer, applicant, explained what he had done to revise his plan and answered questions of
the Commission.
Art Tonneson, project arborist, answered questions of the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Galen Little, 8265 Toloso Road, felt the home should be designed for the lot as opposed to
designing the lot to accommodate the house. Additionally, he felt there were still too many tree
removals on the site.
Tom Parks, 8251 Toloso Road, explained that part of the grading on the lot had been done
recently while testing for a septic system and this has impacted the trees. He indicated that stem
wall design is not fit for this type of property and that this home should be constructed in another
part of town where the property is flat. Mr. Parks feels the home must be designed to fit the
property.
Clement Salvadore, 8240 Toloso Road, agreed with the two previous speakers and felt the
trouble with the applicant's house is that it is not suitable for this particular piece of land. The
footprint of the home is too large for the steep slope on the property and too many trees will have
to be removed.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
Commissioner O'Keefe read from the Minutes of the last meeting where the applicant was
encouraged to consider alternate designs and also some of the cost comparison design work. She
stated there were no alternative designs and the Commission is still dealing with the same house
plan. Therefore, in her opinion, the applicant basically ignored what the Commission previously
recommended. Regarding, the pad, she cannot see that it adds any merit to what the applicant
proposes to do because the topography of the land requires a different design, specifically a
raised foundation. Also Commissioner O'Keefe felt the applicant is not following the General
Plan or the Tree Ordinance, which states preserving native trees are to be encouraged and the
design of a building will be such that it takes this into consideration.
Vice Chairperson Kelley felt that the pad as it exists is not suitable for a building because it will
have to be completely re -compacted, therefore considerable grading must be done regardless of
the type of house the applicant builds. He stated that the applicant did add stem walls as
requested and brought back the toe of the grading saving numerous trees. Vice Chairperson
Kelley felt the applicant had done the best he could given the constraints of the site.
Commissioner Bentz agreed that the applicant has made a significant effort at reducing the tree
impacts, effectively eliminating his back yard. He feels the applicant has the right to build a
house on his property and he supports the project.
Commissioner Beraud expressed disappointment that no alternative designs were presented for
consideration. She appreciates the applicant's efforts to decrease the number of tree removals,
but would still like to see the alternative designs.
Commissioner Jones indicated that he was still having difficulty making some of the findings for
the project, specifically, on item #C, the proposal on the comparisons for practical design
alternatives.
MOTION: By Commissioner O'Keefe and seconded by Commissioner Beraud to deny the
applicant's request to remove the trees and that the applicant come back with
alternative designs.
AYES: Commissioners O'Keefe, Beraud, Jones, and Chairperson Fonzi
NOES: Commissioners Porter, Bentz and Kelley
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 4:3 by a roll -call vote.
4-A. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2003-0040: 2055 SAN FERNANDO RD. (DELEO)
Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris provided the staff report and answered questions of
the Commission.
Steve Soenke, architect and applicant's representative, gave a history of the site and stated that
the applicant will be occupying the home and his sister will occupy the second home. There are
two separate lots currently in existence and the applicant wishes to share the driveway with the
second home to minimize impact to the trees. Mr. Soenke explained the justification for the
requested tree removals.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Porter to adopt
Resolution PC 2003-0096 approving a tree removal permit to allow the removal
of 12 native oak trees located at 20055 San Fernando Road with the appropriate
findings as set forth in the staff report.
Commissioner Beraud questioned if the maker of the motion was adopting the staff's
recommendations as part of the motion. The maker indicated that he was.
Commissioner O'Keefe requested clarification as staff had also recommended that the first house
be moved slightly to avoid the trees, saving three trees. The maker stated that it was his intent to
follow those recommendations.
Commissioner Porter withdrew his second based on this clarification.
MOTION: By Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to adopt
Resolution PC 2003-0096 approving a tree removal permit to allow the removal
of 12 native oak trees located at 20055 San Fernando Road with the appropriate
findings as set forth in the staff report.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, O'Keefe, Beraud, Bentz, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi
NOES: Commissioner Porter
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 6:1 by a roll -call vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0111: RITE AID DRIVE THRU
Applicant:
Rite Aid Corporation, PO Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105
Project Title:
Rite Aid Pharmacy Drive Thru
Project
Location:
7055 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 030-081-016
Project
The proposed project consists of a Conditional Use permit application to establish a drive
Description:
thru pharmacy at the existing Rite Aid location. No native trees are proposed for removal.
Proposed
Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15301, Existing Facilities)
Environmental
exempts the minor additions to existing facilities that have a negligible expansion of use.
Determination:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 031-091-005, 006, 008, 009, 031-092-016
Associate Planner Kelly Gleason provided the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
City Engineer Steve Kahn expressed concern with large vehicles loading and unloading in front
of the shopping center and blocking traffic. He encouraged Rite Aid to utilize the loading dock
in the rear to improve site circulation on the front.
Don Thibault, construction manager for Rite Aid, addressed questions raised by the Commission
and described the type of drive-through proposed for the site. He indicated that he would urge
the operations people to do a better job of policing the delivery drivers when loading and
unloading merchandise.
PUBLIC COMMENT — None
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner O'Keefe to adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0095 certifying the proposed environmental
determination and approving condition Use Permit 2003-0111 subject to the
findings, conditions, and exhibits as attached and amending Condition No. 7 to
include the managing of delivery vehicles.
AYES: Commissioners O'Keefe, Beraud, Jones, Bentz, Porter, Kelley and Chairperson
Fonzi
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 7.0 by a roll -call vote.
6. ROAD ABANDONMENT 2003-0012, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2003-0029:
ENCINO/ATAJO 6 -LOT MAP
Applicant:
Don Messer, PO Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423, 466-0549
Project Title:
Road Abandonment 2003-0012, Tentative Tract Map 2003-0029
Project
4.5 vacant acres located at the end of Encino Road between Atajo Road, Atascadero, CA
Location:
93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 031-091-005, 006, 008, 009, 031-092-016
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for Road Abandonment and a six lot tract
Description:
map. The project would result in the abandonment and realignment of a portion of Encino
Road and the adjustment of six existing lots of record, no new lots would be created. The
purpose of the project is to minimize hillside grading and impacts to native trees. The site
consists of steep wooded slopes with Live Oak and White Oak woodlands and a portion
Community Development Director Warren Frace provided the staff report and answered
questions of the Commission.
Fire Chief Kurt Stone gave a presentation, including a video on the Oakland fire, explaining fire
access roads and the reasons for building them. Chief Stone answered questions of the
Commission.
Ken Wilson, applicant's representative, stated the applicant is in favor of the recommendation
for a fire access. The applicant agrees there is a balance between increased traffic and the need
for fire evacuation and agrees to the width of the road per the fire code. He feels if there is no
barrier, it is best to have the entire road paved, however Mr. Wilson suggested the installation of
a wooden breakaway hinged gate with a "no trespassing" sign that would pop open; with this
gate a based road would be adequate for emergency escape. Mr. Wilson expressed concern with
safety issues if through traffic is permitted on the road and again stated that there must be a
balance between the fire concern and the traffic concern. He felt if the City requires the road to
be a through one and there is an accident, the developer should not be held responsible because
he put the road in.
Russ Thompson, R. Thompson Consulting, stated that as long as he can remember the criteria for
an emergency access road is that anything 12% or less has been acceptable at a base standard. If
this is truly an emergency access only road, the vast majority of that interconnect piece is from 0
to 2%, and therefore, a base road is possible at that slope.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tom Novak, 5740 Encino, stated the following concerns with this project: 1) Maintenance of the
road, 2) second access out in an emergency is effected by the width of the road, 3) Option #1 is
his first choice, Option #5 his second, 4) he likes the suggestion of a hinged, swinging gate, 5)
Option #8 will require retaining walls, which will cause more trees to be cut down and more
expense on relocating water and telephone lines. He questioned if the neighbors would be able
to look at the plans ahead of time to be able to discuss this project as a group.
Linda Christenson, 5990 Encino, expressed regret that the revised staff recommendation failed to
reflect the strong neighborhood opposition to making Encino a through street. She feels Encino
is a narrow access road and not adequate to accommodate through traffic.
Mark Bewley, 5530 Encino, feels very little time has been spent on the engineering of the fire
road. He feels the steep slopes on this project require engineering decisions that are not simple.
of an un -named blue line creek. The project includes the removal of 133 native oak trees.
General Plan Designation: SFR -Z (Single -Family Residential 1.5 — 2.5 acre minimum lot
size)
Zoning District: RSF- Z (Residential Single -Family 1.5 — 2.5 acre minimum lot size)
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:
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.
Fire Chief Kurt Stone gave a presentation, including a video on the Oakland fire, explaining fire
access roads and the reasons for building them. Chief Stone answered questions of the
Commission.
Ken Wilson, applicant's representative, stated the applicant is in favor of the recommendation
for a fire access. The applicant agrees there is a balance between increased traffic and the need
for fire evacuation and agrees to the width of the road per the fire code. He feels if there is no
barrier, it is best to have the entire road paved, however Mr. Wilson suggested the installation of
a wooden breakaway hinged gate with a "no trespassing" sign that would pop open; with this
gate a based road would be adequate for emergency escape. Mr. Wilson expressed concern with
safety issues if through traffic is permitted on the road and again stated that there must be a
balance between the fire concern and the traffic concern. He felt if the City requires the road to
be a through one and there is an accident, the developer should not be held responsible because
he put the road in.
Russ Thompson, R. Thompson Consulting, stated that as long as he can remember the criteria for
an emergency access road is that anything 12% or less has been acceptable at a base standard. If
this is truly an emergency access only road, the vast majority of that interconnect piece is from 0
to 2%, and therefore, a base road is possible at that slope.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tom Novak, 5740 Encino, stated the following concerns with this project: 1) Maintenance of the
road, 2) second access out in an emergency is effected by the width of the road, 3) Option #1 is
his first choice, Option #5 his second, 4) he likes the suggestion of a hinged, swinging gate, 5)
Option #8 will require retaining walls, which will cause more trees to be cut down and more
expense on relocating water and telephone lines. He questioned if the neighbors would be able
to look at the plans ahead of time to be able to discuss this project as a group.
Linda Christenson, 5990 Encino, expressed regret that the revised staff recommendation failed to
reflect the strong neighborhood opposition to making Encino a through street. She feels Encino
is a narrow access road and not adequate to accommodate through traffic.
Mark Bewley, 5530 Encino, feels very little time has been spent on the engineering of the fire
road. He feels the steep slopes on this project require engineering decisions that are not simple.
He is in favor of a turnaround or a barrier. He asked what would be done with the 2,300 cubic
yards of excess dirt from the originally proposed full cut road.
Celia Bewley, 5530 Encino, asked the Fire Chief for his reaction to the push through barrier and
base road. Additionally she asked if the project follows the Tree Ordinance with the proposed
mitigation measures.
Darren Stovell, 5105 Portola, stated that his property backs up to the proposed project and raised
the following issues: 1) drainage off of Portola road that runs through his property and through
the proposed road, will this be diverted? 2) Small size of lots causes the homes to be clustered
closely together.
Kristen Ring, 5675 Encino, agreed with her neighbors who had previously spoken. She is
confused about the easement and tree mitigation issues.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Fonzi asked staff and the applicant representatives to address the concerns raised
during the Public Comment period.
Commissioner Beraud suggested the following be added to any motion on this item: Pg. 100
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4—amend (d) to include the verbiage "the status of the project's
impacted trees and their viability, which may require additional payment into the tree mitigation
fund." She feels this should be added because of the number of trees to be impacted.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Jones to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0092 recommending that the City Council
certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0044; and, adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2003-0093 recommending that the City Council approve
Road Abandonment 2003-0012, thereby approving the abandonment of a portion
of Encino Road subject to findings and conditions; and, adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2003-0094 recommending that the City Council approve
Tentative Tract Map 2003-0029, thereby approving a six lot subdivision tract that
would adjust six existing Colony lots of record consistent with Road
Abandonment 2003-0012, and provide for a 16 foot based fire access road
connection to Encino Avenue with additional tree protection retaining walls,
subject to findings and conditions and that the wooden barrier be applied at each
end of Encino Road and with the following change:
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4(d) to read: Upon project completion and prior to
final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by the project
arborist certifying that the tree protection plan was implemented, the status
of the project's impacted trees and their viability, which may require
additional payment into the tree mitigation fund, the trees designated for
protection were protected during construction, and the construction -related
tree protection measures are not longer required for tree protection.
AYES: Commissioners Jones, O'Keefe, Porter, Bentz and Kelley
NOES: Commissioner Beraud and Chairperson Fonzi
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 5:2 by a roll -call vote.
Commissioner Beraud stated she voted against the motion because she does not think there
should be a gate.
Chairperson Fonzi recessed the hearing at 9:55 p.m.
Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting back to order at 10:10 p.m.
Fire Chief Stone asked for clarification on the prior motion and if it was the intent of the motion
maker that the road be 16 feet with two, 2 -foot shoulders. Vice Chairperson Kelley stated that it
was correct, a total of 20 feet of all based road.
Chairperson Fonzi called for a show of hands from the public indicating who was present for
each of the remaining agenda items. She then asked the Commission for suggestions on items to
be continued.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by Commissioner Jones to hear Item #7
and continue all remaining items to the next meeting and that these items would
receive priority at that meeting.
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.
7. ZONE CHANGE 2002-0036, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0087,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2002-0035: 7755 NAVAJOA AVE.
Applicant:
Michael Emrich, 8580 Casanova Rd., Atascadero, CA 93422, 466-8113
Jack Huckobey; 5050 Portola Rd, Atascadero, CA 93422, 461-9234
Project Title:
7755 Navajoa Ave PD -7; Zone Change 2002-0036, Conditional Use Permit 2003-0087;
Tentative Parcel Map 2002-0035 for a 4 -lot PD -7 subdivision
Project
7755 Navajoa Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422 (Single Family Residence)
Location-
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 031-183-002.
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit,
Description:
and Tentative Parcel Map. The proposed project consists of six new single-family homes
located on individual lots that will be developed under the requirements of the PD -7 overlay
district within the Residential Multi -Family (RMF -10) zoning district. Each proposed residence
is approximately 2000 square feet. The project includes one home per lot each with a two -
car garage. Mitigation will be required for the removal of native walnut trees.
General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential — MDR
Zoning District: Residential Multiple Family — RMF -10
Proposed
Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Negative Declaration is proposed. The
Environmental
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was available for public review from 9/17/03
Determination:
through 10/6/03 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, from 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Associate Planner Kelly Gleason provided the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
Russ Thompson, applicant's representative, stated that this PD -7 was different from others for
the following reasons: 1) larger two-story units with greater square footage, 2) upscale units
proposed, 3) use of quality materials, and 4) extensive use of pavers. Mr. Thompson indicated
that the development is in a transition zone between commercial and residential and that it meets
General Plan standards. He stated that the walnut trees were removed prior to the applicant
taking ownership of the property and felt the applicant should not be penalized for their removal.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Cory Meyer, 7735 Navajoa Road, read from a prepared statement expressing his concerns with
the project. (Exhibit B)
Rob Lees, 7770 Navajoa Road, felt the project was not compatible with the neighborhood and
that there is only one commercial building in the area. He would like to see four one-story units
and stated the following concerns: 1) Navajoa Road is narrow and not maintained well, 2) there
is a lack of parking along Navajoa Road, 3) the commercial building already brings excessive
noise into the neighborhood, 4) the driveways of the proposed homes are situated so that auto
lights will shine directly into his home, 5) flooding, and 6) privacy issues with two-story homes.
Linda Benevitas, 7750 Navajoa Road, expressed her concerns with the potential size of the trees,
runoff and flooding, and the lack of maintenance of Navajoa Road. She requested the
Commissioners deny the project.
Chairperson Fond closed the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Fonzi asked staff and the applicant's representative to address questions raised
during the Public Comment period.
Commissioner O'Keefe reminded the Commission that they had looked at a project on Tunitas at
the last meeting with the same parcel size and zoning, where the applicant put in four units. She
felt these very large houses didn't fit with the smaller more modest homes in the area and made
the following points: 1) this project does not conform to the General Plan where it states that
new development must be compatible with the existing and surrounding neighborhoods, 2) for
the Conditional Use Permit the Commission must make a finding that the project is compatible
with the existing neighborhood, and she feels it is not, and 3) the feeling of the neighbors present
tonight is to put in a smaller four unit project more compatible with the existing neighborhood.
She stated she is unable to make the findings to support this project.
Commissioner Bentz referred to page 113 of the staff report and quoted "The project site's multi-
family residential zoning is consistent with the General Plan," and moved for adoption of the
project.
Vice Chairperson Kelley referred to the $500 tree mitigation and felt there had been ample
testimony that the applicant did not remove the trees and should therefore not be made to pay
this fee.
Commissioner Beraud indicated that she was having trouble making the findings. Referring to
Commissioner Bentz' statement, she feels the General Plan is open to interpretation and her role
as a Planning Commissioner is to help the public interpret the General Plan. For this reason she
agrees with Commissioner O'Keefe and the neighbors present that this project does not fit the
character of the existing neighborhood.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by Vice Chairperson Kelley to adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0098 recommending that the City Council certify
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0051; and, adopt Resolution No.
PC 2003-0099 recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for
first reading to approve Zone Change 2002-0036 based on findings; and, adopt
Resolution No. PC 2003-0100 recommending that the City Council approve the
Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0087) based on findings, and subject to
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Resolution No PC
2003-0101 recommending the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2003-0043 based on findings and subject to Conditions of approval and
Mitigation Monitoring and to replace the tree replacement fee of $500 to zero and
that the applicant will work with the property owner across the street to provide
landscaping so that the driveway doesn't cause lights to shine in his front
windows.
AYES: Commissioners Bentz, Jones, Porter, Kelley and Chairperson Fonzi
NOES: Commissioners O'Keefe and Beraud
ABSTAIN: None
Motion passed 5:2 by a Noll -call vote.
8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0095: 9190 SAN DIEGO WAY
88 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX
THIS ITEM CONTINUED TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Applicant:
JRM Enterprises, 1050 Herdsman Way, Templeton, CA 93465 Phone: 238-5313
Project Title:
Southside Villas Apartments — CUP 2003-0095 for a 86 -unit Multi -Family Residential
Development
Project
San Diego Way Lots 9, 11, 12, and 13; Block 66, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 045-352-002, 003, 004, 006, 007.
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit to establish an
Description:
86 -unit apartment development. The project will include 74 two bedroom units of
approximately 857 square feet and 12 three bedroom units of approximately 1048 square
feet. No native oak trees are proposed for removal.
General Plan Designation: High Density Multi -Family
Zoning District: Residential Multi -Family — 16
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
through 10/7/03 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, from 8:00
Determination: a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
9. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2002-0023: 8805 SAN RAFAEL 5 -LOT
THIS ITEM CONTINUED TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Applicant:
Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422, 461-7504
Owner:
Eagle Ranch LLC, P.O. Box 25010, Ventura, CA 93002, (805) 648-3363
Project Title:
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023
Project
8805 San Rafael Road, 8550 San Gabriel Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 049-311-005 / 056-371-018
Project
The proposed project consists of a tract map subdividing three existing vacant lots into five
Description•
parcels. Five parcels will be created allowing the development of five vacant individual
Proposed
residences. The project includes building envelopes with proposed driveways for each lot.
Environmental
The project site is located within the Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district. The new
Determination:
development will take access from San Rafael Road and from an access easement across
lot four. Onsite septic systems will be used for wastewater and water service will be provided
by Atascadero Mutual Water Company.
General Plan Designation: RE
Zoning District: RS
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 from
Determination:
9/12/03 through 10/1/03 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department,
Room 104, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
10. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0100: HOTEL PARK OFFICE
THIS ITEM CONTINUED TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Applicant:
Hotel Park Group, PO Box 1980, Atascadero, CA 93423
Project Title:
Modification to the master site plan established for Hotel Park
Project
5855 Capistrano Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
APN 029-363-024
Project
The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the
Description:
original master site plan for the Hotel Park development. The proposed changes relate to
phase II building architecture. One oak tree is proposed for removal.
Proposed
The proposed project is within the scope of the improvements included within the original
Environmental
Master Plan of Development PPN 30-87. No new impacts are associated with the modified
Determination:
building designs.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS - None
DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Fonzi adjourned the meeting at 11:05 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting
on October 21, 2003.
MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary
The following Exhibits are available for review in the Community Development Department:
Exhibit A — Roger Sharp, Big Bubba's BBQ presentation booklet
Exhibit B — Cory Meyer, prepared statement
ITEM
NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2003-0091
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DENYING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
FOR THE REMOVAL OF NATIVE OAK TREES
LOCATED AT 8270 TOLOSO ROAD
(TRP 2003-0039:Mike Messer)
WHEREAS, an application for a Tree Removal Permit has been received from
Mike Messer, 9265 Carmelita Avenue, Atascadero, California 93422, to allow the
removal of two native oak trees located at 8270 Toloso Road; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed project is located within the Rural Estates 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 September 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rotunda Room of City Hall
located at 6500 Palma Avenue and considered testimony and reports from staff, the
applicant, and the public; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the necessary findings for
native tree removal could not be made as the project was designed and directed the
applicant to revise the proposed development to preserve additional native trees on the
project site, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised proposal for Tree
Removal application on October 7, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rotunda Room of City Hall
located at 6500 Palma Avenue and considered testimony and reports from staff, the
applicant, and the public; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the necessary findings for
native tree removal could not be made based on the revised project design, and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions:
SECTION 1. Denial of Application. The Planning Commission finds as
follows:
1. Alternative designs were not presented for Planning
Commission review.
2. The revised site design was substantially the same plan
presented at the September 16, 2003 Commission hearing.
3. Based on the Arborist's Report and the Applicant's site design,
the necessary findings, as outlined in the City of Atascadero's
Native Tree Ordinance and listed below, could not 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;
S) 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.
On motion by Commissioner O'Keefe, and seconded by Commissioner Beraund the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Fonzi, Beraud, O'Keefe, Jones (4)
NOES: Porter, Bentz, Kelley (3)
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
Roberta Fonzi
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\- TRP - Tree Removal Permits\TRP 03\TRP 2003-0039 8270 Toloso Road\Pinal Reso for 10-7 PC Hearing.doc
(0)
(0)
Planning Commission Staff Report
SUBJECT:
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
San Diego Apartments
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0095
(9190 San Diego Way / JRM Development)
The proposed project consists of an application to construct an 86 -unit apartment
development to include 74 two-bedroom units and 12 three-bedroom units, parking,
landscaping, and wetland mitigation.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff Recommends:
1. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0102 certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
2003-0035 and approving the Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0095) based on
findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant / Representative: JRM Development
1050 Herdsman Way, Templeton, CA 93465
2. Project Address: 9190 San Diego Way, Atascadero, CA 93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN 045-352-002, 003, 004,
006,007
3. General Plan Designation:
4. Zoning District:
5. Site Area:
6. Existing Use:
7. Environmental Status:
DISCUSSION:
Analysis of Plan ninga Issues
1. Project Definition
General Plan Designation: High -Density Residential
(16 units/acre)
RMF -16 (Residential Multiple Family)
4.06 acres gross, 3.97 acres net
Single Family Residences
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0011
The proposed project is an %-unit apartment complex consisting of twenty-one 4 -unit
apartment buildings connected by common pathways, landscaping, and pocket park.
Seventy-four units are proposed as two-bedroom units of approximately 864 square feet and
the twelve remaining units are proposed as three-bedroom units of approximately 1,048
square feet. The project includes on-site parking spaces for 195 residents or guests.
Project Summary Table
Lot Area
3.997ac net
Building coverage
43,800 sqft
(not to exceed 50%)
25.15%
Outdoor recreation area
43,677 sqft
Parking Spaces
195 total
Covered
86
Guest
17
2. Background
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
ounding Land Use and Setting:
;h: High Density Residential
;h: Commercial Retail — Mixed -Use Planned
Development designation
High Density Residential/Commercial
Tourist
t: High Density Residential
The General Plan and Zoning Ordinance identifies the project site, along with adjacent
properties to the north, east, and west as High -Density Residential with a maximum density
of 16 dwelling units per acre. Properties to the south are zoned as Commercial Retail with a
Mixed -Use Planned Development General Plan designation, allowing for a potential of 16
dwelling units per acre maximum on portions of the site dedicated to residential
development. The General Plan further identifies the southern properties as "Dove Creek", a
200 unit, 300,000 square foot commercial mixed use master planed development. The project
site is zoned multi family residential and is consistent with the General Plan.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
A Conditional Use Permit is required for all multifamily projects that propose 12 units or
more. This proposed Master Plan of Development incorporates site development standards
and appearance review, including architecture, landscaping, and site design.
3. Design and Appearance
The project has incorporated amenities including a small tot lot and park area, pedestrian
connections to future development at the "Dove Creek" site, and wetland habitat
rehabilitation. Per ordinance requirements, each unit will have one covered parking space and
all units will have access to the proposed open space areas. The buildings have been designed
to utilize colors and materials that blend with the natural environment and architectural
features have been incorporated which enhance the overall appearance and scale of the
proj ect.
The applicant has worked closely with staff in designing the apartment development with
special architectural features, upgraded building materials, compatible colors, and landscape
design. In addition, staff has added conditions of approval consistent with General Plan &
Zoning requirements, as identified below.
Architecture, Materials, Color
The proposed multi family buildings provide a mix of clapboard siding and stucco siding
with traditional window placements and ledgestone veneer base. Roof forms, eve brackets,
and deep earth tone colors have been selected to emphasize a residential craftsman -type
architectural appearance. Tower elements have also been included on buildings visible from
San Diego Way and El Camino Real as an architectural upgrade and to provide additional
visual interest. Staff concurs with the proposed exhibits which depict the proposed buildings
incorporating the following architectural embellishments, as appropriate to the selected
architectural design: plaster trim around all windows; banding; masonry and clapboard
siding; ledgestone building base, bracketed entry elements; composition roofing materials;
decorative vents; decorative iron treatment, recessed doors and windows; divided light
windows; ornamental lighting; a minimum of two colors per residential building with a third
accent color (Condition 12). All trash storage, recycle storage, and air conditioning units will
be screened from view behind fenced or landscaped enclosures (Condition 15).
Earth -toned colors emphasizing sage, olive, and tan color combinations are proposed
throughout the project. Staff has included a condition that the colors be slightly varied
amongst the 21 buildings (Condition 12). The buildings will share the same antique slate
colored composition roof material. All trash storage, recycle storage, and air conditioning
units will be screened from view behind fenced or landscaped enclosures. Each community
trash enclosure is designed to accommodate both trash and recycling and will be designed to
utilize a dark color split faced block with solid corrugated metal doors, materials, and
compatible colors (Condition 15).
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
Staff notes that the applicant agrees with all of the appearance -related mitigation measures
and conditions of approval regarding architectural features and materials which enhance the
overall appearance of the residential buildings.
Building Elevations
.11 ■o1 a�■ -, I11, 11
Landscape Design
The siting of the buildings provides a range of 10' to 20' setbacks along El Camino Real and
San Diego Road for landscaping and pedestrian sidewalks. Frontage along San Diego Road
will be landscaped from the back of sidewalk with turf grass and deciduous shade trees.
Frontage along El Camino Real will include a range of 15 to 20 -foot setbacks, incorporating
an 8 -foot wide street tree parkway with a 5- foot wide sidewalk and a dense planting of
additional shade and accent trees and shrubs behind the sidewalk. Landscaping along the
southern portion of the site, adjacent to the off-site wetland and onsite wetland restoration
area will include native tree and shrub plantings (Condition 16). The internal portions of the
site between buildings will be comprised of shallow turf grass drainage detention basins,
groundcovers and shade trees. Parking areas will also include shade tree plantings.
A tot lot play amenity will be provided at the southeastern portion of the site. The tot lot
shall, at a minimum, include a commercial grade swing set, slide, climbing apparatus or
similar equipment on a soft surface designed for the safety and enjoyment of young children.
The tot lot shall include pedestrian connection from nearby sidewalks and/or housing areas
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
and shall include durable seating arrangements for adults and children. Tot lots shall be
landscaped and include shade trees. With the exception of perimeter fencing, all common
areas, including the tot lot, are proposed to be unfenced, open, and accessible (Condition 13).
Two entry monument signs are proposed at each project entrance. The signage column and
base material shall be designed to match the ledgestone base material proposed for the
project buildings (Condition 14). A 5 -foot high metal picket fence with masonry columns 16 -
feet on center is proposed along the north, south, and east project boundaries to provide a
barrier between the proposed project and adjacent uses and streets. The proposed fencing is
designed to be low and transparent to retain views of the adjacent wetland and open space
areas and to establish a landscape theme along this portion of El Camino Real. Fence
columns finish shall match the ledgestone building material treatment (Condition 14).
Due to the on-site topography, the use of retaining walls up to 4 feet in height are required
along the easterly edge of the site parallel to El Camino Real. A condition of approval has
been included to design such walls to utilize dark color split face block compatible with the
color scheme and texture of proposed project materials (Condition 15).
ILI
o y�aSre��
find10
VS
�_"�—YP,n�
OF1411 ♦yii y�t1.i/��
'•vi �yw �kA �M����Ns.�w_�+i�"�
.��I�..�
W �' rµ�o��''egyt`.(��yf'.(Cul� 'Cl.fYi�ay
�r�A�r t1a✓a��G. �•�1���.'3(�VM"�ti
'n �A
1► Lr�.
�"'.+�.���I.����t�fr
�. t � �lat U' �r i Z �R^ZCS�3ae`
''t''. m�7►�4
�
:�\��il
O
Two entry monument signs are proposed at each project entrance. The signage column and
base material shall be designed to match the ledgestone base material proposed for the
project buildings (Condition 14). A 5 -foot high metal picket fence with masonry columns 16 -
feet on center is proposed along the north, south, and east project boundaries to provide a
barrier between the proposed project and adjacent uses and streets. The proposed fencing is
designed to be low and transparent to retain views of the adjacent wetland and open space
areas and to establish a landscape theme along this portion of El Camino Real. Fence
columns finish shall match the ledgestone building material treatment (Condition 14).
Due to the on-site topography, the use of retaining walls up to 4 feet in height are required
along the easterly edge of the site parallel to El Camino Real. A condition of approval has
been included to design such walls to utilize dark color split face block compatible with the
color scheme and texture of proposed project materials (Condition 15).
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
Site Plan, Circulation, Parking
The site plan has been designed to incorporate a series of two-story attached multi -family
buildings placed into a campus -type setting. Buildings have been set back from El Camino
Real and San Diego Road to retain a semi -rural sense of openness as currently exists on the
site. Development adjacent to the off-site (Dove Creek) wetland has been designed to reduce
environmental impacts and provide an area for on-site wetland restoration.
Circulation improvements include complete street frontage improvements along the project
frontage of El Camino Real and San Diego Road. The project includes two access drives
with special entry paving treatment along San Diego Road. The access drives connect within
the site serving resident and guest parking spaces. An additional emergency vehicle access
will be provided from El Camino Real. In addition, a bus turn -out and shelter will be located
along the El Camino real frontage.
The proposed project provides a total of 195 parking spaces as required by code (See table
below). 86 of the spaces will be covered with a simple shade structure (Exhibit H, Condition
20). Shaded spaces are distributed throughout the project and are designed to be compatible
with the project architecture.
Site Drainage
The site is moderately sloped to the south-west. Shallow stormwater detention basins have
been incorporated into the design of the usable common open space areas. Detention basins
have been designed to hold or -site stormwater for short durations during and immediately
after 50 -year storm events. The use of these areas as a resident amenity will not be limited
by the temporary water capacity of the proposed basins and a Condition has been added to
ensure that these areas remain open and accessible to residents and guests and shall not be
fenced (Condition 13). On-site drainage is also designed to create and enhance an on-site
wetland restoration area located along the southerly boundary of the site as discussed further
in Section 4 of this report.
Wastewater
The project will be connected to City Sewer.
Parking
# of units
Required spaces
Spaces
Provided
Two Bedroom Units
74
2
148
Three Bedroom Units
12
2.5
30
Guest Parking
86
1/5 units
17.2
Total Parking
spaces required
195.2
Site Drainage
The site is moderately sloped to the south-west. Shallow stormwater detention basins have
been incorporated into the design of the usable common open space areas. Detention basins
have been designed to hold or -site stormwater for short durations during and immediately
after 50 -year storm events. The use of these areas as a resident amenity will not be limited
by the temporary water capacity of the proposed basins and a Condition has been added to
ensure that these areas remain open and accessible to residents and guests and shall not be
fenced (Condition 13). On-site drainage is also designed to create and enhance an on-site
wetland restoration area located along the southerly boundary of the site as discussed further
in Section 4 of this report.
Wastewater
The project will be connected to City Sewer.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
4. Wetland Rehabilitation
The project site contains a degraded wetland in areas along the south and east boundaries
which extends partially onto the project site. The project biological assessment determined
that the project as proposed will disturb portions of the existing wetland area. As such, the
project is conditioned to comply with all applicable regulations developed by Althouse and
Mead, Inc. in their biological review, (Exhibit J), pertaining to building location and wetland
reconstruction methods. Implementation of the following mitigation measures prior to,
during, and following site construction will serve to avoid and/or minimize adverse indirect
impacts to Waters of the U.S. and wetlands within the proposed project area (Mitigation
Measure4.b.1.):
a) Buildings 124/125 and 126/127 have been relocated to allow for the reconstruction of
a designated wetland area onsite.
b) The applicant will be required to comply with all requirements and regulations set
forth by governing state agencies and shall obtain the necessary permitting as
discussed below.
■ The applicant shall contact the Army Corps of Engineers prior to permit issuance
and shall request authorization to install culverts, impact degraded wetlands, and
create functional wetlands under Nationwide Permits, NW #7 Outfall Structures,
NW #18 Minor Discharges, and NW #27 Stream and Wetland Restoration
Activities.
The applicant shall develop a wetland mitigation site at a ration of 2:1, based on
anticipated ratios required by the Army Corps of Engineers, which shall be
located adjacent to the established wetlands at the southerly border of the subject
property and which will be located in the area of the existing degraded wetlands
habitat.
c) The applicant shall provide a full biologist report, prior to the entitlement hearing,
that identifies all sensitive habitats on and adjacent to the project site, and certifying
the proposed development plan in regards to wetland mitigations.
d) The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a pre -construction
survey of the onsite wetlands area and to report the survey results to the City. This
biologist shall also place protective fencing at the protected wetlands boundary to
ensure that construction activities do not impact the noted areas. A note to this effect
shall be placed on the approved construction/grading plans with the provision that
CDFG shall be notified if the pre -construction survey finds additional wetland habitat
on-site, and that construction work is the area shall not proceed without specific
direction from the CDFG.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
e) A qualified biologist shall be present during phases of construction that are conducted
adjacent to the identified wetland habitat. The biologist shall submit regular reports to
the Community Development Department verifying the integrity of the impacted
areas. Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall
be prepared by the project biologist certifying that the stated wetland protection and
mitigation measures were implemented and that the construction -related protection
and enhancement measures are no longer required.
5. Tree Removal
The project proposal includes off-site public improvements as part of the traffic mitigation
plan. The off-site improvements include the widening of the El Camino Real/San Diego Way
intersection. The off- site widening and improvement of the El Camino Real frontage will
require the removal of a 48" white oak tree as shown below. The applicant shall be required
to pay a mitigation fee of $1600.00, consistent with the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance.
17
l J -
�,.a Ii
6. Affordable Housing
The applicant is requesting a 35% density bonus (22 units) for the provision of affordable
income units. The State mandates that either 10% of the pre -density bonus project units be
deed restricted as very low-income units, or 20% of the pre -density bonus units be deed
restricted as low-income units. According to the San Luis Obispo County Department of
Planning & Building, as of April 2003, a 2 -bedroom moderate level affordable unit only
qualifies if the rent does not exceed $ 779 per month at the low-income level and $649 per
month at the very low-income level with a 30 -year deed restriction commitment. Fora three-
bedroom unit, the maximum rental price per month is $935 per month for a low-income
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
level, or $837 at a very low-income level with a 30 -year deed restriction recorded. These
numbers are subject to change as they may be adjusted monthly. A condition has been added
to ensure that this state requirement is met and maintained over the required 30 -year period
(Condition 11).
7. Project Benefits Summary
The project provides a number of resident and community benefits which include the
following: 1) provision of affordable housing units; 2) mitigation and rehabilitation of
existing degraded wetland areas; 3) pedestrian connections to adjacent project sites, 4)
resident amenities including open space courtyards and a tot lot; 5) provision of a transit
turnout and shelter provided along El Camino Real; and 6) superior architectural design and
incorporation of quality materials throughout the project.
8. Conditional Use Permit Findings
As previously mentioned, a Conditional Use Permit is required for the proposed project. 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 MultrFamily Residential designation of
the Plan and General Plan Land Use Element Policy 1.1.2, and Housing Element Policy
4.3. The project, as proposed, provides an infill development opportunity consistent with
smart growth principles set forth in the General Plan. The project is located along the El
Camino Real corridor and will create housing opportunities within the City's urban core.
2. The proposed project or 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 will not, because of
the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be detrimental to the
health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in
the vicinity of the use.
Staff Comment: The proposed residential project will not be detrimental to the general
public or working persons health, safety, or welfare.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
4. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the immediate
neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development.
Staff Comment: The project has been designed to be consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood character. Surrounding uses include high-density residential projects and
Neighborhood Commercial developments.
5. The proposed use or project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe capacity
of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be improved in
conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the surrounding
neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance with the Land Use
Element.
Staff Comment: The proposed project and use is consistent with the traffic projections
and road improvements anticipated within the General Plan. The proposed project
density equates to a maximum of 86 units on the project site. The applicant has agreed to
provide full improvements of San Diego Way and El Camino Real adjacent to the site in
addition to extending the improvements to include the intersection at San Diego Way and
El Camino Real, under agreement with the City, to alleviate heightened and future traffic
impacts at this time.
Based on staff's analysis in the preceding sections, it appears that all of the required findings
for approval of a Conditional Use Permit can be made.
9. General Plan Consistency
The project as proposed meets a number of General Plan policies related to infill
development, affordable housing provisions, and smart growth. Land Use Policy 1.1 supports
"guiding new development into the Urban Core" calling for infill development which
conforms to the historic Colony land use patterns of the City. The project as proposed will
focus high-density residential development along the El Camino Real Corridor in an area of
existing higher density developments and neighborhood commercial uses. General Plan
Housing Policy 1.1 supports the production of new housing "to meet the needs of all
household types". The permitted residential density of 64 units will be supplemented by a 35
percent density bonus allowance for the provision of a minimum of 9 very low or 17 low-
income
owincome deed -restricted affordable units per State entitlements related to density bonus
allowances.
Implementing General Plan programs require appearance review of architectural design,
materials, street trees, and landscaping to maintain the semi -rural atmosphere and protect the
environment including the adjacent wetlands. The General Plan also requires that projects
incorporate architectural themes into the site and building design. As analyzed above, the
proposed project, as conditioned is consistent with the General Plan.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
In staff's opinion the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use
Element and the Housing Element, with the project design quality, density, wetlands
reconstruction, and the inclusion of affordable -income units. The project will provide 86
one and two bedroom apartment units that fulfill an important housing need within the
community. As conditioned, the project incorporates architectural and landscape elements
that are consistent with the scale and character of a high-density residential project, the
surrounding neighborhood, and the General Plan's appearance review and density bonus
requirements.
10. Proposed Environmental Determination
Staff has prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The document was circulated to
public agencies and interested members of the public on August 4th, 2003. The biological
assessment and wetland reconstruction proposal has been incorporated into the
environmental documentation. The environmental analysis identified concerns regarding
potential impacts to Biological Resources and area Traffic. Mitigation measures pertaining to
the project design, right-of-way improvements, and wetlands rehabilitation are included. A
finding is proposed that this project would not have a significant effect on the environment
based upon the implementation of the identified mitigation measures.
The applicant has incorporated mitigation into the proposed project design and concurs with
all mitigation measures contained within the project initial study and this staff report. As a
result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. Staff is recommending the
Commission certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0035.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Atascadero Municipal Code, as
analyzed within this staff report. The applicant has proposed design modifications and
agrees with all mitigation measures and conditions of approval. It is staff's opinion that the
proposed project, as conditioned allows the Planning Commission to make all of the required
findings for project approval recommendation to the City Council.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may make 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.
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
3. The Commission may deny the project. The parcel would retain its designation of
Residential Multi -Family. The Commission should specify the reasons for denial of
the project and 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 2003-0102 to Approve Proposed Master Plan of
Development Cup 2003-0095
Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan and Zoning
rI
San Diego Way -"
i
e�
a
k
Highway 101
L i
General Plan
MDR
Zoning District
RMF -16
ino Real
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
Viejo Camino
ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-21-03
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution PC 2003-0102
CUP 2003-0095
Approval of Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2003-0102
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO CERTIFYING PROPOSED MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2003-0035 AND APPROVING MASTER
PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT (CUP 2003-0095)
APN 045-352-002, 003, 004, 006, 007
(9190 San Diego Way / JRM Development)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from JRM Development (1050
Herdsman Way, Templeton, CA 93465), Applicant, to consider a project consisting of a an
86 unit multi family development (CUP 2003-0095) located at 9190 San Diego Way (APN
045-352-002, 003, 004, 006, 007); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-
0035 were prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public
hearing on Tuesday, October 7, 2003 following the close of the review period to consider the
Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and,
SECTION 1. Findings for Certification of he Proposed Mitilzated Negative
Declaration The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when
mitigation measures are incorporated into the project's mitigation monitoring
program as conditions of approval; and,
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long term
environmental goals; and,
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable; and,
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either
directly or indirectly; and,
SECTION 2. Findings for Approval of Tree Removal Permit. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
1. The trees were obstructing proposed improvements that could not 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.
SECTION 3. 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 2003-0095 to establish an 86 -unit multi -family
development at 9190 San Diego Way. (APN 045-352-002, 003, 004, 006, 007), consistent
with the following Exhibits:
EXHIBIT A: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT C:
Site Plan
EXHIBIT D:
Grading and Drainage Plan
EXHIBIT E:
Landscape Plan
EXHIBIT F:
Elevations
EXHIBIT G:
Floor Plans
EXHIBIT H: Shade Structure Design
EXHIBIT I: Materials Board
EXHIBIT J: Preliminary Biological Assessment; Althouse and Mead
EXHIBIT K: Project Statistical Summary
EXHIBIT L: Off-site Public Improvement 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: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta Fonzi
Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
EXHIBIT A: Draft Mitigated Declaration 2003-0035
CUP 2003-0095
EXHIBIT B: Conditions of approval
CUP 2003-0095
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Planning Services
1. This conditional use permit shall be for a 86 -un it multi -family
PS
development, parking lot, and landscaping on a 4.06 -acre siteas
described on the attached exhibits and located on parcel 045-352-002,
003, 004, 006, 007regardless 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
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 Conditional Use Permit.
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. All exterior elevations, finish materials and colors shall be consistent with
BP
PS
the Master Plan of Development as shown in Exhibit F, H, and I.
6. All site development shall be consistent with the maximum intensities
BP/FM
PS
described in the statistical project summary as shown on EXHIBIT K.
7. All site work, grading and site improvements shall be consistent with the
BP/FM
PS
Master Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT C, D, and E.
8. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be approved prior to the
BP
PS
issuance of building permits and included as part of site improvement
plan consistent with EXHIBIT E. All exterior meters, air conditioning
units, and mechanical equipment shall be screened with landscape
material. Trash/recycle container areas shall be screened with fencing
or landscape.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
9. All project fencing shall be installed consistent with EXHIBIT E subject to
BP
PS
the following modifications.
a. Fence pillars shall incorporate ledgestone consistent with the
approved building base materials.
b. All fencing shall be low and transparent in nature and shall not
exceed a height of 5 feet with columns at a maximumof 6 feet high.
c. Fencing shall be set back 5 feet from the property line at EI Camino
Real. No fencing shall be located along San Diego Way.
10. Retaining walls shall incorporate design & materials to utilize dark color
GP
PS
split face block, subject to staff approval.
BP
11. Affordable Housing Requirement: The applicant shall set aside 7 units
FM, BP
PS, CE
at the very low-income rate, or 13 units at the low-income rate for a
period of 30 years.
12. All exterior material finishes (stucco, materials, lighting) shall be durable,
BP
PS
high quality, and consistent with the elevations shown in EXHIBIT F, H,
and I. with the incorporation of the following, subject to staff approval:
A. Ledgestone or similar material shall be incorporated into the base
material of the residential buildings and shall wrap to include the
side and rear elevations.
B. Clapboard siding shall be incorporated into the design of the tower
elements identified on Buildings 101, 129, 130, and 143 to match
entry elements as shown in exhibit F.
C. Window trim shall be consistently applied on all elevations of the
residential and attached laundry facility buildings.
D. A minimum of two color schemes utilizing the same pallet shall be
utilized throughout the project.
E. A minimum of two colors per residential building with a third accent
color shall be utilized throughout the project.
F. Vinyl windows shall be desert tan. Grids shall be required on large
windows only, subject to staff approval.
13. Unobstructed access shall be provided between the rear patios and the
FM
PS, CE
shared common open space areas. Rear patios shall either be open or
shall incorporate low transparent fencing, consistent with project fencing,
not to exceed 3 feet in height and including a gate to the open space
courtyards. Open Space areas acting as detention basins shall remain
open and unfenced.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
14. All project elements utilizing stone materials shall be consistent with the
base material for the residential buildings, including monument entry
signs and decorative walls at the project entrance.
15. All trash enclosures shall be constructed of dark colored split face block
with corrugated metal doors painted to match and shall be screened
with landscaping per EXHIBIT E.
16. Landscaping along the southern portion of the site, adjacent to the off-
site wetland and on-site wetland restoration area shall include native
tree and shrub plantings
17. Monument entry signage shall incorporate ledgstone base to match the
building materials, and shall include the following subject to staff
approval:
■ Entry sign face shall be trimmed with ledgestone material
■ Signage shall be constructed of individual die cut raised metal
letters mounted on a stucco face consistent with building color and
finish.
18. The parking area adjacent to the tot lot and wetlands shall be modified
to provide a minimum 10 foot setback from the south property line and
shall include the following, subject to staff approval.
■ A pedestrian path shall be extended along the south property line
and shall connect to EI Camino Real.
■ The fire access portion of the driveway shall incorporate decorative
pavers and decorative removable bollards.
19. Rear ground floor patio areas facing EI Camino Real shall be extended
where possible to maximize private open space for each unit.
20. Parking shade structures shall be constructed of heavy timber, or similar
metal elements, and shall be designed with a flat trellis style roof,
subject staff approval.
21. Workforce Housing
FM
PS, CE
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into a legal
agreement with the City to reserve '/2 of the units for rent to residents or
workers within the City of Atascadero, including the affordable units. The
agreement shall include the following provisions:
■ The units shall be offered for rent to residents or workers within the
City of Atascadero for a minimum of 60 -days. During this time period
offers may only be accepted from Atascadero residents or workers;
■ The applicant shall provide reasonable proof to the City that at least
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
one of the qualified renters is a resident or worker within the City Limits
of Atascadero;
■ The Atascadero resident or worker restriction shall apply to the initial
rental only;
■ The applicant shall identify which units will be reserved; and
■ The City Attorney shall approve the final form of the agreement.
22. Removal of the 48" oak tree shall be mitigated by the payment of
$1600.00 into the tree replacement fund as required by the tree
ordinance.
Building Services
23. A soils investigation prepared by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer is
BP
FM
to be provided for the project. The report is to be provided at the time
of building permit submittal along with the building plans for review by
the Building Division. Recommendations contained in the report are
to be incorporated into the project plans.
Fire Marshal
24. Provide a letter from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company stating
the minimum expected water available to the site. Amount available
must meet min. requirement specified in the California Fire Code.
25. Show location of existing and any proposed fire hydrants.
BP
BS
26. Note approved address signage is to be provided.
BP
BS
27. Note on plans that fire lanes shall be delineated to restrict parking as
BP
BS
required by the Fire Authority.
City Engineer
Standard Conditions
28. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check & Inspection agreement
BP
BS
with the City.
29. The applicant shall be responsible for the protection, relocation
BP
BS
and/or alteration of existing utilities.
30. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable
BP
BS
TV and telephone) underground.
31. The applicant shall monument all property corners for construction
BP
BS
control and shall promptly replace them if disturbed.
32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a
BP
BS
grading and drainage plan with a separate sheet(s) devoted to
sedimentation and erosion control, prepared by a registered civil
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
engineer for review and approval by the City Engineer.
33. Prior to the final inspection, all outstanding plan check and inspection
BP
BS
fees shall be paid.
34. All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero
BP
BS
Noise Ordinance for hours of operation.
Construction activities shall be limited to the following hours of operation:
• 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday
• 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday
• No construction on Sunday
The hours of construction may be modified by the Community
Development Director upon a determination that unusually loud
construction activities are having a significant impact on the
neighbors.
Failure to comply with the above-described hours of operation may result
in withholding of inspections and possible construction prohibitions,
subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission.
35. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit a written
BP
BS
statement from a registered civil engineer that all work has been
completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans and the
Uniform Building Code (UBC).
City Engineer
Site Specific Conditions
Public Improvements:
36. EI Camino Real. Full frontage improvements are required with this
BP
PW
development from the southerly project boundary to San Diego Way.
These include pave out for additional travel lanes with adequate width
for bicycles, curb, gutter, landscaping and sidewalk. The project shall
install &foot landscape strip at the street frontage with a 5foot
sidewalk behind it. The entire surface of EI Camino Real will be
restriped for bicycles lanes and two travel lanes in both directions and
a center turn lane. The landscaping on EI Camino Real shall be
irrigated, maintained and cared for by this project.
The asphalt will transition back to the existing edge of pavement at the
south end of the project at a 5:1 ratio. Public Improvement plans shall
be submitted detailing the design. Cross sections shall be submitted
detailing the existing and proposed cross fall on EI Camino Real.
37. San Diego Way. Full frontage improvements are required with this
BP
PW
development from the southerly project boundary to EI Camino Real.
These include pave out, which will allow travel lanes in each direction
with room for bicycles and no parking. A 5 foot sidewalk will be
constructed from the southerly project property line to EI Camino
Real.
38. Intersection of San Diego Way and EI Camino Real. The intersection
BP
PW
will be raised and realigned to be perpendicular to EI Camino Real.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
The intersection will be restriped to allow for left and right hand turn
pockets onto EI Camino Real.
39. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the
BP
PW
City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications
and Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer.
Drainage:
40. Drainage calculations are required per section 5 of Atascadero
BP
PW
Engineering Standards. The "Retention Areas" will be sized for the
detention of the 50 year developed storm runoff, while metering out
the 2 year undeveloped storm runoff. The offsite storm water flows
will be allowed to be passed through the project undetained in
drainage easements. The offsite flows and the detained onsite flows
must be released down stream in the same location, concentration
and pattern as historic flows were released, unless the downstream
owner provide written approval of a deviation.
41. Drainage calculations shall be produced considering all areas
BP
PW
tributary to this property. These calculations shall be in conformance
the City of Atascadero Engineering Standards. Submit calculations to
support the design of any structures or pipes. Closed conduits shall
be designed to convey the 10 -year flow with gravity flow; the 25 -year
flow with head, and provide safe conveyance for the 100 -year
overflow.
42. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall be produced and
BP
PW
approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City
of Atascadero. These plans shall recommend mitigation measure
during and after construction to eliminate point and non point source
pollution. The use on onsite grading feature to pond and percolate
storm water is recommended. A filter system, mechanical or non,
shall be installed with this project. This system shall comply with the
intent of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, Phase II
requirements.
43. Obtain approval by the City Engineer of the grading & drainage plan
BP
PW
and the storm drain design & facilities.
44. Acquire drainage easements where needed. Drainage shall cross lot
BP
PW
lines only where a drainage easement has been provided.
45. Concentrated drainage from off-site areas shall be conveyed across
BP
PW
the project site in drainage easements.
Transit:
46. Bus stop with shelter shall be installed on EI Camino Real (south
BP
PW
bound) along the EI Camino real Frontage, per the Public Works
Director.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Wastewater:
47. This project proposes a sewage lift station. This lift station will meet
BP
PW
the following criteria:
❑ Sewer lift stations, force mains, gravity mains, laterals and
other sewer facilities shall be privately owned and
maintained.
❑ Catalogue cuts of equipment that will be installed the lift
station shall be submitted and approved by the Director of
Public Works.
❑ Lift stations shall be installed with alarm dialers
programmed to notify qualified maintenance personnel
when malfunctions occur.
❑ Developer shall submit a lift station emergency
contingency plan that addressed protection of public
health and the environment from sewage spills and
prolonged power outages.
❑ Lift Station shall be equipped with duplex pumps.
48. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims located
BP
PW
below the elevation of the next upstream manhole cover of the public
or private sewer serving such drainage piping shall be protected from
backflow of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve
Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the
backwater valve.
49. The sewer force main crossing EI Camino Real shall cross
BP
PW
perpendicular in the right of way.
50. All sewer main taps will be done by the City of Atascadero. The
BP
PW
developers shall pay a sewer tap fee.
51. Sewer connection permit shall be issued separately (from building
BP
PW
permit) after public sewer extension has been completed and has
received a satisfactory final Public Works inspection. Final project
inspection shall be contingent upon completion of the public sewer
extension and Public Works final inspection.
Solid Waste Conditions:
52. Atascadero Waste Alternative shall approve the location, size and
BP
PW
design of all solid waste facilities. The facilities shall include room for
recycling and green waste containers. The location of the facilities will
take into account the collection of the solid waste.
Atascadero Mutual Water Company
53. Prior to the start of construction, , the applicant shall submit plans for
BP
BS
review and approval by AMWC for all existing and proposed water
distribution facilities that provide water service to the proposed
Development. The plans shall show all facilities required for fire
protection. The plans shall show all cross -connection devices
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
required to isolate the fire protection and landscape irrigation systems
from the domestic water system.
54. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain a
BP
BS
"Will Serve" letter from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company for the
newly created Lots.
55. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall pay all installation
BP
BS
and connection fees required by the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company.
56. All water distribution facilities shall be constructed in conformance
BP
BS
with Atascadero Mutual Water Company standards, policies and
approved procedures. All cross -connection devices shall be
constructed in conformance with AWWA and Department of Health
Services standards.
Mitigation Measures
BP
PS, BS, CE
1.C.1
Mitigation Measure 1.c.1: The following landscape mitigations shall apply:
■ Development along EI Camino Real shall be buffered with an informal
landscape theme to include groupings of shade and accent trees.
Evergreen shall be utilized where there is heightened visibility of the
project from EI Camino Real.
■ Fencing surrounding the private park space and the adjacent wetland
areas shall be transparent wrought iron and shall be integrated with the
final landscape plan subject to staff approval.
■ Development along San Diego Way will include street trees placed 30
feet on center, landscaped common open space area, and an
appropriately landscaped pedestrian project entrance.
■ The project shall include landscaping of all common areas, including
slopes, common open space areas, and building frontages.
■ Parking lot shade trees shall be provided within landscape fingers and
curbside landscape planters as shown in Exhibit 5. Trees shall be large
canopy trees and shall be of a scale appropriate to the project.
■ All trees shall be 15 gallon size or greater and shall be double staked.
Mitigation Measure 1.c.2: The proposed apartments shall include a variety
BP
PS, BS, CE
1.c.2
of earth -tone paint and roof colors designed to blend with the surrounding
environment and reduce the potential for reflected light and glare.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 1.c.3: Building architecture shall include features that
BP
PS, BS, CE
1.c.3
emphasize vertical elements and minimize the horizontal nature of the
buildings. Such features are to be of exceptionally high design quality per
General Plan Land Use Policy 2.1.2 and shall include changes in materials,
fagade undulation, and vertically emphasized window elements; or similar
treatments.
Mitigation Measure 1.d: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any off
BP
PS, BS, CE
1.d.
site glare. All exterior site lights shall utilize full cut-off, "hooded" lighting
fixtures to prevent offsite light spillage and glare. Building mounted fixtures
shall be designed to direct light downward. Any parking lot lighting shall be
low bollard style lighting or decorative pole lighting designed to be a
maximum of 14 feet in height. Lighting of the parking area shall be
integrated with proposed landscaping and/or covered parking elements.
Lighting at the rear of the proposed buildings shall be limited to low level
building mounted fixtures and shall be designed to produce a zero
footcandle reading at the property line.
Mitigation Measure 3.b: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
3.b
applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -
10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality
Handbook.
Section 6.3: Construction Equipment
■ Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications.
■ Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but
not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes,
generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for use off-road).
■ Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction
equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer certification standard for
off-road heavy-duty diesel engines.
■ Install diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC), catalyzed diesels particulate
filters (CDPF) or other District approved emission reduction retrofit
services (Required for projects grading more than 4.0 acres of
continuously worked area).
Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques
■ Develop a comprehensive construction activity management plan
designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment
operating during any given time period.
■ Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak hours to reduce
peak hour emissions.
■ Limit the length of the construction workday period, if necessary.
■ Phase construction activities, if appropriate.
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
9190 San Diego Way
Southside Villas
CUP 2003-0095
Timing
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigatio
n
Measure
(Continued from above)
GP
PS, BS, CE
3.b
Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10
All of the following measures shall be included on grading, demolition and
building plan notes:
A Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible.
B. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering
frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph.
Reclaimed (non -potable) water should be used whenever possible.
C. All dirt stock -pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed.
D. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project re -
vegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as
possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities.
E. Exposed ground areas that are plann4ed to be reworked at dates
greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast -
germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is
established.
F. All disturbed soil areas not subject to re -vegetation should be stabilized
using approved chemical soil binder, jute netting, or other methods
approved in advance by the APCD.
G. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved should be
complete as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid
as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are
used.
H. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on
any unpaved surface at the construction site.
I. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum
vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance
with CVC Section 23114.
J. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto
streets, or was off trucks and equipment leaving the site.
K. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried
onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water
should be used where feasible.
L. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor
the dust control program and to order increased watering, as
necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and
telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior
to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for
finish grading of any structure.
Mitigation Measure 4.a: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
4.a
applicable regulations developed by Althouse and Mead, Inc. in their
biological review, dated June 13, 2003 (Attachment 6).
Conditions of Approval /
Mitigation Monitoring Program
9190 San Diego Way
Southside Villas
CUP 2003-0095
Timing
BL: Business
License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigatio
n
Measure
Mitigation Measure 4.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
BP, GP, CA
PS, BS, CE
4.b.1
applicable regulations developed by Althouse and Mead, Inc. in their
biological review, dated June 13, 2003, pertaining to building location and
wetland rehabilitation methods. Implementation of the following mitigation
measures prior to, during, and following site construction will serve to avoid
and/or minimize adverse indirect impacts to Waters of the U.S. and wetlands
within the proposed project area:
A Buildings 124/125 and 126/127 shall be relocated, eliminated, and/or
downsized to avoid significant disturbance of the designated wetland
area. The applicant will be required to comply with all requirements and
regulations set forth by governing state agencies and shall obtain the
necessary permitting as discussed below.
B. Signage shall be placed at the pedestrian pathway entrance to the
wetlands area informing users of the sensitive nature of the wetlands
habitat.
C. The applicant shall provide a full biologist report, prior to the entitlement
hearing, that identifies all sensitive habitats on and adjacent to the
project site, and certifying the proposed development plan in regards to
wetland mitigations.
D. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-
construction survey of the on-site wetlands area and to report the
survey results to the City. This biologist shall also place protective
fencing at the protected wetlands boundary to ensure that construction
activities do not impact the noted areas. A note to this effect shall be
placed on the approved construction/grading plans with the provision
that CDFG shall be notified if the pre-construction survey finds
additional wetland habitat on-site, and that construction work is the area
shall not proceed without specific direction from the CDFG.
E. A qualified biologist shall be present during phases of construction that
are conducted adjacent to the identified wetland habitat. The biologist
shall submit regular reports to the Community Development Department
verifying the integrity of the impacted areas. Upon project completion
and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by
the project biologist certifying that the stated wetland protection and
mitigation measures were implemented and that the construction-
related protection and enhancement measures are no longer required.
F. Per recommendations setforth in the prepared biology review (Althouse
and Mead, Inc), the applicant shall contact the Army Corps of Engineers
prior to permit issuance and shall request authorization to install
culverts, impact degraded wetlands, and create functional wetlands
under Nationwide Permits, NW #7 Outfall Structures, NW #18 Minor
Discharges, and NW #27 Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
G. Per recommendations set forth in the prepared biology review (Althouse
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
4.b.1
and Mead, Inc), the applicant shall develop a wetland mitigation site at
a ration of 2:1, based on anticipated ratios required by the Army Corps
of Engineers, which shall be located adjacent to the established
wetlands at the southerly border of the subject property and which will
be located in the area of the existing degraded wetlands habitat.
Mitigation Measure 5.b.1: Should any cultural resources be unearthed
GP
PS, BS, CE
5.b.2
during site development work, the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, will
be followed to reduce impacts to a non-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 6.b: The grading permit application plans shall include
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
6.b
erosion control measures to prevent soil, dirt, and debris from entering the
storm drain system during and after construction. A separate plan shall be
submitted for this purpose and shall be subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer at the time of Building Permit application.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with
GP
BS
6.c
a future building permit by the building department.
Mitigation Measure 8.e.f.1: Points of concentrated drainage through the
GP
PS, BS, CE
8.e.f.1
existing wetlands areas shall be addressed by the project biologist and
engineer, and subject to review and approval as identified in the Biology
section of this initial study. All proposed drainage shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and shall be designed to City standards. All
site runoff shall be retained on site through the provision of on-site drainage
basins.
Mitigation Measure 8.e.f.2: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
GP
PS, BS, CE
8.e.f.2
(SWPPP)/Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted and approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of the building permit. The plan shall include
storm water measures for the operation and maintenance of the project for
the review and approval of the City Engineer. The Building Permit
application plans shall identify Best Management Practices (BMPs)
appropriate to the uses conducted on site that effectively prohibit the entry of
pollutants into storm water runoff.
Mitigation Measure 8.e.f.3: The developer is responsible for ensuring that
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
8.e.f.3
all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and th at such
measures are implemented. Failure to comply with the approved
construction Best Management Practices will result in the issuance of
correction notices, citations, or stop orders.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
Southside Villas
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 11.d: All construction activities shall comply with the
GP
PS, BS, CE
11.d
City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation, and as follows:
Construction activities shall be limited to the following hours of operation:
• 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday
• 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday
• No construction on Sunday
Further, particularly loud noises shall not occur before 8 a.m. on weekdays
and not at all on weekends.
The hours of construction may be modified by the Community Development
Director upon a determination that unusually loud construction activities are
having a significant impact on the neighbors.
Failure to comply with the above-described hours of operation may result in
withholding of inspections and possible construction prohibitions, subject to
the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
A sign shall be posted on-site with the hours of operation and a telephone
number of the person to be contacted in the event of any violations. The
details of such a sign shall be approved by staff during the Grading
Plan/Building Permit review process.
Mitigation Measure 14.a.b: The project shall include a tot lot within the
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
14.a.b
communal open space area at the southern border of the site. The tot lot
shall at a minimum include a commercial -grade swing set, slide, climbing
apparatus or similar equipment on a soft surface designed for the safety and
enjoyment of young children. The tot lot shall include pedestrian connection
from throughout the project and shall include durable seating arrangements
for adults and children. The tot lot shall be landscaped and shall include
shade trees.
Mitigation Measure 15.a.b.1 : Per the provided traffic study, the project shall
GP
PS, BS, CE
15.a.b.1
include the construction of full frontage improvements along San Diego Way
and EI Camino Real as approved by the City Engineer and per standards
listed in the General Plan Circulation Element. Improvements are to include:
■ Widening of EI Camino Real to allow for 2 southbound travel lanes and
class 2 bike facilities.
■ Widening of San Diego Way to a width of 24 feet to allow for a total of 2
travel lanes.
■ Curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along EI Camino Real and
San Diego Way.
Mitigation Measure 15.a.b.2: A Bus turnout shall be provided along the EI
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
15.a.b.2
Camino Real frontage. Facilities shall include a 5 -foot width bus turnout and
shelter. The shelter shall be a City Standard shelter and shall be subject to
the approval of the City Engineer.
Conditions of Approval /
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigatio
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/Monitoring
n
PS: Planning Services
Measure
BL: Business
BS: Building Services
9190 San Diego Way
License
FD: Fire Department
GP: Grading Permit
PD: Police Department
Southside Villas
BP: Building Permit
CE: City Engineer
CUP 2003-0095
Fl: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
Mitigation Measure 16.c.1: Proposed drainage into the existing wetlands
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
16.c.1
areas shall be addressed by the project biologist and engineer, and subject
to review and approval as identified in the Biology section of this initial study.
Mitiaation Measure 16.c.2: Drainage retention basins shall be included in the
BP, GP
PS, BS, CE
16.c.2
project site and shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Basins
shall be designed to accommodate all site runoff and each basin will be
maintained as designed.
EXHIBIT C: Site Plan
!m—
�--�� � - � - =1'i III. II'.'=_"_�
11 Mis
NEI- I Mi
It it
&milm
11
EXHIBIT G: Floor Plan
&A" & i -I
FLOOR PLAN wA7
.n i v..i �afaaL
u ■ e son-oui1
FLOOR PLAN "C"_
wwrw w ss
ire► rrw
lrt:a H_K� •/t �M
FLOOR PLAN wBw
��ws�
� •U1
�i
w�
&A" & i -I
FLOOR PLAN wA7
.n i v..i �afaaL
u ■ e son-oui1
FLOOR PLAN "C"_
wwrw w ss
ire► rrw
lrt:a H_K� •/t �M
FLOOR PLAN wBw
EXHIBIT H: Shade Structure Design
EXHIBIT I: Color and Materials Board
COLOR SYMBOL
R-1
P-1/CP-4
P-2/CP-1
r, P-2
CP -3
IIN&-
COLOR CHART
R-1 COMPOSITION ROOFING - AMERICAN -ANTIOUE
SLATE
CP-4*fP•1 FRAZ££-814L1V - WSTEO POLLEN
CP-I*)P-2 FRA7EE-818W..SALTBRUSN
CP -2' FRAZEE-6154M-GUMrEAF
CP )- FAAZEE-8!TSD-WKDGRASSES
- CEMF.N I PLASTER SPIAL. DE LA HABRA TO MATCH PAMT
COLOR SI.F.N'TCOLOR SAN -PLV FOR APPROVAL
PN*1( TO APPLICATION
4;OLOR APPLICAT:
J COMPOSITXNA3PNALTPCROW
NGIR•'?
2 I A8CIA (P-1)
7. CEN.ENT PLASTER - ANN WALL (CP -i)
4 CEMENT PIASTER- TOMA (CP -21
0 CEMENT PLASTER-TRMAROU%DDJJRSVNAULAVS(CP-1
i CEMfk7 PLASTER - BELLY BAND 'NIM (CP -4)
V,cv0000 TR -M AROJNO DOORS. V:NMVS. 6 BUI-O'NC. 1'D(:BS
EXHIBIT J: Preliminary Biological Assessment
Althouse and Mead
ALTHOUSE AND MEADE, INC.
BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1875 Welisona Road • Paso Robles, CA 93446 + Telephone (805) 467-1041 • Fax (805) 467-1021
VILA FACSIMILE Lynx Dec Althouse, RLD.c.
(805)459-1W
June I3, 2003 Dwid E. Wade' Ph.D.
274.1 (805) 705-2479
Steve McHarris 461-5036
Planning Services Manager
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Ataseadero, CA 93422
Re: South Side Villas, 9190 San Diego Road, JRM Development Proposal
APN 045-352-002,3,4,6,7
Dear Steve:
Yesterday I looked at the proposed development between San Diego Road and El
Camino Real. I identified two small wetlands along the property boundary as shown on
the attached map. The total area of the two wetlands is approximately 430 square feet.
One wetland is at the terminus of a small culvert that drains water from the mobile home
park north of San Diego Road and from the upslope area The second wetland is in the
corner of the lawn area, down slope from a septic tank vent. Bath wetlands are
dominated by rabbit's -foot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis) and Italian ryegrass (Lolium
multii locum). The wetland at the terminus of the culvert also contains vetch (Vicia
sativa), yellow starthistle (Centauria solstitialis), and other non -wetland species.
The remainder of the project boundary adjacent to wetlands on the parcel south of the
subject property, is dominated by fescue and blue -grass lawns and back yard structures
(i.e_, above -ground pool, landscaping, and fences) that have been in place since the early
1970's.
Tim Roberts and I discussed the appropriate location for a wetland mitigation site,
anticipating a 2:1 mitigation ratio from the Army Corps. By moving buildings 125 and
126 away from one another, there is plenty of room for creating wetland habitat adjacent
to the neighbor's existing wetland.
I left a message for Corrie Veenstra from the US Army Corps of Engineers this morning
stating that I had observed two small wetlands adjacent to the adjoining parcel she looked
at last week_ I recommend that the applicant notify the Corps of Engineers and request
authorization to install culverts, impact degraded wetlands, and create functional
wetlands under Nationwide Permits NW #7, Outfall structures, NW #l8, Minor
Disharges; and, NW#27, Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities.
Sincerely,
LynneDee Althouse
Copy: Tim Roberts via fax — 238-6148
EXHIBIT J: Preliminary Biological Assessment
Althouse and Mead
Althouse and Meade, Inc.
Attachment — Portions of map sent via fax by Tim Roberts (not to scale)
Clean Water Act Section 404 Wetlands,
weide the fenceline are contiguous with
tlands to the south, on the adjoining
parcel. Wetland sites are indicated by o�vals.l
ti
tl it—At`
i 1f
` # 1
ZB'Q 6f 1:9 8£Z 9NIa33NT9N'J siaaaaa t+a ezae 40�Z-£i-NqS
South Side ViUas 274.1 2
EXHIBIT J: Preliminary Biological Assessment
Althouse and Mead
ALTHOUSE AND MEADE, INC.
BIOLOGICAL AND ENWRONNIEWTAL SERVICES
1875 Wellsona Road + Paso Robles, CA 93446 • Telephone (805) 467.1041 • Fax(805) 467-1021
FACSIMILE. TRANSMITTAL 1-ynno Dec AMhowA P6D.C.
(30)459-[W
[)mitt E. Made. Pb.U.
July 28, 2003 (soos> gas xa9
274.1
Peter Josserand
809 13'6 Street
Paso Robles, CA 93446
238-5313
FAX 238-5373
Re: San Diego Way Apartments — Site Plan Review
Dear Peter.
We recommend the following information be included on a site plan for submittal to the
US Army Corps of Engineers and to the CA Department of Fish and Gerrie for review.
■ Grading plan with wetland areas clearly shown.
• Drainage plan (model flows from 2 yr to 100 yr storms in each drainageway) with
ordinary high water mark clearly indicated were drainage modifications are
proposed-
■ Cross-sections and details of drainageways and proposed culvert installations.
• Watershed boundary map.
The site plan you submitted to our office today does not show topography or drainages
(with wetland areas clearly identified).
1 recommend that we notify the Corps of Engineers and request authorization to install
culverts, impact degraded wetlands, and create functional wetlands. The Corps process
takes from 90 days to over a year, depending on endangered species issues. The Corps
will require a wetland delineation and may require additional surveys following
Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Your project will need a Clean Water Act 401 certification from the Regional Water
Quality Control Board before the Corps permit it fully authorized.
Your project may also require a permit from the CA Department of Fish and Game to
modify the location and function of wetlands.
Siuicerely, �j�
yne Althouse
EXHIBIT K: Project Statistical Summary
AREA CALCULATIONS _
Gross Site = 176,964 sq.ft.
Offer of Dedication= 2824 sq.ft.
Net Site = 174,140 sq.ft.
Building Footprints
18 buildings @ 1880 =
4 buildings @ 2030 =
5 Laundries @ 180 =
Total Footprints= 42860
33,840
8,120
900
24.61% of net
Parkin _
Total park'g. & drives = 56,566 = 32.48% of net,
Carports = 44324 =14,256 of parking
Landscape
Walks & flatwork =12,562
Softscape = 62.152
Total Landscape = 74,714 = 42.90% of net
EXHIBIT L: Off-site Public Improvement Plan
\\CityhaII\CDvlpmnG CUP - Conditional Use Permits\CUP 031CUP 2003-0095 San Diego Way. Southside
Villas\CUP 2003-0095. PC-SR.kd.doc
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report — Community Development Department
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
8805 San Rafael Road (APNs 056-371-042 & 056-361-029)
Kelly Gearhart/Eagle Ranch, LLC/ Wilson Land Surveys
RECOMMENDATION(S):
The Planning Commission:
1. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0097 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration 2003-0033 and approving Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023 (Tract
2491), a request to subdivide three parcels totaling 16.47 acres into five parcels of
3.05, 3.05, 2.80, 3.73, and 3.80 acres gross, based on findings and subject to
conditions.
REPORT -IN -BRIEF:
A request to subdivide three existing lots of record to create a 5 lot, residential subdivision
with parcels of 2.80 to 3.80 acres, gross. The site is located on the north side of San
Rafael Road. The subdivision has been designed with "nonbuildable" areas to reduce
potential impacts to native trees and minimize grading on 30% or greater slopes.
61411Rl_rIIf] 0WTI 01I9lyGT4a1691
1. Applicant/Owner: Eagle Ranch, LLC/Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara
Avenue, Atascadero, California 93422
(805) 461-7504
2. Representative: Wilson Land Surveys, 7600 Morro Road, Atascadero,
California 93422
(805) 466-2445
3. Project Address: 8805 San Rafael Road, Atascadero, California 93422
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
4. General Plan Designation: RE (Rural Estate)
5. Zoning District: RS (Residential Suburban with a minimum lot size of
2.78 to 3.034 acres gross)
6. Site Area: 16.47 acres, gross
7. Existing Use: Vacant
8. Environmental Status: Proposed Negative Declaration posted September 12,
2003.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The site consists of three existing parcels and is moderately to steeply
sloped with oak trees on the higher elevations. It is located on the north side of San Rafael
Road, east of the intersection of Los Osos Road and San Rafael Road.
San Gabriel
San Rafael
Project Site
Los Osos Road
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
The surrounding parcels are generally developed with single-family residences on 3 to 5
acre lots. The parcels to the south are within the County's unincorporated area.
Analysis: Minimum lot size for residential suburban parcels is based on performance
standards, which include distance from the community center, percolation rates, slopes,
access and average size of surrounding lots. When these factors were computed for the
project site, minimum lot size was calculated to be between 2.784 and 3.034 acres, gross
(see attachment 2).
Based on the minimum lot size standards, the applicant is requesting a 5 -lot subdivision
with proposed lot sizes as follows:
Lot 1 —
3.05
Lot 2 —
3.05
Lot 3 —
2.80
Lot 4 —
3.78
Lot 5 —
3.80
Lots 1, 2, and 3 would have driveway access off of San Rafael Road. Lot 4 is proposed as
a flag lot from San Rafael Road and Lot 5's access would be along the flag portion of Lot 4
with an easement to Lot 5.
Environmental Review: The Initial Study concludes that there will be no significant harm to
the environment as a result of this subdivision. A proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration is included in draft Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0096.
Public Improvements: Project development will include the construction of San Rafael
Road to City standards, from approximately the Los Osos/San Rafael intersection across
the entire property frontage.
Flag Lots: Consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, the proposed flag lot has been
conditioned to provide a 24 foot wide accessway with 20 feet of pavement. Section 11-
6.26 of the Municipal Code requires that the lot farthest from the street own the "flag" or
accessway in fee. Other lots using the accessway are to have easements, unless
otherwise approved by the advisory agency (i.e., Planning Commission). Based on
topographical considerations, the subdivision has been designed so that Lot 4 will own the
accessway, and Lot 5 will have an access and utility easement over the accessway and
across Lot 4.
9
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
4111/1�','/� \:� `,IiuNIIlllntIIIIIllil�\\�\\\\\\\,
11411f - \\\,I IIII III/ lrr/r4//!rn/111111111
1111,111\\ll�l\,IIIIIIIIII/IlI%lllllllllllllQ�II�1\\\\\���\�\��� _
U141
\ 1
Parcels 11111111 ll111111111J
III 111/111111
A ,1 III 1
Illll#\I� I IIII\\ \ \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \ \ \
Parcel 4 \\\\\\\ \\\\ \
-s==ate== _ � \\\�, IIII\,l\ \\ \\\ \\�\\\\\\\\0'►\\R\\\\\\� \
j111111,1\\11\\\\
\\`\\\`\\�\\\\\\►\\ \ I//JI/1,/�I/l/�jllj%l////j//�//ii-r _ � \1
I I,1ii11111\111,\1111\1 1\\\ 1
�l/,I/lut,gll\il l\�
ii III It
it
/i//
��/�%�� ��irgiii'�i/b//iii''/�3/iii iii �/ij' � ___ _� •�/ii�' /// /III
L��o�/� iii! G ii/i'i iii'%n/i/i�'�ii�i/i�
Parcel1
\
Parcel 2 --_; _ Parcel 3
-- ------ `1 --_--LLA
-
Z'v� SAN RWO& ROAD
nb Easement Area
a for Parcel 5
30' Flag Area
b
� a
7�
SI%78 i1 8 @
w
*
11.11
q
,
4111/1�','/� \:� `,IiuNIIlllntIIIIIllil�\\�\\\\\\\,
11411f - \\\,I IIII III/ lrr/r4//!rn/111111111
1111,111\\ll�l\,IIIIIIIIII/IlI%lllllllllllllQ�II�1\\\\\���\�\��� _
U141
\ 1
Parcels 11111111 ll111111111J
III 111/111111
A ,1 III 1
Illll#\I� I IIII\\ \ \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \ \ \
Parcel 4 \\\\\\\ \\\\ \
-s==ate== _ � \\\�, IIII\,l\ \\ \\\ \\�\\\\\\\\0'►\\R\\\\\\� \
j111111,1\\11\\\\
\\`\\\`\\�\\\\\\►\\ \ I//JI/1,/�I/l/�jllj%l////j//�//ii-r _ � \1
I I,1ii11111\111,\1111\1 1\\\ 1
�l/,I/lut,gll\il l\�
ii III It
it
/i//
��/�%�� ��irgiii'�i/b//iii''/�3/iii iii �/ij' � ___ _� •�/ii�' /// /III
L��o�/� iii! G ii/i'i iii'%n/i/i�'�ii�i/i�
Parcel1
\
Parcel 2 --_; _ Parcel 3
-- ------ `1 --_--LLA
-
Z'v� SAN RWO& ROAD
nb Easement Area
a for Parcel 5
30' Flag Area
b
� a
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
Proposed Tentative Map for Tract 2491
Subdivision Design: The proposed project has been presented with conceptual building
and grading footprints. However, actual design of the project site has not been completed.
In order to minimize potential impacts to native trees and grading on slopes of 30% or
greater, the applicant has identified "nonbuildable" areas on the proposed lots (see
attachment 3). This method of establishing "building envelopes" allows for flexibility in
actual site development and addresses potential impacts to natural resources and
potential geological constraints. An additional, informational map sheet will be recorded
with the final map that will notify potential buyers of the new lots that all project development
must be sited outside the nonbuildable areas.
Conclusion:
As conditioned, the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The parcel configurations are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements and
the size and shape of the proposed lots are consistent with the character of the immediate
neighborhood. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the tentative tract
map as proposed.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project would likely have a slight negative impact on City revenues. As a general rule,
single-family dwellings require services that exceed the revenue generated by the
proposed uses.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may approve the subdivision subject to additional or revised project
conditions. The Commission's motion to approve needs to include any new or revised
project conditions.
2. The Commission may deny the subdivision if it is found to be inconsistent with the
General Plan or any of the other required findings. The Commission's motion to deny
must include a finding basis for denial.
3. 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 Location Map (General Plan & Zoning)
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Attachment 2
Minimum Lot Size Calculations
Attachment 3
Subdivision Design Site Plan
Attachment 4
Draft Resolution 2003-0097
ATTACHMENT 1: Location Map (General Plan and Zoning)
TTM 2002-0023
San Rafael Road, east of Los Osos Road
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
ATTACHMENT 2: Minimum Lot Size Calculation Form
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
San Rafael Road, east of Los Osos Road
Lot Size
Lot I
10-12,000
40-59
20%
0.3
Distance from Center of
Community 10-12,000 =.30
Septic Suitability (perk rate 40-59 min/inch= 1.00
1
Average Slope 11-20% =.75
0.75
Access Condition City accepted road =.40
0.4
Average Lot Size Within 1500
Feet acres 2.92
0.58
Lot Size
_
Lot 2
10-12,000
40-59
14%
Minimum
Lot Size=
3.034
0.3
Distance from Center of
Community 10-12,000 =.30
Septic Suitability (perk rate 40-59 min/inch= 1.00
1
Average Slope 11-20% =.75
0.75
Access Condition City accepted road =.40
0.4
Average Lot Size Within 1500
Feet acres 2.92
0.58
Lot Size
Distance from Center of
Community
Septic Suitability (perk rate
Average Sloe
Access Condition
Average Lot Size Within 1500
Feet acres
LatJ
10-12,000 =.30
40-59 min/inch= 1.00
0-10%=.5
City accepted road =.40
2.92
10-12,000
40-59
10%
Minimum
Lot Size=
3.034
0.3
1
0.5
0.4
0.58
_
Lot Size
Lot 4
10-12,000 =.30
>20 min/inch=.50, 20-39 min/inch=.75, 40-59
min/inch= 1.00, > 60 min/inch= 1.50
11-20% _ .75
City accepted road =.40
2.92
10-12,000
40-59
15%
Minimum
Lot Size=
2.784
0.3
Distance from Center of
Community
Septic Suitability (perk rate
1
Average Slope
0.75
Access Condition
0.4
Average Lot Size Within 1500
Feet acres
0.58
Lot Size
Distance from Center of
Community
Septic Suitability (perk rate
Average Slope
Access Condition
Average Lot Size Within 1500
Feet acres
Lot S
10-12,000 =.30
40-59 min/inch= 1.00
11-20% =.75
City accepted road =.40
2.921
10-12,000
40-59
18%
Minimum
Lot Size=
3.034
0.3
1
0.75
0.4
0.58
Minimum
Lot Size=
3.034
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
ATTACHMENT 3: Subdivision Design Site Plan
TTM 2002-0023
San Rafael Road, east of Los Osos Road
I _
,!U��N+14�/;' � I ��\���� \ �; - I' ! f •ice � ■
ss
Nonbuild area •� f K
Nonbuild area
t �
dp
Nonbuild area
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
ATTACHMENT 4: Draft Resolution PC 2003-0097
Mitigated Negative Declaration for TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
San Rafael Road, east of Los Osos Road
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC 2003-0097
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2002-0023 TO DIVIDE THREE RESIDENTIAL
LOTS INTO FIVE RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SAN RAFAEL
ROAD, EAST OF LOS OSOS ROAD
(APN 056-361-029 & 056-371-042)
(EAGLE RANCH, LLC/KELLY GEARHART)
WHEREAS, Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Avenue, Atascadero, California 93422
(Applicant) and Eagle Ranch, LLC, P.O. Box 25010, Ventura, California 93002 (Property Owner)
applied for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide three lots totaling 16.47 acres into five parcels of 3.05,
3.05, 2.80, 3.78 and 3.80 acres, gross each; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed project has a General Plan Designation of Rural Estate (RE) and is
in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and all other applicable General Plan
policies; and,
WHEREAS, the site is located in the Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district with a minimum
lot size ranging from 2.784 to 3.034 acres, gross, which allows for the proposed use and density when
certain findings are made; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0033 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Tract Map application on October 7, 2003 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 Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission of the
City of Atascadero, hereby certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0033 based on the following
findings:
follows:
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with
CEQA; and,
2. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning
Commission, and the information contained therein was considered by the Planning
Commission, prior to recommending action on the project for which it was prepared;
and,
3. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation
measures are incorporated into the project.
4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals.
5. The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable.
6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or
indirectly.
SECTION 2. Findings for approval of subdivision. The Planning Commission finds as
1. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan and
applicable zoning requirements.
2. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan and applicable zoning requirements.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed.
5. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their
habitat.
6. The subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood.
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at
large for access through, or the use of property within, the proposed subdivision; or
substantially equivalent alternative easements are provided.
8. The proposed subdivision design and type of improvements proposed will not cause
serious public health problems.
9. The proposed subdivision will be accomplished without detriment to the adjacent
properties.
10. The proposed accessway improvements meet the intent of the subdivision ordinance
and based on topographical issues, Lot 4 will own the accessway and Lot 5 will be
provided with an access and utility easement.
SECTION 3. Approval. The Planning Commission does hereby approve Tentative Tract
Map 2002-0023 (Tract 2491) to subdivide three parcels totaling 16.47 acres into five parcels of 3.05,
3.05, 2.80, 3.78 and 3.80 acres each, subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits:
EXHIBIT A: Mitigated Negative Declaration
EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT C: Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023
EXHIBIT D: Tentative Tract Map 2002-0023 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: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ABSTAINED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta Fonzi, Planning Commission Chairperson
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
ATTEST:
Warren Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
EXHIBIT A: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0097
TTM 2002-0023
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
EXHIBIT B: Conditions of Approval
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0097
TTM 2002-0023
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
Planning Services
Standard Planning Conditions
1. The approval of this application shall become final, subject
Ongoing
PS
to 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, or a final map is
recorded with the County Recorder's Office.
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
Ongoing
CA
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,
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
concerning the subdivision.
6. The final map shall be subject to additional fees for park or
FM
PS
recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) as required by City
Ordinance.
Project Specific Conditions
7. In conjunction with recordation of the final map, the
FM
PS
applicant shall record an additional map sheet which
identifies the nonbuildable areas and conceptually locates
the building pads, leach fields and driveways. The actual
building areas may deviate from those shown on the
additional map sheet, but they shall not be located in any
area noted as "nonbuildable."
Engineering Standard Conditions
8. In the event that the applicant is allowed to bond for any
FM
CE
public improvements required as a condition of this map,
the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement
Agreement with the City Council.
9. An engineer's estimate of probable cost shall be submitted
FM
CE
for review and approval by the City Engineer to determine
the amount of the bond.
10. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall record
FM
CE
concurrently with the Final Map.
11. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection
FM
CE
agreement with the City.
12. A six (6) foot Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be
FM
CE
provided contiguous to San Rafael Road property frontage.
13. The applicant shall acquire title interest in any off-site land
FM
CE
that may be required to allow for the construction of the
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
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.
14. Slope easements shall be obtained by the applicant as
FM
CE
needed to accommodate cut or fill slopes.
15. Drainage easements shall be obtained by the applicant as
FM
CE
needed to accommodate both public and private drainage
facilities. The applicant shall address stormwater
detention prior to grading and drainage approval.
16. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for
FM
CE
review in conjunction with the processing of the parcel
map.
17. The final map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to
FM
CE
the map being placed on the agenda for City Council
acceptance.
18. Prior to recording the final map, the applicant shall pay all
FM
CE
outstanding plan check/inspection fees.
19. Prior to recording the final map, the applicant shall
FM
CE
complete all improvements required by these conditions of
approval.
20. Prior to recording the final map, the applicant's surveyor
FM
CE
shall set monuments at all new property corners. A
registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall
indicate by certificate on the parcel map, that corners have
been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they
will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced.
21. Prior to recording the tract map, the applicant shall submit
FM
CE
a map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
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.
22. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
FM
CE
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map. The applicant shall
show all access restrictions on the final map.
23. Prior to recording the final map, the applicant shall have
FM
CE
the 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 final map.
24. All public improvements shall be constructed in
FM
CE
conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering
Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as
directed by the City Engineer.
25. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or
FM
CE
alteration of existing utilities.
26. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas,
FM
CE
electric, cable TV and telephone) underground. Utilities
shall be extended to the property line frontage of each lot
or its public utility easement.
27. Prior to the final inspection of any public improvements, the
FM
CE
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.
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
28. The applicant shall monument all property corners for
FM
CE
construction control and shall promptly replace them if
disturbed.
Engineering Project Specific Conditions
29. An ingress, egress and utility easement, benefiting Lot 5,
FM
CE
shall be shown along the Lot 4 accessway and shall be
shown on the final map.
30. The accessway for Lot 4 shall be constructed in
FO
BS
accordance with the City's Subdivision Ordinance and shall
have a minimum paved width of 20 feet.
31. A road maintenance agreement shall be prepared for
FM
CE
maintenance of the accessway to Lot 4. Prior to
recordation, the agreement shall be reviewed by the City
Engineer and City Attorney.
32. Construction of San Rafael Road to City Standard 401,
FM
CE
across the entire property frontage and extending westerly
to connect with the previously constructed portion of San
Rafael Road will be required prior to recordation of the final
map. Complete public improvement plans shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
Building /Fire Marshal:
1. Interior fire sprinklers will be required whenever the grade of
GP
FD/PS/BS
accessways exceeds 16%.
2. All roads, accessways and driveways shall be built to Fire
GP
FD/PS/BS
Department standards, including turnouts and/or
turnarounds, as required.
3. All residential structures shall be within 800 feet of a fire
GP
FD/PS/BS
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
hydrant as measured along the road and driveways.
Water Company:
FM
AMWC
1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall
submit plans for review and approval by AMWC for all
existing and proposed water distribution facilities that
provide water service to the proposed lots. All new water
distribution facilities shall be constructed in conformance
with the Atascadero Mutual Water Company standards.
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall obtain a "Will Serve" letter from the Atascadero
Mutual Water Company for the newly created Lots.
3. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall pay all
installation and connection fees required by the
Atascadero Mutual Water Company.
4. Private easements may be needed for the private water
service lines that serve parcels which do not front on San
Rafael Road.
5. There is a current recovery fee agreement in effect for the
water main extension completed on this section of San
Rafael Road. Recovery fees would be due, in addition to
the standard installation and connection fees, for all lots of
this subdivision.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project is conditioned to
BS
BS/PS
3.b.1
comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the
control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3,
6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook.
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Program
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
Timing
PM: Parcel Map
GP: Grading Prmt
BP: Building Prmt
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
PI: Public
Improvements
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
Mitigation
Measure
Section 6.3: Construction Equipment
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune
according to manufacturer's specifications.
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment,
including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes,
loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets,
compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for
use off-road).
• Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel
construction equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer
certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel
engines.
• Install diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC), catalyzed diesels
particulate filters (CDPF) or other District approved
emission reduction retrofit services (Required for projects
grading more than 4.0 acres of continuously worked
area).
Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques
• Develop a comprehensive construction activity
management plan designed to minimize the amount of
large construction equipment operating during any given
time period.
• Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak
hours to reduce peak hour emissions.
• Limit the length of the construction workday period, if
necessary.
• Phase construction activities, if appropriate.
Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10
All of the following measures shall be included on grading,
demolition and building plan notes:
A Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where
possible.
B. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient
quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the
site. Increased watering frequency would be required
whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Program
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
Timing
PM: Parcel Map
GP: Grading Prmt
BP: Building Prmt
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
F0: Final
Occupancy
PI: Public
Improvements
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
Mitigation
Measure
(non -potable) water should be used whenever
possible.
C. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as
needed.
D. Permanent dust control measures identified in the
approved project re -vegetation and landscape plans
should be implemented as soon as possible
following completion of any soil disturbing activities.
E. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be
reworked at dates greater than one month after initial
grading should be sown with a fast -germinating
native grass seed and watered until vegetation is
established.
F. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegatation
should be stabilized using approved chemical soil
binder, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD.
G. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved
should be complete as soon as possible. In
addition, building pads should be laid as soon as
possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders
are used.
H. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not
exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
I. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose
materials are to be covered or should maintain at
least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance
with CVC Section 23114.
J. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit
unpaved roads onto streets, or was off trucks and
equipment leaving the site.
K. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil
material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers with reclaimed water should be used
where feasible.
L. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or
persons to monitor the dust control program and to
order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent
transport of dust off site. The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
Program
/Monitoring
Measure
Arborist in the Tree Protection Plan. Tree protection fencing shall be
PM: Parcel Map
TTM 2002-0023 (Tract 2491)
GP: Grading Prmt
PS: Planning Services
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The Precise Grading Plan shall identify tree
BP: Building Prmt
BS: Building Services
4.e.2
North side of San Rafael, east of Los Osos Road
TO: Temporary
FD: Fire Department
and/or native shrub mass within 20 feet of construction activity.
Occupancy
PD: Police Department
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: Grading and excavation and grading work
F0: Final
CE: City Engineer
4.e.3
shall be consistent with the City of Atascadero Tree Ordinance. Special
Occupancy
WW: Wastewater
precautions when working around native trees include:
PI: Public
CA: City Attorney
1. All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain.
Improvements
AMWC: Atascadero
2. Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area.
Mutual Water Company
APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation
and land use clearance for finish grading of any
structure.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1 : The building permit site plan shall identify all
BP
PS
4.e.1
protection and enhancement measures recommended by the Certified
Arborist in the Tree Protection Plan. Tree protection fencing shall be
installed at the locations called out in the Tree Protection Plan.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The Precise Grading Plan shall identify tree
BP
PS
4.e.2
protection fencing around the dripline of each existing on-site tree
and/or native shrub mass within 20 feet of construction activity.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: Grading and excavation and grading work
BP
PS
4.e.3
shall be consistent with the City of Atascadero Tree Ordinance. Special
precautions when working around native trees include:
1. All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain.
2. Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area.
3. Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be
pruned prior to any heavy equipment work being done.
4. Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the
dripline of all trees.
5. All trees within the area of work shall be fenced for protection
with 4 -foot chain link, snow, or safety fencing placed per the
approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be
in place prior to any site excavation or grading. Fencing shall
remain in place until completion of all construction activities.
6. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be
clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: An arborist's report shall be required prior to
BP
PS
4.e.4
project implementation. The report shall identify each native tree
proposed for removal and each tree within the project area subject
to potential impact. The report shall provide recommendations for
tree pruning, tree protection of existing native trees to remain, and
identify native tree impact/replacement mitigation per the
Atascadero Municipal Code Section 9-11.105.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.5: The developer shall contract with a certified
FO
BS/PS
4.e.5
arborist during all phases of project implementation. The certified
arborists shall be responsible for monitoring the project during all
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
phases of construction through project completion, as follows:
(a) A written agreement between the arborist and the developer
outlining a arborist monitoring schedule for each construction
phase through final inspection shall be submitted to and approved
by planning staff prior to the issuance of building/grading permits.
(b) Arborist shall schedule a pre -construction meeting with engineering
/planning staff, grading equipment operators, project
superintendent to review the project conditions and requirements
prior to any grubbing or earth work for any portion of the project site.
All tree protection fencing shall be installed for inspection during
the meeting.
(c) As specified by the arborist report and City staff:
■ Prune all trees to be saved for structural strength and crown
cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist;
■ Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree
pruning.
■ All trenching or grading within the protected root zone area,
outside of the tree protection fence shall require hand
trenching or preserve and protect roots that are larger than 2
inches in diameter.
■ No grading or trenching is allowed within the fenced protected
area.
• Any roots that are 4 inches in diameter or larger are not to be
cut until inspected and approved by the on-site arborist.
■ Apply any additional recommendations of the project arborist.
(d) Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status
report shall be prepared by the project arborist certifying that the
tree protection plan was implemented, the trees designated for
protection were protected during construction, and the
construction -related tree protection measures are no longer
required for tree protection.
Mitigation Measure 6.b.1 : All disturbed areas, not shown on the project
BP
BS/PS
6.b.1
landscape plan for landscaping shall be hydroseeded with a native
seed mix. Erosion control measures shall include an erosion control
blanket for all 2:1 fill slopes. Affected areas that previously contained
native shrubs and vegetation shall be replanted with similar plant
species per the approved landscape plan. Duration of the project: The
contractor will be responsible for the clean-up of any mud or debris that
is tracked out on to EI Monte Rd and/or the private access drive by
construction vehicles.
Mitigation Measure 6.b.2: The grading permit application plans shall
BP
BS/PS
6.b.2
include erosion control measures to prevent soil, dirt, and debris from
entering the storm drain system during and after construction. A
separate plan shall be submitted for this purpose and shall be subject
to review and approval of the City Engineer at the time of Building
Permit application.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.d.1 : A soils report shall be required to be
BP
BS
6.c.d.1
submitted with a future building permit by the building department. The
building plans will be required to follow the recommendations of the
soils report to assure safety for residents and buildings. The property
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
contains no unusual geological formations.
Mitigation Measure 6.e.1 : Percolation tests are required in the City of
BP
BS
6.e.1
Atascadero before building permits for residences can be issued.
Mitigation Measure 11.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with
BP
BS/PS
11.d.1
the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation.
Construction activities shall be limited to the following hours of
operation:
• 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday
• 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday
• No construction on Sunday
Further, particularly loud noises shall not occur before 8 a.m. on
weekdays and not at all on weekends.
The Community Development Director upon a determination that
unusually loud construction activities are having a significant impact on
the neighbors may modify the hours of construction.
Failure to comply with the above-described hours of operation may
result in withholding of inspections and possible construction
prohibitions, subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director.
A sign shall be posted on-site with the hours of operation and a
telephone number of the person to be contacted in the event of any
violations. Staff shall approve the details of such a sign during the
Grading Plan/Building Permit review process.
EXHIBIT C: Tentative Parcel Map
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0097
TTM 2002-0023
i
i
Parcel 5
3.80 Acres Gross
" • t 111, � 1,\ � � \\'�\]�,
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
Easement area for Lot 5
Alt
= Z�.\\\\
__ 11 /,lr►, 14 \\`\a\ c \\\ w 1111
1 out 11111/ I
?\`�►rf� +'lul
It,
r I
�Q11�.
�,1'j1j1111
1//'�' x',111+111+
/1'ice"_� �" 11111x111y+t +++
wlrrl j//�tsii/ii�i4i/!ii �i/i�1/i/it+'vr 111 1
it
/ iil�� 11 111
/jirii/fit
y47�%��/I /11
v.
Flag Portion of Lot 4
1
Parcel 3
Ise..s..
O
i N
2.80 Acres
!
Gross
t
S �
"III II1rr1 /1rI r
Parcel 4
,1
' 11
i a 1 1 +ttTt
t+11,11 111,1
. � ^ _
378 Acres Gross
-
�� �Is
,t1�1
ITEM NUMBER: 5
DATE: 10/21/03
Easement area for Lot 5
Alt
= Z�.\\\\
__ 11 /,lr►, 14 \\`\a\ c \\\ w 1111
1 out 11111/ I
?\`�►rf� +'lul
It,
r I
�Q11�.
�,1'j1j1111
1//'�' x',111+111+
/1'ice"_� �" 11111x111y+t +++
wlrrl j//�tsii/ii�i4i/!ii �i/i�1/i/it+'vr 111 1
it
/ iil�� 11 111
/jirii/fit
y47�%��/I /11
v.
Flag Portion of Lot 4
M 0111M we
Parcel 3
2.80 Acres
!
Gross
,1
Parcel
(
3.05 Acres Gross
Parcel 1
-C ------- ----1
3.05 Acres Gross
---------, �,
------- "_
Il —
M 0111M we
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10/21/03
EXHIBIT D: Subdivision Design Site Plan
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0097
TTM 2002-0023
\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\- TTM - Tentative Tract Maps\TTM 02\TTM 2002-0023 8805 San Rafael Road\TTM 2002-0023 PC
Staff Report.km.doc
Planning
Public Hearing
SUBJECT:
Commission Staff Report
Hotel Park Amendment
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100
(5855 Capistrano Ave. / Hotel Park Group)
ITEM NUMBER: 6
DATE: 10/21/03
The proposed project is an application for a Condition Use Permit (CUP 2003-0100) to
amend the master site plan established for the Hotel Park office development in 1987. The
proposed amendment is a request to modify the architecture of the phase 2 building and
combines three structures into one. The project, as proposed, does not include any
alterations to the site circulation set forth in the original master site plan. The project will
require the removal of one native oak tree.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff Recommends:
The Planning Commission refer the item back to staff with direction to the applicant to revise
the proposed project to conform to the design standards set forth in the Downtown
Revitalization Plan.
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant: Hotel Park Group, PO Box 1980, Atascadero, CA
93423, (805) 466-6644
2. Representative: Frank Henderson, 948 Patria Circle, Atascadero, CA 93422
(805) 466-5874
3. Project Address: 5855 Capistrano Ave., Atascadero, CA
APN 029-363-044
4. General Plan Designation: D (Downtown)
5. Zoning District: DO (Downtown Office)
6. Site Area: 1.9 acres
7. Existing Use: Vacant
8. Environmental Status: The proposed project is within the scope of the improvements
included within the original Master Plan of Development PPN
30-87 and included within the original initial study for the
project. No new impacts are associated with the modified
building designs.
DISCUSSION:
Analysis of Planning Issues
1. Project Summary
The proposed project consists of an amendment to the master site plan for Hotel Park, located
at 5855 Capistrano Ave. The proposed modifications relate to the Architecture of the
buildings included in Phase II of the master development scheme. No modifications to the
site circulation, as shown on the 1987 approved master site plan, are included with this
application, with the exception of the removal of one native oak tree as discussed below.
Multi Family
1
RSF-Y
tel
Park
ltlti Family
2. Background
Surrounding Land Uses and
Setting:
North: Multi family residential
South: Downtown Commercial —
Century Plaza
East: Highway 41 east
West: Atascadero
Creek/Downtown
Commercial
On September 14, 1987, a precise plan application for the construction and master site plan
for a 69,696 square foot office/retail project was approved by the Community Development
Department. The master site plan specified four phases for the overall construction of the
project. Grading for all phases was approved to be completed with the issuance of phase I
building permits. Phase I included five office buildings which were constructed between
1989 and 2000. To date, only phase I of the master site plan has been completed.
\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\- CUP- Conditional Use Permits\CUP 03\CUP 2003-0100 5855 Capistrano Hotel Park Amend\CUP 2003-0100. PC-
SR.kg.doc
The original approval for Phase II included three office buildings of the same design as phase
I. The applicant is requesting modifications to the architecture of the proposed office
buildings, which includes a redesign of the exterior fagade and the enclosure of connecting
breezeways to form one single building structure.
/
I I /
I I I AIN k
I
I
/
/
l
r�
,
4
,
y
The original approval for Phase II included three office buildings of the same design as phase
I. The applicant is requesting modifications to the architecture of the proposed office
buildings, which includes a redesign of the exterior fagade and the enclosure of connecting
breezeways to form one single building structure.
3. Design and Appearance
The Conditional Use Permit includes a review of site design and building appearance,
including landscaping and architecture. The proposed modification to the appearance and
architecture of Phase II buildings includes an adjustment to the overall building footprint and
a redesign of the building facade.
The original building design included three separate office buildings connected with open
stairwells. Each building totaled 6,082 square feet in size with upper and lower office suites.
The applicant is proposing to consolidate the originally approved detached buildings into one
16 -suite office building with three enclosed stairways. As proposed, the building footprint
has been extended an additional 5 feet to the north of the building. To avoid on-site parking
and circulation problems discussed in section 4 of this report, staff is recommending that the
5 -foot setback be maintained (Condition 11). The proposed building will total 20,707 square
feet gross.
a
MOW
NO
7 k e...
�r
_PROPOSED 0 FtCE BtD'G.
six
gn
i::
AME,�21�q +, / .{
Proposed
SITE PLAN
Phase II
Architecture
The proposed building is a large box mass with minor fagade articulation. The building has a
mixture of different architectural styles; Mediterranean roof and stucco, classical columns,
coined corners, and colonial style windows. Furthermore, the scale of the windows does not
relate in proportion to the scale of the building. The central building entrance incorporates a
two-story transparent glass fagade. As proposed, the roof will be clay barrel tile with 2 -foot
soffited overhangs and a low 5:12 pitch. A 3 -foot high scored plaster base is proposed on all
building facades. Two-story column elements are proposed in intervals along the front and
rear building faces. French doors and iron grille work have been included on the east and
west elevations.
Building Colors and Materials
The applicant is proposing a neutral color pallet of warm and cool grays. The main building
face will be smooth plaster finish with two distinct shades of gray separated by horizontal
banding abutting the second floor windows. Shallow relief pilasters have been located along
the front and rear fagade and extend the full height of the proposed building.
Downtown Design Guidelines
The proposed project is located within the Downtown area, as designated in the General Plan.
The City has adopted architectural design and site development standards, listed in the design
guidelines section of the Downtown Revitalization Plan, to create a pedestrian scaled
environment throughout the civic core (Attachment 3). The intent of the design guidelines is
to 1) assist in the revitalization of downtown Atascadero and 2) provide for infill commercial
development of high architectural quality that is compatible with existing attractive
buildings.
Fa(;ade example with downtown Iguidelines• •
The Downtown Design Guidelines call for accentuated fagade details and high quality
architectural design including the use of contrasting textures and materials and pedestrian
scaled building features. Specifically, section II of the guidelines discourages large unbroken
fagade surfaces, supporting a human scaled storefront design approach. The guidelines set
forth recommended design solutions to allow larger buildings to fit within the downtown
vision, including accentuated vertical and horizontal breaks along lengthened building
facades and the incorporation of elements such as balconies, pilasters, awnings, and canopies.
Project Signage
No signage has been proposed as part of this application. Staff is recommending a sign
master sign plan be prepared the project to ensure that all building signage is compatible with
existing tenant signage design and location (Condition 13).
4. Site Circulation / Parking
Project circulation will be provided as shown on the Hotel Park master site plan. Phase II will
include one additional site access point joining the existing Bank of America Parking lot to
the project site. 100 additional parking spaces will be provided as specified by the master site
plan for Phase II development.
The original master site plan shows a curb to building setback at the north side of the
building of approximately 5 feet, allowing for parked vehicles to overhang beyond the curb
and allowing for pedestrian passage at the side of the building. The proposed stairway
enclosure and reconfiguration of the building footprint eliminates this setback between
parking curb and building. In addition, due to changes in elevation over the length of the
proposed building, grading for a raised pad will necessitate a 4 -foot high retaining wall along
the front and side fagades. Staff is recommending that the 5- foot setback be maintained to
allow for site vehicular and pedestrian site access as previously approved and that the limits
of the graded pad be maintained within the required setback (Condition 11).
5. Tree Removal
The applicant is requesting the removal of one native oak tree, identified as a heritage oak by
the Planning Commission during the initial site approval in 1987. The subject oak tree, in
addition to all other existing on-site oak trees, is identified as a State recognized historic
granary tree. The project arborist has determined that the oak tree proposed for removal is in
declining health and will present a hazard once Phase II is constructed. The master site plan
incorporates a planter for the existing oak tree. Staff is therefore recommending that the
removal be mitigated for with the planting of a 36" box oak of like species.
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 below stated following findings must be made. Staff has identified finding
#1 as appropriate for the application request.
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;
S) 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:
9 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.
6. Conditional Use Permit
The project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use and the zoning district. 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 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 use is consistent with the General Plan.
Staff Comment: The proposed project is inconsistent with appearance review
requirements set forth in the General Plan.
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 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 of injurious to the property or improvements
in the vicinity and the use.
Staff Comment: The proposed commercial building will 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: As proposed, the project is inconsistent with the downtown
revitalization plan and design guidelines due to the scale and bulk of the structure.
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, 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 building and use are consistent with the traffic projections
and road improvements anticipated within the General Plan.
Based on staff's analysis in the preceding sections, it does not appear that all of the required
findings for the granting of a Conditional Use Permit can be made.
7. General Plan Consistency
The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of the
site as a 20,707 square foot office building compatible with the Hotel Park master site plan as
approved in 1987. The architecture and character of the proposed structure is inconsistent
with the guidelines set forth in the Downtown Revitalization Plan.
8. Proposed Environmental Determination
Environmental impacts for Phase II of the Hotel Park development were assessed during the
1987 project review. All mitigation measures applicable to Phase II of the master site plan
will be included in this application.
CONCLUSION:
The General Plan and Downtown Revitalization Plan call for pedestrian scaled design within
the downtown area. Specifically, guidelines set forth in the Downtown Revitalization Plan
call for strong pedestrian connections to the Hotel Park office park development from retail
and supporting uses within the extended downtown area. The master site plan approved in
1987 allows for pedestrian pathways throughout all phases of development. Subsequent
phases include additional offices and a restaurant facility.
The applicant's proposal for a redesign of Phase II architecture includes a monumental
building which includes classical design elements designed to accentuate a grand scale. The
City's downtown design guidelines call for a more pedestrian scaled architecture with
accentuated fagade features. Staff believes that the project, as presented, is inconsistent with
the design intent set forth in the Downtown Revitalization Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Planning commission can approve the project
2. The Commission may make modifications to the project and/or conditions of
approval for the project.
3. The Commission may deny the conditional use permit. The Commission is required
to specify the reasons for denial of the project and make an associated finding with
such action.
PREPARED BY: Kelly Gleason, Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Attachment 1: General Plan, Zoning and Location Map
2. Attachment 2: Master Site Plan for Hotel Park: 1987
3. Attachment 3: Downtown Revitalization Plan Appendix A: Downtown Design
Guidelines
4. Attachment 4: Draft Resolution of Approval
ATTACHMENT 1: GENERAL PLAN LOCATION AND ZONING MAP
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100: Hotel Park Amendment
ATTACHMENT 2: MASTER SITE PLAN - HOTEL PARK 1987
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100: Hotel Park Amendment
ATTACHMENT 3: DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PLAN APPENDIX A -DESIGN GUIDELINES
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100: Hotel Park Amendment
ATTACHMENT 4: DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2003-0102
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100: Hotel Park Amendment
RESOLUTION 2003-0102
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-0100 AMENDING PHASE II
OF THE HOTEL PARK MASTER SITE PLAN TO ALLOW FOR
A 20,707 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING
AT APN 029-363-044.
(5855 Capistrano Ave / Hotel Park Group)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Hotel Park Group (PO Box 1980,
Atascadero, 93423) [Applicant] for a Condition Use Permit (CUP 2003-0100) to amend the
master site plan for phase II of the Hotel Park development to construct a 20,707 square foot
office building in the downtown district located at 5855 Capistrano Ave (APN 029-363-044);
and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is D (Downtown); and,
WHEREAS, the site's zoning district is DO (Downtown Office); and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject
Conditional Use Permit application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said
Conditional Use Permit; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on October 7, 2003, studied and considered Conditional Use Permit
(CUP 2003-0100).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
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,
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; and,
SECTION 2. Findings for Approval of Tree Removal Permit. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
1. The tree is dead, diseased or injured beyond reclamation, as certified by a
tree condition report from an Arborist;
SECTION 3. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a
regular session assembled on October 7, 2003, resolved to Conditional Use Permit 2003-
0100 subject to the following conditions and exhibits:
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT B: Site Plan
EXHIBIT C: Exterior Elevations
EXHIBIT D: Floor Plan
EXHIBIT E: Color and Material Sample Board
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
Roberta Fonzi, Chairperson
Atascadero Planning Commission
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
Conditional Use Permit 2003-0100: Hotel Park Phase II Amendment
Conditions of Approval
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
CUP 2003-0100: Hotel Park Phase II Amendment
/Monitoring
Measure
GP: Grading Permit
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Permit
BS: Building Services
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FD: Fire Department
FI: Final inspection
PD: Police Department
F0: Final Occupancy
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Planning Services
1. This conditional use permit shall be for a 20,707
On going
PS
square -foot new commercial building, parking lot and
landscaping, as consistent with the original project
master site plan PPN 30.87, and located on parcel 029-
363-044 (5855 Capistrano Ave) regardless of owner.
2. The approval of this use permit shall become final and
On going
PS
effective for the 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. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid
On going
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 project has received a building
permit.
4. The Community Development Department shall have
BP
PS
the 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 Conditional Use Permit.
5. All site improvements, lighting, landscaping, and
BP
PS
building elevations including colors, material and
FI
finishes shall be consistent or superior to those shown
in attached Exhibits B through E.
6. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened from
BP
PS
view in all directions.
FI
7. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all
BP
PS
other mechanical equipment, whether on the ground,
FI
on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from
public view with materials architecturally compatible
with the main structure. Gas and electric meters,
electric transformers, and large water piping systems
shall be completely screened from public view with
approved architectural features and/or landscape
plantings.
Conditions of Approval
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
CUP 2003-0100: Hotel Park Phase II Amendment
/Monitoring
Measure
GP: Grading Permit
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Permit
BS: Building Services
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FD: Fire Department
FI: Final inspection
PD: Police Department
F0: Final Occupancy
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
8. The Community Development Department will approve
BP
PS
a final landscape and irrigation plan prior to the
issuance of any building permit consistent with Exhibit
G. Landscape plans and specification will be prepared
by a professional landscape architect and indicate the
location, size, quantity and planting requirements of all
plant materials. The plans will include details for an
automatic underground irrigation system. The
landscape construction plan shall be consistent with the
incorporation of the following features at a minimum:
a) The species, size, quantity and location of all
proposed plant material will be indicated on the
plans.
b) All slopes in excess of 3:1 shall be planted with
slope stabilizing plant materials and installed with
jute mesh.
9. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all off-
GP
PS
site access and parking easements required from
BP
CA
adjacent properties shall be approved by the City
Attorney and recorded in favor of the project and it
perpetuity.
10. A 5 -foot setback at the west of the proposed building
BP
PS
shall be maintained to allow for site vehicular and
pedestrian site access as previously approved, and,
the limits of the graded pad shall be maintained within
the required setback area.
11. The stucco siding shall be of smooth finish
BP
PS
appearance, not machine finished.
12. Prior to the installation of any signage, a master sign
BP
PS
program shall be established, subject to the review
and approval of planning staff.
Public Works
Standard Conditions
BS
13. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check &
BP
BS
Inspection agreement with the City.
14. The applicant shall be responsible for the protection,
BP
BS
relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities.
15. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas,
BP
BS
electric, cable TV and telephone) underground.
16. The applicant shall monument all property corners for
BP
BS
construction control and shall promptly replace them
if disturbed.
17. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant
BP
BS
shall submit a grading and drainage plan with a
Conditions of Approval
Timing
Responsibility
Mitigation
CUP 2003-0100: Hotel Park Phase II Amendment
/Monitoring
Measure
GP: Grading Permit
PS: Planning Services
BP: Building Permit
BS: Building Services
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
F0: Final Occupancy
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
separate sheet(s) devoted to sedimentation and
erosion control, prepared by a registered civil
engineer for review and approval by the City
Engineer.
18. Prior to the final inspection, all outstanding plan check
BP
BS
and inspection fees shall be paid.
19. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit
BP
BS
a written statement from a registered civil engineer
that all work has been completed and is in full
compliance with the approved plans and the Uniform
Building Code (UBC).
Atascadero Mutual Water Company
20. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall submit plans showing the water distribution
facilities required to serve the subdivision for review
and approval by the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company (AMWC). The plans shall show all facilities
required for providing water to the subdivision for
domestic and fire protection purposes. The plans
shall show all cross -connection devices required for
isolating the landscape irrigation systems from the
domestic water system.
21. Prior to commencing construction on the water
system improvements required for the subdivision,
the applicant shall pay all installation and connection
fees required by AMWC.
22. Before to approval of improvement plans by AMWC,
the applicant shall obtain a "Will Serve" letter from
AMWC for the properties subdivision.
23. The applicant shall design and construct all water
distribution facilities in conformance with AMWC
standards, policies and approved procedures and the
California Waterworks Standards (Code of
Regulations Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 16). All
cross -connection devices shall be constructed in
conformance with AWWA and California Department
of Health Services standards.
24. The applicant shall dedicate easements to AMWC for
all existing or proposed water system improvements
constructed outside of Colony rights-of-way or rights-
of-way dedicated for public use. AMWC shall review
and approve the form and content of the easements
before their recordation. The applicant shall provide
AMWC with recorded copies of the easements before
construction of the water system improvements
commences.
EXHIBIT B: Site Plan
CUP 2003-0100
1 MiMYA/
SITE PLAN
EXHIBIT C: Exterior Elevations
CUP 2003-0100
_:
iii ■ ■■!,;�
'�■!■�it�
j ;■■'
■'�
•
mi
Oft
D ■ A:m.
mf
..■
�I.
1►I
---------------
1�61�W�
--------------
illi
�
t
■■ ■■� -
�
■■
■■
i
_
®I
■
EXHIBIT D: Floor Plans
CUP 2003-0100
%incaevo •ox+avozvry x ococv9vsoo �ms•9v Yov VD'083GV06VIV
calve e+e coozz-aaosrinoav •xazasanax as 3AV ONVUISIdVO SSSS
9NI1'U19N09 9N I NNVId SNb'1d a001� � •
sa1L-!DOSSV -Q UosaapuaH 7:1 >UVd -aM
.?A S—A . LL d-.IZ � „E .4Z . Zh 9 Til 9—.0
D 11r_ -rt. � r- - IT
� A5
4
y
yy 55i
W 4 h W V
I
q
Z Z
a_
CL
101 e ir E1= Ir
iA
L u
P P
'J w a
5 a
5 ti
5 V
y4
h j
f,15x
A
M1
99 h
Y M
I-tY
t<ilil
x: mA A9
if III m 1119 m
EXHIBIT E: Color & Material Sample Board
CUP 2003-0100
% O
Q
J
W
Z
.6 0
�; LL
spi
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
Planning Commission Staff Report
Public Hearing
Zone Change 2003-0069 / Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020 (Tract 2498),
805 El Camino Real
(Kelly Gearhart / Wilson Land Surveys)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff Recommends:
Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0104, recommending that the City Council certify the proposed
Mitigation Negative Declaration 2003-0054; and,
2. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0105, recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance
for first reading to approve Zone Change 2003-0069; and,
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0106 recommending that the City Council approve Conditional
Use Permit 2002-0072 for the Master Plan of Development subject to findings and conditions of
approval; and,
4. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0107 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Tract
Map 2002-0020, subject to findings and conditions of approval.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
The proposed project consists of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit (CUP 2000-
0008) to allow a 26 unit single family development with a 60 unit seniors complex, know as the
Rochelle Residential Project. A use permit for a 168 -space recreational vehicle park currently exists on
the site. The applications consist of a zoning code text change to PD -9 (ZCH 2003-0069), a Master
Plan of Development for Planned Development 9 (PD -9) (CUP 2002-0072) and a tentative tract map
(TTM 2002-0020). The project will include a 45.9 -acre open space parcel that will protect the Salinas
River flood plain area and provide a public park site. The site is bordered by the Union Pacific Railroad
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
to the south, the Salinas River to the north and Paso Robles Creek to the west. Graves Creek bisects
the site. Development areas are limited to flat bluffs above the riparian areas that have been historically
used for dry farming. Project access will be from El Camino Real in the form of a grade separated
railroad crossing bridge which is currently under construction as part of a separate project. The site has
a General Plan Designation of SFR X (Single Family Residential '/z ac minimum), CREC (Commercial
Recreation) and OS (Open Space) and a Zoning District RSF-X (Residential Single Family 1/2 ac
minimum), LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned Development 9 overlay.
1. Applicant: Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Avenue, Atascadero, CA
93422 Phone: 805/674-3711
2. Property Owner: Kelly Gearhart
3. Representative: Ken Wilson, Wilson Land Surveys, 7600 Morro Road,
Atascadero, CA 93422
4. Project Address: 805 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 049-043-002
5. General Plan Designation: General Plan Designation of SFR X (Single Family Residential
1/2 ac minimum), CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS
(Open Space)
6. Zoning District: RSF-X (Residential Single Family'/2 ac minimum), LS (Special
Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned
Development 9 overlay.
7. Site Area: 75.4+/- acres (gross)
8. Existing Use: Vacant, road under construction
9. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 posted
October 1, 2003 / Rochelle/Auto Mall and RV Park
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report SCH 91071086
Feb 1992.
Site description: The 72 acre site consist of a combination of flat grassland areas surrounded by
riparian corridors following the Salinas River, Graves Creek and Paso Robles Creek. Development
portion of the project will be limited to the flat grassland portions of the site while the riparian areas will
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
be protected as permanent open space. There are no native cak trees located in the proposed
development areas. The development areas of the site are situated above the 100 -year flood plain
(refer to following aerial photos).
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
60 senior cottages
26 single family
residential lots
d
4
Home Depot
100 year flood plain
.' -� '
Z�,-- .� _; __
• ,... '"�:►rte ��i,
Y
a.
Riparian areas
Salinas Riverbed
•+ u
_ .
all*
Riparian areas
-,•x
Flat grassland
'
-.>.
areas
.... ��.
Flat grassland
areas
�` b
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
BACKGROUND:
The proposed project represents the latest is a series of projects that have been approved for the site
dating back in the early 1990's. In 1992 General Plan Amendment 2A-91 was approved for the entire
125 acre Rochelle site with an EIR. The project consisted of an auto mall south of the railroad and a
440 space RV park north of the railroad. Planned Development #9 was adopted for the site to regulate
development. In 1999, the project was amended to allow for the Home Depot Commercial Center on
the south side of the railroad. An application for phase 1 of the RV park project was approved in 2000
allowing 168 space park north of the railroad. Due to financing problems construction of the RV park
did not occur and the property owner requested the City consider residential land use on of the site as
part of he General Plan update process. In July 2002, the City adopted a new General Plan
redesignating the site for single family residential and allowing for a senior housing project under the
Commercial Recreation designation. The current application is a proposal to amend PD -9, adopt a
revised master plan of development and approve a tentative tract map consistent with the 2002 General
Plan land use designations.
Another project, De Anza Estate was approved in 2002 south of the project site. That project
consisted of clustered estate residential lots that utilize an access road that connects to El Camino Real
through the project site. Construction of that road project is currently in progress.
Railroad Crossing
Bridge
Project Boundary
a
De Anza Estates
n
Access Road
to EI
Camino Real
�D
m
D
Cn
0
--1
mD
a
De Anza Estates
n
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
DISCUSSION OF PLANNING ISSUES:
General Plan / Zoning Consistency
General Plan Designations for the site consist of SFR -X (Single Family Residential '/2 ac minimum),
CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space). The 26 single family lots are proposed within
the SFR X designation with a PD overlay allowance for minimum lot areas of 0.30 acres. General Plan
policy HOS 1.1.4. allows lot sizes smaller than '/2 acre in the SFR X land use through a PD process.
The 60 senior cottages are proposed in the CREC (Commercial Recreation) land use. The CREC
allows for malty family residential development up to a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per acre.
The remainder of the site will be dedicated to the City as open space and future park land consistent
with OS land use areas. In addition, the project will provide affordable housing units, public trails and
an equestrian staging area consistent with General Plan policy.
PD 9 Text Amendment
Planned Development 9 was originally adopted to allow an RV park on the project site. Since the
update of the General Plan, PD -9 is now inconsistent with the underlying land use designations. Staff is
recommending that the following zoning code text be adopted to resolve this inconsistency and allow
approval of the project. The amended text of PD -9 is included below:
9-3.654 Establishment of Racroatien Residential Planned Development Overlay Zone
No. 9: (PD9) North of Union Pacific Railroad.
. .--.i.-4;-Residential Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 9 is established as shown on
the official zoning maps (Section 9-1.102). The following development standards are
established:
(a) A Master Plan of Development shall be approved prior to approving a plot plan, precise plan,
conditional use permit, tentative parcel map, or tract map. The Master Plan shall be applied for
and processed in the manner prescribed for a conditional use permit (Section 9-2.109).
(b) The proposed Master Plan of Development shall generally incorporate the mitigation
measures as contained in the final supplemental environmental impact report (EIR), prepared by
Site and Environmental Design, February 1992. Depending on the proposed project, the EIR may
need to be modified or expanded to address unforeseen environmental impacts.
(c) In approving a Master Plan of Development, the level of processing for subsequent projects or
phases may be reduced to a plot plan provided that the Master Plan contains sufficient detail to
support such a determination.
(d) No subsequent plot plan, precise plan, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map or tract
map shall be approved unless found to be consistent with the approved Master Plan of
Development. Any amendment to the Master Plan, including conditions thereof, shall be
accomplished as set forth in subsection (a) of this section.
(e) In approving a Master Plan of Development for the site, the conditionally allowed land uses
are limited to the following:
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
raso KODies
Creek Open
Space Parcel
60 senior
cottages
Graves Creek
Open Space
CREC
OS
F R -X
PD -9 Overlay zone
EI Camino Real - - " Q, q
/ Home Depot
Center I �.
0
Salinas River
Open Space
Parcel
26 single
family
Grade Separated
Railroad Crossing
hinrinr rnncfrur4inn1
Project Design
SFR
Seniors
Project Design
The project has twc
development. The
cottages located on
grounds oriented ar
paths will connect with tl �
will be a conventional tra
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
Senior Cottage
Development
Typical Single
Familv Elevation
_ '� ; �iT
- � ; �_� _ _ �S'�`�< � .moi � ,
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
Affordable Housing
The project is subject to the Council's interim inclusionary housing policy. The senior cottages will be
subject to the multi -family requirements and the single family project will be subject to the single family
standards. The project has been conditioned to provide all required units as on-site constructed units
consistent with the following table.
Rochelle PD -9
Affordable Housing Plan
Inclusionary
Housing
Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
SFR Units
Housing
Council Policy
Proposed
Difference
In -Lieu Fee
MFR Units
60 units
Affordable
Distribution
20% Affordable
12 units
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units 4%
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units 4% $ 4,925.00
Estimated Valuation
100,000.00
Affordable
Distribution
20% Very Low
2.0 units
2 units
0 units
0%
37% Low
4.0 units
4 units
0 units
0%
43% Moderate
5.0 units
5 units
0 units
0%
11.0 units
11 units
0 units
0% $ -
$0 / MFR unit
Inclusionary
Housing
Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
SFR Units
26 units
20% Affordable
5 units
Estimated Valuation
197,000.00
Affordable
Distribution
100% Moderate
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units 4%
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units 4% $ 4,925.00
$235 / SFR unit
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
Access
The project proposes to provide this a primary access point from El Camino Real. The Home Depot
project includes a roadway bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad that would provide access to the
proposed project. A secondary emergency project access is located at the end of Ferrocarril Road
which is an existing cul-de-sac street. The senior cottage project will require the construction of a
bridge across Graves Creek for access. The fire department is requiring a secondary emergency
evacuation plan for the senior cottages as part of the project.
Roads and Maintenance
The project has been conditioned to establish an assessment district to cover the costs of emergency
services, road, landscape and bridge maintenance.
Parks and Trails
The project includes a system of pedestrian and equestrian trails that will provide access to the Salinas
River and De Anza Trail. A trail corridor is conditioned along the east side of the road that runs through
the project. This trail segment will provide a connection from De Anza Estates through the project up to
Paso Robles Creek. The project will also include a public equestrian staging area with direct access to
the Salinas River. The Parks and Recreation Commission is recommending that the City take title to the
equestrian staging area and consider the site for a future park (see attached Parks and Recreation
Commission comments.). The Parks Commission is recommending an additional trail corridor behind
the lots at the top of the riverbank and a paved walkway along the street. Both of these items are not
currently part of the project. The Commission may want to consider the Parks Commission's
comments in making a recommendation to Council. SLOCOG has just released a trail corridor study to
connect Atascadero to Templeton (see attached map). The project has been conditioned to provide
the necessary easements to accommodate segments 8 and 10.
Parks and Recreation Commission Comments.
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
MEMORANDUM
September 29, 2003
Warren Frace, Community Development Director
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
IVSD
SEP 3 0 2003
coMfAUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FILE COP y
Brady Cherry, Assistant City Manager
Tentative Tract Map 2498 — Planned Development 9/C.U.P. 2002-0027
On Thursday, September 18, 2003, the Atascadero Parks and Recreation Commission
made the following recommendation regarding Tentative Tract Map 2498.
Recreation and Park issues related to Tentative Tract Map 2498 -Planned
Development 9/C.U.P. 2002-0027
MOTION BY: Commissioner Butz, seconded by Commissioner Mathews:
Parks and Recreation Commission recommend to the Planning Commission that
the following conditions be applied to Tentative Tract Map 2498 Planned
Development 9/C.U.P. 2002-0027:
a. Extend the Anza Trail from the southern boundary of the project to the
northern boundary of the project behind the homes and along the Salinas
River assuring equestrian and public access and in keeping with the
natural environment.
b. Require and improve hard surface pedestrian path in front of the homes.
c. Construct a trailhead area with parking, a small holding arena and hitching
posts.
d. Construct a "step -over" type barrier through the existing fence to AMWC
property and through any fencing constructed at the northern boundary of
the property.
Parks and Recreation Commission recommend that staff pursue the potential
lease of adjacent Atascadero Mutual Water Company property as a site for
future sports fields.
This recommendation cannot be construed to be an endorsement of the
development.
6 Ayes; 0 Nos. Motion passed 6/0
Please let me know if you have any questions or have any comments.
C Geoff English, Deputy Director of Community Services
Atascadero Parks and Recreation Commission
Templeton-Atascadero Bikeway Connector Constraints Analysis
Section 3.0 Conclusion and Recommendations
XW I
;'s a
!f
y
f•'fr7 P �� � •�
A •rte •S l
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
I
Source: RvKm ConsLAnnits, Ane_ 2003.
I
14 •
V
41
41
Trail Segment Constraint Severity Figure .3-1
rSan Luis Obispo County
�
4
3
I
Legend
N
Constraint Severity
n
o Lan Constraint Level
/A
G Moderate Constraint Level
e� Moderate to High Constraint Level
High Constraint Level
Q Segment Nodes
Q Project Boundary
Sm lade A-2 for rd•nhframhon of ndvidval
constrnints associg(ad with each trait tegmen/.
• Qvstramf sevwq for Segments 8 and 10 are
comogard on Gty o/Adasa+dero dovdopm•nt
t 1
Source: RvKm ConsLAnnits, Ane_ 2003.
I
14 •
V
41
41
Trail Segment Constraint Severity Figure .3-1
rSan Luis Obispo County
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
Environmental Issues
Previous Environmental Studies:
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified in 1981 for the subject property
and the adjacent commercial property. At the time, the project included a prezoning and annexation
proposal called the Rochelle Prezoning. The EIR was certified and annexation of the parcel
accomplished in 1984. The site was zoned Retail Commercial, Recreation and Suburban Residential at
the time.
In 1992, a Supplemental Focused EIR (SF-EIR) was prepared assessing the impacts of a 27 acre
commercial park envisioned with five dealership auto sales mall on the site of the present commercial
development, and a 444 space recreational vehicle park on the subject site. The discretionary actions
covered by the 1992 SF-EIR included a request for a zone change and general plan amendment.
The SF-EIR identified Water Supply and Air Quality as Significant Adverse Impacts of the proposed
project. The City Council declined to certify the EIR, rendering action on the project moot. On July
14, 1992, the Council approved the applicant's request to re -hear the project.
The A EIR identified Water Supply and Air Quality as Significant Adverse Impacts. On November 24,
1992, the SF-EIR and A EIR were certified with two Statements of Overriding Considerations. On
December 8, 1992, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 249 rezoning the project area from
Commercial Tourist, Residential Suburban, and Recreation with Flood Hazard overlays to Commercial
Park and Recreation with a Planned Development overlay No. 9 (PD -9) and Flood Hazard overlay.
PD -9 required the approval of a Master Plan of Development before approving plot plan, precise plan,
CUP, tentative parcel map or tract map.
When the commercial center was approved in 1999, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was
adopted by the Planning Commission. The 1999 MND included an updated traffic study prepared by
ATE.
Project Environmental Determination:
After reviewing the SF-EIR, Addendum EIR and 1999 MND, staff finds that a supplemental MND
would be appropriate for the project. An updated Archaeological Report, Noise Analysis and
Biological Resources Assessment have been prepared and included as part of the MND. Staff has
identified a number of mitigation measures which would reduce the project's environmental impact to a
level of insignificance.
The mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for Planning
Commission consideration.
ITEM NUMBER: 7
DATE: 10-21-03
CONCLUSIONS:
• The project density is in conformance with the General Plan.
• The project meets the Planned Development 9 standards as amended.
• The subdivision is consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may recommend the City Council approve the project subject to additional or
revised project conditions. The Commission's motion to approve needs to include any new or
revised project conditions.
2. The Commission may recommend denial of the project.
3. 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.
PREPARED BY: Warren Frace, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 --
Location Map (General Plan & Zoning)
Attachment 2 --
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0104
Attachment 3 --
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0105
Attachment 4 --
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0106
Attachment 5 --
Draft Resolution PC 2003-0107
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE: 10-21-03
ATTACHMENT 1: Location Map (General Plan / Zoning)
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution 2003-0104
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2003-0104
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2003-
0054 PREPARED FOR ZONE CHANGE 2003-0069, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-
0072, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2002-0020
(805 El Camino Real / Gearhart)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara Avenue,
Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant & Owner), to consider a project consisting of a Planned
Development overlay zone change of PD -9 with the adoption of a Master Plan of Development, and a
33 -lot cluster residential tract map with 26 single family lots and a 60 -unit senior housing complex, on a
72+/- acre lot located at 805 El Camino Real (APN 049-043-002); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing
following the close of the review period for the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration to consider
its adequacy; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a public hearing
held on Tuesday, October 21, 2003, hereby resolves to recommend that the City Council certify
Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 based on the following findings and as shown on Exhibit A:
1. The Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and,
2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning Commission, and the
information contained therein was considered by the Planning Commission, prior to
recommending action on the project for which it was prepared; and,
3. The project does not have the potential to create a significant environmental impact; and,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
4. The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration will be forwarded to the City Council, and the
information therein contained will be considered by the City Council, prior to taking final
action on the project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by the
Planning Commission Secretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero.
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following
roll call vote:
AYES: (X)
NOES: (X)
ABSENT: (X)
ABSTAIN: (X)
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta Fonzi, Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Exhibit A: Proposed Negative Declaration 2003-0054
1
` CITY OF ATASCADERO
PROPOSES AMENDED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2003-0054
6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5035
APPLICANT: Kelly Gearhart
6205 Alcantara Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93401
PROJECT TITLE: PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle
Residential Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-
0020
PROJECT LOCATION: 805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422: APN 049-
043-002
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
-- •IT�7.��
i •
• �- -
. • - •� • .� .u•i• �-� • .� - �• •�•Iii�T - .- a 111 111: • .l•. • � i� -
••u • �� . ••u ' '�' •�• •�. . u 11 11 M 4W.W4111MMMu.• ��
- . �- �- - •.u•i a -. • i. . ..• �- .. .� �. �. •••�
.0
u u •• •� .. • ••-� •. .ol•• o• ••u•� ' • -
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation
measures are incorporated into the project.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or
indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study 20030-0054 (made a part
hereof by reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined
that the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following proposed
mitigation measures are incorporated into the project.
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES:
The attached mitigation measures have be incorporated into the project's conditions of approval to
insure each mitigation is implemented and monitored.
PREPARED BY: Warren Frace, Community Development Director
DATE POSTED: October 2, 2003
PUBLIC REVIEW ENDS: October 21, 2003
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
805 El Camino Real
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP
2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
Environmental Review 2003-0054
1. Project Title: PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Project) ZCH
2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Warren Frace, Community Development Director
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
4. Project Location:
805 El Camino Real (APN 049-043-002)
Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County)
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Kelly Gearhart
6205 Alcantara Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93401
6. General Plan Designation:
SFR X (Single Family Residential 1/2 ac minimum), CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS
(Open Space)
7. Zoning:
RSF-X (Residential Single Family I/z ac minimum), LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space)
with a Planned Development 9 overlay
8. Project Description: The proposed project consists of an amendment to an existing conditional use
permit (CUP 2000-0008) to allow a 26 unit single family subdivision with a 60 unit seniors
complex, know as the Rochelle Residential Project. A use permit for a 186 -space recreational
vehicle park currently exists on the site. The applications consist of a zoning code text change to
PD -9 (ZCH 2003-0069), a Master Plan of Development for Planned Development 9 (PD -9)
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
(conditional use permit, CUP 2002-0072) and a tentative tract map (TTM 2002-0020). The
project will include a 45.9 -acre open space parcel that will protect the Salinas River flood plain area
and provide a public park site. The site is bordered by the Union Pacific Railroad to the south, the
Salinas River to the north and Paso Robles Creek to the west. Graves Creek bisects the site.
Development areas are limited to flat bluffs above the riparian areas that have been historically used
for dry farming. Project access will be from El Camino Real in the form of a grade separated
railroad crossing bridge which is currently under construction as part of a separate project. The site
has a General Plan Designation of SFR X (Single Family Residential %Z ac minimum), CREC
(Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space) and a Zoning District RSF-X (Residential Single
Family '/z ac minimum), LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned
Development 9 overlay.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is located at the northernmost end of the City of
Atascadero near Santa Cruz Road. The property is bounded on the west by a shopping center under
construction (Home Depot) and the railroad tracks; the Salinas River to the northeast; Graves Creek
to the north and residences on large lots south of the site.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement): PUC, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Dept. of Fish and Game, Atascadero
Mutual Water Company
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Figure 1
Location Map
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
❑
Aesthetics
❑
Biological Resources
❑
Hazards & Hazardous
❑
Materials
❑
Mineral Resources
❑
Public Services
❑
Utilities / Service
Systems
❑
Agriculture Resources
❑
Air Quality
❑
Cultural Resources
❑
Geology /Soils
❑
Hydrology / Water
❑
Land Use / Planning
Quality
❑
Noise
❑
Population / Housing
❑
Recreation
❑
Transportation/Traffic
❑
Mandatory Findings of Significance
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
® 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant effect' or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described
on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
® 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects
(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Warren Frace
Community Development Director
Date
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the
project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it
is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not
expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well
as operational impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less
than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures
from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the
checklist.
6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references information
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to
the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached.
Other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
❑
❑
❑
M
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
M
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
❑
❑
M
❑
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
❑
M
glare that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
SOURCES: Site Development Plan, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR.
DISCUSSION: The project will change the character of a currently undeveloped area.
This change is considered less than significant due to the secluded location and the
preservation of 40+ acres of open space surrounding the project. All exterior lighting will
be subject to the City's lighting ordinance which requires shielded fixtures.
MITIGATION MEASURES: N/A
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, ❑ ❑ F-1 M
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing ❑ ❑ ❑
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use?
SOURCES: Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: The property is not designated as prime agricultural land and is not under
agricultural production.
MITIGATION MEASURE: N/A
3. AIR QUALITY -- The significance criteria
established by the Air Quality Control District in
its CEQA Guidelines may be relied upon to
make the following determinations. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
El M
❑ ❑
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ ❑
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ❑
substantial number of people?
SOURCES: Land Use Element, Air Pollution Control District CEQA Guidelines,
Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: Construction of the proposed project would result in emission of air
pollutants that exceed recommended significance thresholds. Emission associated with
project construction also adds to the cumulatively significant effect that results in basin
wide exceedance of air quality standards.
The Addendum EIR suggests the inclusion of a camp store to reduce trips out of the
project; however, the adjacent shopping center will have a convenience market to serve
the needs of campers. The proposed bridge and driveway will provide pedestrian access
to the adjacent shopping center.
MITIGATION MEASURES
3.c.1. A bicycle and pedestrian pathway will be provided along the bridge and project
driveway to Graves Creek.
3.c.2. A pedestrian and bicycle pathway shall be provide through the project with a connection to Graves
Creek and the Salinas River.
3.c.3. The following measures shall be noted on the grading plans and implemented
during construction:
a. Water trucks shed during construction to keep all areas of vehicle movement
damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. Increased watering is
required whenever wind speed exceeds 15 mph. Reclaimed water should be
used whenever possible.
b. Amount of disturbed area shall be minimized and onsite vehicles speeds
should be reduced to 15 mph or less.
c. If stockpiling of fill material is required, soil stockpiled for more that two days
shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust
generation.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
d. Trucks transporting material to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of
origin or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer.
e. Control Technology for construction Equipment shall be used. Examples of the
technology include, but are not limited to: a) Diesel equipment shall be tuned
with a fuel injection timing retard of 2 degree, and installation of high pressure
injectors, and use of reformulated diesel fuel; OR b) Diesel equipment shall be
turned with a fuel injection timing retard of 2 degree, coating of internal
combustion chamber surfaces (cylinder head, piston, valves), and use of
reformulated diesel fuel.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
C
I-
FE-
��
FE-
❑-
n
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially
Significant
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ❑
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Less Than
Less Than
Significant with
Significant
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
®
❑
No
Impact
IN
FM
AI
SOURCES: Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR, July 7, 2000 Biological Resources
Assessment prepared by Morro Group, Inc., 9/2/03 COE 404 determination letter.
DISCUSSION: The project has been designed to avoid disturbance of sensitive riparian
and aquatic habitat along the western and northern property boundaries in association
with Graves and Paso Robles Creeks and the Salinas River.
MITIGATION MEASURES
4.a.1. The developed areas of the project will provide a 50 -foot setback from riparian canopy and 100 -foot
setback due to presence of red -legged frog.
4.a.2. The tract map shall include an open space habitat easement along the Salinas River and Graves
Creek which will includes the archaeological site CA-SLO-493.
4.a.3. Wildlife Migration Corridors along the Salinas River, Paso Robles and Graves Creeks shall be
provides on the final map.
4.a.4. BR/mm-1: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall retain a qualified biological
monitor to supervise all construction activities located within or directly adjacent to sensitive
communities including riparian forest, and known and potential wetland areas. The biological
monitor shall conduct a brief training session prior to commencement of construction to advise
construction personnel on the biological sensitivity of various habitats and discuss various
measures for minimizing potential construction -related impacts. The biological monitor shall visit
construction zones located within or near sensitive areas at a frequency and duration determined
appropriate by the City of Atascadero and based on construction timing and sensitivity of
resources at issue. During the periodic site visits, the biological monitor will ensure that identified
construction zones and access routes remain clearly marked and restricted areas are avoided.
Weekly reports will be prepared by the monitor which document construction activities and
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
associated effects on sensitive biological resources.
4.a.5. BR/mm-2: Avoid indirect disturbance of riparian vegetation, including scattered willows,
cottonwoods, and valley and coast live oaks, through implementation of the following measures:
Immediately prior to construction, retain the biological monitor, or qualified botanist, to clearly mark
the dripline area of each tree located outside of, but adjacent to proposed development areas. The
dripline area of each tree should be marked with highly visible flagging or construction fencing.
During construction, avoid all soil disturbance, compaction, and grading activities within, and
adjacent to, the associated dripline of each tree. The biological monitor should be retained
throughout construction activities to ensure that the identified dripline of each tree remains
undisturbed, and to supervise all construction activities adjacent to woodland areas.
Following project implementation, avoid the use of artificial irrigation in areas located adjacent to or
within the associated driplines of all remaining oak trees. Revegetate disturbed areas located near
remaining oaks, with appropriate native vegetation to minimize the need for artificial irrigation.
4.a.6. BR/mm-3: Designate permanent riparian setbacks for the Salinas River corridor and Graves Creek
corridor to preserve sensitive riparian communities. The setback for the Salinas River should
extend from the outer edge of the riparian corridor, and southward 50 feet (Refer to Figures 3 and 4
of Biological Assessment for locations of recommended riparian setbacks). The setback for
Graves Creek will extend from the outer edges of the riparian corridor, and upland 100 feet, due to
the presence of sensitive species. Permanent riparian setbacks of 100 feet will also be designated
for the portion of the Salinas River located west of Graves Creek, and for Paso Robles Creek.
4.a.7. BR/mm-4: If direct disturbance of the southern embankment of the Salinas River, located in the
northern portion of the site, cannot be completely avoided, a permit must be obtained from the
Corps to discharge dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S., pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. The permit must be obtained from the Corps prior to initiation of any ground
disturbance activities in the vicinities of identified drainages. A Streambed Alteration Agreement
will also be required from the CDFG for disturbance of any portion of the channel located beneath
the top of bank. The applicant should contact the Corps and CDFG well in advance of project
implementation to determine specific permitting requirements and mitigation responsibilities
associated with disturbance of the identified drainages and associated wetlands.
4.a.8. BR/mm-5: To avoid or minimize indirect impacts to areas qualifying as Waters of the U.S. located
down-slope from proposed development areas, including areas associated with the Salinas River
and Graves Creek implement the following measures:
Clearly mark the boundaries of all construction areas using highly visible flagging and construction
fencing. Limit all private and construction vehicle traffic to areas located within designated access
route and construction areas.
Implement appropriate erosion control measures during construction and limit construction
activities to dry weather to avoid increased surface water runoff and erosion on site, and
sedimentation in nearby drainages. Install appropriate erosion control devices (i.e., hay bales, silt
fences) around the perimeter of each construction zone and areas experiencing disturbance of the
ground surface. Erosion control devices should be checked on a daily basis by construction
personnel, and periodically by the biological monitor, to ensure proper function.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Avoid stockpiling any soil in areas located adjacent to drainages, or in areas that have potential to
experience significant runoff during the rainy season.
Following completion of construction -related activities, immediately revegetate all disturbed and
barren areas with appropriate native vegetation to reduce the risk of erosion from the site and
sedimentation in adjacent ephemeral drainages. Areas experiencing only temporary disturbance
should be replanted with only native species that are characteristic of various habitats of the
project area.
4.a.9. BR/mm-6: To reduce the potential for inadvertent release of fuel from construction areas to aquatic
habitats, avoid all cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles within the vicinities of existing
drainages and associated seasonal wetland habitat. Stage and re -fuel vehicles only in
appropriately marked construction staging areas.
4.a.10. BR/mm-7: Retain a qualified biologist throughout the duration of construction activities to monitor
for California red -legged frog (CRLF), as well as southwestern pond turtle, California horned lizard,
western toad, and other sensitive species that have potential to occur in construction zones. The
monitor should be pre -approved by the USFWS and CDFG to move CRLF from affected areas to
appropriate habitats on-site, but away from construction zones. At a minimum, the CRLF monitor
should remain on site throughout the duration of all construction activities that take place within
300 feet of the Graves Creek riparian corridor, due to the presence of a known population of the
species.
4.a.11. BR/mm-8: To avoid take of active raptor nests, any necessary tree removals should be conducted
between September 15 and February 15, outside of the typical breeding season. If any tree
removals are determined to be necessary between February 15 and September 15, a raptor nest
survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to project implementation and any
planned tree removals. The results of the raptor nest survey should be submitted to CDFG, via a
letter report. If the biologist determines that a tree slated for removal is being used by raptors for
nesting at that time, construction in the vicinity of the nest should be avoided until after the young
have fledged from the nest and achieved independence. If no nesting is found to occur in the
vicinity of proposed development, construction activities could then proceed.
4.a.12. BR/mm-10: Any public or private access trails retained or created as part of the proposed project
should be limited to pedestrian and equestrian traffic only. Restrict the use of all off-road vehicles
and construct appropriate barriers at existing river access points. Post signs at regular intervals
along public access points to the river that discuss the sensitivity of the adjacent Salinas River
corridor and identify allowable and restricted uses. Signs should primarily be posted along the
outer edge of the designated setback for the Salinas River.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑
significance of a historical resource as defined
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
in "15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ® ❑ ❑
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to "15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ❑
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
SOURCES: Phase -1 Archaeological Survey at the Proposed North Atascadero RV
Park, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR, CA Singer 7/9/03 Survey Letter.
DISCUSSION: There are four known archaeological sites within the project area, CA-
SLO-492, 493, 1076, and 1077. The phase 1 assessment recommends that phase 2
testing and a phase III mitigation plan will reduce project impacts to a level of less than
significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
5.b.1 Prior to any tract improvement within the areas of CA-SL0-492, 493, 1076, and 1077, a Phase 2
Archaeological Report shall be prepared. All future development shall be conform to the required
mitigations of the Phase 2 study. The sites shall be fenced until mitigation is complete.
5.b.2. A Phase 3 mitigation plan shall be developed for all work proposed in CA-SL0-492, 493, 1076, and
1077.
5.b.3. A deed disclosure shall be included on included on any future lots that cross sites CA-SL0-492,
493, 1076, and 1077 notify owner of the possibility of underlying archaeological deposits.
5.b.4. If human remains are discovered during construction all work shall cease immediately and the
Atascadero Community Development Department and County Coroner shall be notified by the
contractor. No further work shall occur in the area until authorized by the Atascadero Community
Development Department.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential ❑ ❑
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant
No
Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
❑ ❑ ❑
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑ ❑ ❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
❑ ❑ ®
❑
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
® ❑
❑
of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
®
El
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on -
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
❑ ❑ ❑
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
❑ ❑ ❑
supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
SOURCES: General Plan Safety Element, Supplemental EIR
DISCUSSION: The project site will likely be subject to severe ground shaking due to its
location and liquefaction potential in the event of a major earthquake. Erosion during site
preparation (grading) could impact the Creeks and River by increased runoff volume,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
siltation & vehicle related pollutions in runoff water. Project construction could result in
some erosion and result in sedimentation in cut and fill areas, exposing thick topsoil and
colluvium.
Surface runoff from the parking areas within the project site would carry elevated levels of
contaminants, which would eventually enter downstream drainage areas and potentially
lead to degradaton of aquatic habitat.
6c. An area of asphalt fill has been identified along a portion of the banks of the
Salinas River. The origin of the fill is unknown but appears stable at the current time.
According to a soils investigation prepared by Buena Geotechnical Services July 8, 2003,
eight borings were made along the bank of the river to determine the extent of the asphalt
fill. No debris was encountered and Buena concluded that the fill is limited to the bank
face area and does not extend into the proposed lots. To minimize grading impacts to the
riparian area the asphalt is proposed to remain.
MITIGATION MEASURES
6.b.1. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared and approved by the Water Quality
Control District prior to the issuance of construction permits.
6.b.2. Erosion/sedimentation and revegetation plans that demonstrates how sensitive riparian areas will
be protected from siltation during and after construction shall be included in the construction plans
and approved by the City Engineer.
6.b.3. As part of the construction plans, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan which includes the
proper design and placement of sediment/greasetraps to prevent the discharge of pollutants. As a
condition on the drainage plan, the applicant shall maintain the catch basin/greasetraps on a
regular basis to remove pollutants, reduce high pollutant concentrations during the first flush of
storms, prevent clogging of the downstream conveyance system, and maintain the catch basins
sediment trapping capacity.
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS -- Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or -1 F71
the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ ❑ M
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a ❑ ❑ ❑ M
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
❑ ❑ ❑ M
use plan area or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people living or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
❑ ❑ ❑ M
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people living or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
❑ M ❑ ❑
interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
❑ ❑ M ❑
risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
SOURCES: Uniform Fire Code, Site Plan, TPM,
Zoning Ordinance
DISCUSSION: The single family portion of the project includes two access points, one
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
from an EI Camino Real railroad bridge and a secondary emergency access from
Ferrocarril Road. The senior cottages have a single point of access in the form of a
bridge across Graves Creek.
MITIGATION MEASURES
7.g.1. Prior to approving construction plans, the PUC application for a bridge crossing of the UPRR
railroad tracks shall be approved by the PUC.
7.g.2. A second access road and/or an alternative emergency -vehicle -only access to the proposed
project shall be provided to Ferrocarril Road.
7.g.3. Prior to final map, the Fire Department shall approve a mitigation plan to provide adequate access
to the senior cottages.
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY --
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
❑
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies
❑
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of previously -existing nearby wells would
drop to a level that would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
❑
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner that would result in
3
W
LE
u
U
❑■
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant with
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
®
❑
El
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
❑
❑
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood
❑
❑
❑
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑
®
❑
❑
structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
❑
®
❑
❑
risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑
❑
❑
SOURCES: Site Plan, Supplemental EIR, Addendum EIR, 9/2/03 COE 404
Determination Letter
DISCUSSION: The proposed project could impact the creeks and river by increased
runoff volume, siltation & vehicle related pollutions in runoff water. Surface water runoff
from the project could pollute the Salinas River and Graves Creek. The bridge cross of
Graves Creek has been determined by COE to not require a 404 permit since no fill will
occur within jurisdictional limits.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Refer to section 6 mitigation measures for water quality.
8.c.1. All residential portions of the site shall be outside of the Flood Hazard Zone.
8.c.2. As part of the grading plan, the City Engineer shall determine whether the FEMA Flood Hazard
Zone is being changed by the project. If so, the applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
FEMA to change maps prior to approval of construction plans.
8.c.3. All grading and drainage facilities shall be designed consistent with the City's NPDES standards.
8.c.4. A storm water pollution prevention plan shall be approved prior to construction.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ VN
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ❑ ❑ ❑
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
SOURCES: General Plan, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: The proposed project does not conflict with the General Plan.
MITIGATION MEASURES: N/A
10. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ❑ ❑ ❑
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
SOURCES: General Plan
DISCUSSION: N/A
MITIGATION MEASURES: N/A
11. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of ® ❑ ❑
noise levels in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑
excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -
borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
❑
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land
❑
❑ ❑
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
❑
❑ ❑
airstrip, would the project expose people living
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
No
Impact
SOURCES: Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR, Site Plan, Dohn Associates 3/20/03
Noise Mitigation Analysis.
DISCUSSION: The noise analysis for the project found that the project will be impacted
by noise from the railroad, Home Depot Shopping Center, and US 101. The primary
noise impact that would violate City standards would be produced by the railroad. The
study finds that sound walls of 15 -feet in height would be required to mitigate the railroad
noise impacts along the entire property boundary. Since the wall would have a number of
negative impacts it is not recommended. The following mitigation measures are
recommended to reduce the level of impact to less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
11.a.1. The project shall provide a 100 -foot noise setback buffer with dense landscaping plantings and
evergreen trees along the UPRR frontage. Reconfiguration of building sites on lots 23 and 24 will
be required.
11.a.2. Disclose to potential buyers that 24-hour average noise levels may exceed the recommended
limits established by the City of Atascadero.
11.a.3. Advise buyers that noise levels during train passbys will be very loud, potentially annoying and
perhaps startling.
11.a.4. Advise buyers that noise levels due to operation of trucks, forklifts and loading operations at the
Home Depot commercial center will frequently be loud and potentially annoying.
11.a.5. Locate outdoor living spaces out of direct line -of -site of railroad and Home Depot commercial
center.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would
the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ ® ❑
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing ❑ ❑ ❑
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
Potentially
Less Than
Impact
Significant
Significant with
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Impact
Mitigation
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
®
Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
®
❑
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
❑
❑
necessitating the construction of replacement
❑
housing elsewhere?
SOURCES: General Plan, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
Less Than
No
Significant
Impact
Impact
®
❑
❑
DISCUSSION: The project will result in the construction of 90 new housing units
consistent with the City's General Plan.
MITIGATION MEASURES: N/A
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection? ❑
®
F-1
❑
Police protection? ❑
®
❑
❑
Schools? ❑
❑
®
❑
Parks? ❑
®
❑
❑
Other public facilities? ❑
®
El
❑
SOURCES: UFC, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: The project will require additional emergency services and public
maintenance. These additional costs will not be adequately covered by the City's property
tax revenues. Additional funding mitigations in the form of assessment districts will be
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential Impact Mitigation Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020 Incorporation
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
required to reduce this impact to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
13.a.1. The project shall be required to establish special funding districts to mitigate
cost impacts to fire services, police services, road maintenance services, bridge
maintenance and landscape maintenance.
14. RECREATION --
a) Would the project increase the use of ❑ ❑ ❑
existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational ❑ ❑ ❑
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities that might
have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
SOURCES: General Plan, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: The project will provide trails along Grave Creek and Salinas Creek as
required by the General Plan and an equestrian park facility.
MITIGATION MEASURES: N/A
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would
the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is ❑ ® ❑ ❑
substantial in relation to the existing traffic load
and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
a substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than No
Significant
Significant with
Significant Impact
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
Incorporation
safety risks?
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
❑
®
❑
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
® ❑
level of service standard established by the
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
county congestion management agency for
(e.g., farm equipment)?
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
❑
❑
including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
❑
®
❑
❑
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
®
❑
❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑
❑
❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
❑
❑
❑
programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
SOURCES: UFC, General Plan, Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR
DISCUSSION: The 1992 Supplemental EIR stated that the project traffic impacts will be
concentrated at the Highway 101/San Ramon Road -Santa Cruz Road Interchange.
However, no capacity improvements will be required to mitigate recreation vehicle traffic
impacts. The project traffic impacts are expected to be insignificant at the EI Camino
Real intersections Del Rio Road and Santa Cruz Road. Campers could be exposed to
safety hazards from high speed trains without adequate fencing installed.
MITIGATION MEASURES
15.a.1. The project shall be install and/or reimburse its share of the traffic
improvements that were required of the Home Depot Shopping Center project.
15.d.1. A 6 -foot tall, vinyl clad chain link fence shall be installed along the UPRR
frontage of Parcel 1 within the landscape buffer.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --
Would the project:
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ❑
of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new ❑
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑
serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitments?
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
® ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ ❑
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ ❑ ❑
and regulations related to solid waste?
SOURCES: Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR, Site Map, TPM
DISCUSSION: A large portion of the site lies within the 100 -year flood plain. The
development of this property will result in increased storm water runoff.
No
Impact
4
�4
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Initial Study 2003-0054
PD -9 Master Plan of Development Amendment (Rochelle Residential
Project) ZCH 2003-0069 / CUP 2003-0072 / TTM 2003-0020
805 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
MITIGATION MEASURES
Refer to Section 6 Mitigation Measures.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE --
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to ❑ ® ❑ ❑
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ® El ❑
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects ❑ ❑ ❑
that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
SOURCES: Supplemental EIR and Addendum EIR, Phase I Archaeological Survey,
Biological Assessment
DISCUSSION: Based the proposed mitigation measures the cumulative impacts can be
mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0104
October 21, 2002
ATTACHMENT 3: Draft Resolution 2003-0105
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2003-0105
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
ZONE CHANGE 2003-0069 THEREBY AMENDING
THE PD -9 ZONING CODE TEXT
(805 El Camino Real / Gearhart)
WHEREAS an application has been received from Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara
Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant & Owner), to consider a project consisting of a
Planned Development overlay zone change of PD -9 with the adoption of a Master Plan of
Development, and a 33 -lot cluster residential tract map with 26 single family lots and a 60 -unit
senior housing complex, on a 72+/- acre lot located at 805 El Camino Real (APN 049-043-002);
and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is SFR X (Single Family Residential'/2 ac
minimum), CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space); and,
WHEREAS, the site's zoning district is RSF-X (Residential Single Family %2 ac minimum),
LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned Development 9 overlay, and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone Change
application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which hearing
evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said zoning amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing held
on October 21, 2003, studied and considered Zone Change 2002-0069, after first studying and
considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0105
October 21, 2003
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Code Text Amendment to the PD -9
Planned Development Overlay District. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to
promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the
opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial
effect on the area.
Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing
development standards or processing requirements.
4. Proposed amendment offer certain redeeming features to compensate for the requested
modification including the creation of additional affordable housing.
SECTION 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session assembled on October 21, 2003 resolved to recommend that the
City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance that amend PD -9 consistent with the following:
9-3.654 Establishment of Reeation Residential Planned Development
Overlay Zone No. 9: (PD9) North of Union Pacific Railroad.
Ronrrnvre;4An Residential Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 9 is established as
shown on the official zoning maps (Section 9-1.102). The following development
standards are established:
(a) A Master Plan of Development shall be approved prior to approving a plot plan,
precise plan, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map, or tract map. The Master
Plan shall be applied for and processed in the manner prescribed for a conditional use
permit (Section 9-2.109).
(b) The proposed Master Plan of Development shall generally incorporate the
mitigation measures as contained in the final supplemental environmental impact report
(EIR), prepared by Site and Environmental Design, February 1992. Depending on the
proposed project, the EIR may need to be modified or expanded to address
unforeseen environmental impacts.
(c) In approving a Master Plan of Development, the level of processing for subsequent
projects or phases may be reduced to a plot plan provided that the Master Plan
contains sufficient detail to support such a determination.
(d) No subsequent plot plan, precise plan, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map
or tract map shall be approved unless found to be consistent with the approved Master
Plan of Development. Any amendment to the Master Plan, including conditions thereof,
shall be accomplished as set forth in subsection (a) of this section.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0105
October 21, 2003
1 ! •
• r . r
• r r r• . r r• !
MaT
. • . MMMM• r • • • • .
• ••. •• ! I
WINr
. r •
/ ! mres"Identual
.b parks
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0105
October 21, 2003
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: (X)
NOES: (X)
ABSENT: (x)
ABSTAIN: (X)
:_D • JD y_ b
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta. Fonzi, Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
ATTACHMENT 4: Draft Resolution 2003-0106
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2003-0106
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-0072, A MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE PD -9 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ON APN 049-049-043-002
(805 El Camino Real / Gearhart)
WHEREAS an application has been received from Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara
Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant & Owner), to consider a project consisting of a
Planned Development overlay zone change of PD -9 with the adoption of a Master Plan of
Development, and a 33 -lot cluster residential tract map with 26 single family lots and a 60 -unit
senior housing complex, on a 72+/- acre lot located at 805 El Camino Real (APN 049-043-002);
and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is SFR -X (Single Family Residential '/2 ac
minimum), CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space); and,
WHEREAS, the site's zoning district is RSF-X (Residential Single Family %2 ac minimum),
LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned Development 9 overlay, and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that a text amendment to PD -9
be approved allowing residential development with the adoption of a Master Plan of Development;
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 project
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,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing held
on October 21, 2003, studied and considered the Master Plan of Development for PD -9, after first
studying and considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Recommendation of Approval of Master Plan of
Development. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General Plan and the City's
Appearance Review Manual; and,
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning
Ordinance) including the PD -9 Ordinance as amended; 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 ise 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. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero, in a regular session, resolved to recommend that the City Council approve Conditional
Use Permit 2002-0072, A Master Plan of Development for PD -9 subject to the following:
1. EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
2. EXHIBIT B: Tract Map
3. EXHIBIT C: Master Site Plan Seniors Cottages
4. EXHIBIT D: Master Site Plan Single Family Residential (Sheet 1-2)
5. EXHIBIT E: Senior Cottage Conceptual Landscape and Site Character
6. EXHIBIT F: Senior Cottage Conceptual Elevations and Recreation Center
7. EXHIBIT G: Single Family Conceptual Character Elevations
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
8. EXHIBIT H: Evacuation Plan
9. EXHIBIT I: Graves Creek Bridge
10. EXHIBIT J: UPRR Crossing Bridge
11. EXHIBIT K: Environmental Setback Map
12. EXHIBIT L: Statistical Summary
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following
roll call vote:
AYES: (X)
NOES: (X)
ABSENT: (X)
ABSTAIN: (X)
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta. Fonzi, Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
Planning Services
1.
The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective following the end of the referendum
period for Zone Change 2003-0069
2.
Approval of this Master Plan of Development shall be valid concurrently with the life of Tentative
Tract Map 2002-0020 and then indefinitely following final map. The Master Plan of Development
approval shall expire and become null and void unless a final map is recorded consistent with the
Master Plan of Development.
3.
The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve minor changes to the
project the (1) increase the intensity 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
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.
4.
All subsequent Tentative Tract Maps and construction permits shall be consistent with the Master
Plan of Development contained herein
5.
All exterior elevations of proposed units shall be of equivalent architectural character and quality
with the Master Plan of Development as shown in Exhibits E, F and G.
6.
All site development shall be consistent with the maximum intensities described in the statistical
project summary as shown on Exhibit L.
7.
All site work, grading and site improvements shall be consistent with the Master Plan of
Development as shown in Exhibits C and D.
8.
A landscape and irrigation plan for all common areas, street trees and the equestrian staging area shall
be provided as part of the subdivision tract improvement plans. Landscape plans for the senior cottages
may be deferred until building permits
9.
Street trees shall be provided on all streets with 50 -foot on -center spacing.
10.
Vehicular barriers that permit pedestrian aid equestrian access shall be provided at all access
points to the Salinas River.
11.
The approval of this application shall become final, subject to the completion of the conditions of
approval, 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.
12.
Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall be valid for two 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
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
granted pursuant to a written request received prior to the expiration date.
13. The Tract Map shall be subject to additional fees for park or recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) as
required by City Ordinance.
14. The applicant shall record CC&R's for the subdivision subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer, City Attorney and Community Development Director. The CC&R's shall identify the
maintenance responsibilities of all private driveways, roads, bridges, sewer facilities, drainage
facilities, common parking areas, site lighting, landscape areas, fencing, and other common
facilities. The CC&R's shall also state that each unit shall have no more than three bedrooms and
that all exterior colors, exterior materials, and yard fencing shall be consistent with the overall
master plan of development.
15. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and 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 subdivision
16. An irrevocable public recreation, open space and public access easement shall be recorded on Lot
33 and clearly noted on the final map. Lot 33 shall be offered for dedication to the City of
Atascadero.
17. Twenty foot (20 -foot) public access easements shall be recorded across all trail corridors located
outside of street right-of-ways.
18. A Class I trail shall be provided on the east side Road A continuously to Paso Robles Creek
19. The final map shall include the Graves Creek 100 -year flood plain boundary within the Lot 33 open
space parcel as shown on Exhibit A.
20. A deed restriction shall be recorded against lots 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 limiting occupancy of
dwelling units to persons defined as seniors (55 years of age).
21. Prior to recordation of final map, a 30 -year affordable housing deed restrictions shall be recorded
consistent with the following table. In -lieu fees for remaining un -built units and fractions of units shall be
based on 2.50% of the construction valuation of the market rate unit. Fees shall be paid at time of
building permit.
Rochelle PD -9
Affordable Housing Plan
Inclusionary Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
MFR Units 60 units
20% Affordable 12 units
Estimated Valuation $
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
Affordable
Distribution
20% Very Low 2.0 units 2 units 0 units 0%
37% Low 4.0 units 4 units 0 units 0%
43% Moderate 5.0 units 5 units 0 units 0%
11.0 units 11 units 0 units 0% $ -
$0 / MFR unit
Inclusionary
Housing Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
SFR Units 26 units
20% Affordable 5 units
Estimated Valuation 197,000.00
Affordable
Distribution
100% Moderate 5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units -4%
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units -4% $ 4,925.00
$235 / SFR unit
22. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall enter into a legal agreement with the City to reserve '%
of the units for sale to residents or workers within the City of Atascadero, including the affordable units.
The agreement shall include the following provisions:
a) The units shall be offered for sale to residents or workers within the City of Atascadero for a minimum
of 60 -days. During this time period offers may only be accepted from Atascadero residents or
workers;
b) The applicant shall provide reasonable proof to the City that at least one of the qualified buyers is a
resident or worker within the City Limits of Atascadero;
c) The Atascadero resident or worker restriction shall apply to the initial sale only;
d) The applicant shall identify which units will be reserved; and
e) The City Attorney shall approve the final form of the agreement.
23. The emergency services and road maintenance costs of the project shall be 100% funded by the project
in perpetuity. The service and maintenance cost may be funded through a benefit assessment district or
other mechanism established by the developer subject to City approval. The funding mechanism must
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
be in place prior to or concurrently with acceptance of the any final maps. The funding mechanism shall
be approved by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services Director prior to acceptance of
any final map. The administration of the above mentioned funds and the coordination and performance of
maintenance activities shall be by the City.
a) All Atascadero Police Department service costs to the project.
b) All Atascadero Fire Department service costs to the project.
c) All streets, sidewalks, streetlights, street signs, roads, emergency access roads, emergency access
gates, and sewer mains within the project.
d) All parks, trails, recreational facilities and like facilities.
e) All open space and native tree preservation areas.
f) All drainage facilities and detention basins.
g) All common landscaping areas, street trees, medians, parkway planters, manufacture slopes
outside private yards, and other similar facilities.
Mitigation Measures
3.c.1. A bicycle and pedestrian pathway will be provided along the bridge and project driveway to
Graves Creek.
3.c.2. A pedestrian and bicycle pathway shall be provide through the project with a connection to
Graves Creek and the Salinas River.
3.c.3. The following measures shall be noted on the grading plans and implemented during
construction:
a) All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice daily with complete coverage,
preferably in the late morning and after work is finished for the day. Increased watering
frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed water
should be used whenever possible.
b) All clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of
high winds (i.e. greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour) so as to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
c) All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered
to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations shall be
minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
e) Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project revegetation and
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any
soil disturbing activities.
f) Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading shall be sown with fast -germinating native grass seed and
watered until vegetation becomes established.
g) All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved
chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the
APCD.
h) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. In addition, structural foundations shall be completed as soon as possible
following building pad construction.
i) On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved surface.
j) All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per day, using non -
potable water.
k) Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt which may have
accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust
from leaving the site.
I) Wheel washers may be required when significant offsite import or export of fill is
involved.
m) All dirt stock -pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed.
4.a.1. The developed areas of the project will provide a 50 -foot setback from riparian canopy and 100 -
foot setback due to presence of red -legged frog.
4.a.2. The tract map shall include an open space habitat easement along the Salinas River and
Graves Creek which will includes the archaeological site CA-SLO-493.
4.a.3. Wildlife Migration Corridors along the Salinas River, Paso Robles and Graves Creeks shall be
provides on the final map.
4.a.4. BR/mm-1: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall retain a qualified
biological monitor to supervise all construction activities located within or directly adjacent to
sensitive communities including riparian forest, and known and potential wetland areas. The
biological monitor shall conduct a brief training session prior to commencement of construction
to advise construction personnel on the biological sensitivity of various habitats and discuss
various measures for minimizing potential construction -related impacts. The biological monitor
shall visit construction zones located within or near sensitive areas at a frequency and duration
determined appropriate by the City of Atascadero and based on construction timing and
sensitivity of resources at issue. During the periodic site visits, the biological monitor will
ensure that identified construction zones and access routes remain clearly marked and
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional
Use Permit 2002-0072
restricted areas are avoided. Weekly reports will be prepared by the monitor which document
construction activities and associated effects on sensitive biological resources.
4.a.5.
BR/mm-2: Avoid indirect disturbance of riparian vegetation, including scattered willows,
cottonwoods, and valley and coast live oaks, through implementation of the following measures:
a)
Immediately prior to construction, retain the biological monitor, or qualified botanist, to clearly
mark the dripline area of each tree located outside of, but adjacent to proposed development
areas. The dripline area of each tree should be marked with highly visible flagging or
construction fencing.
b)
During construction, avoid all soil disturbance, compaction, and grading activities within, and
adjacent to, the associated dripline of each tree. The biological monitor should be retained
throughout construction activities to ensure that the identified dripline of each tree remains
undisturbed, and to supervise all construction activities adjacent to woodland areas.
c)
Following project implementation, avoid the use of artificial irrigation in areas located adjacent
to or within the associated driplines of all remaining oak trees. Revegetate disturbed areas
located near remaining oaks, with appropriate native vegetation to minimize the need for
artificial irrigation.
4.a.6.
BR/mm-3: Designate permanent riparian setbacks for the Salinas River corridor and Graves
Creek corridor to preserve sensitive riparian communities. The setback for the Salinas River
should extend from the outer edge of the riparian oorridor, and southward 50 feet (Refer to
Figures 3 and 4 of Biological Assessment for locations of recommended riparian setbacks).
The setback for Graves Creek will extend from the outer edges of the riparian corridor, and
upland 100 feet, due to the presence of sensitive species. Permanent riparian setbacks of 100
feet will also be designated for the portion of the Salinas River located west of Graves Creek,
and for Paso Robles Creek.
4.a.7.
BR/mm-4: If direct disturbance of the southern embankment of the Salinas River, located in the
northern portion of the site, cannot be completely avoided, a permit must be obtained from the
Corps to discharge dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S., pursuant to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act. The permit must be obtained from the Corps prior to initiation of any
ground disturbance activities in the vicinities of identified drainages. A Streambed Alteration
Agreement will also be required from the CDFG for disturbance of any portion of the channel
located beneath the top of bank. The applicant should contact the Corps and CDFG well in
advance of project implementation to determine specific permitting requirements and mitigation
responsibilities associated with disturbance of the identified drainages and associated
wetlands.
4.a.8.
BR/mm-5: To avoid or minimize indirect impacts to areas qualifying as Waters of the U.S.
located down-slope from proposed development areas, including areas associated with the
Salinas River and Graves Creek implement the following measures:
a)
Clearly mark the boundaries of all construction areas using highly visible flagging and
construction fencing. Limit all private and construction vehicle traffic to areas located within
designated access route and construction areas.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
b)
Implement appropriate erosion control measures during construction and limit construction
activities to dry weather to avoid increased surface water runoff and erosion on site, and
sedimentation in nearby drainages. Install appropriate erosion control devices (i.e., hay bales,
silt fences) around the perimeter of each construction zone and areas experiencing disturbance
of the ground surface. Erosion control devices should be checked on a daily basis by
construction personnel, and periodically by the biological monitor, to ensure proper function.
c)
Avoid stockpiling any soil in areas located adjacent to drainages, or in areas that have potential
to experience significant runoff during the rainy season.
d)
Following completion of construction -related activities, immediately revegetate all disturbed and
barren areas with appropriate native vegetation to reduce the risk of erosion from the site and
sedimentation in adjacent ephemeral drainages. Areas experiencing only temporary
disturbance should be replanted with only native species that are characteristic of various
habitats of the project area.
4.a.9.
BR/mm-6: To reduce the potential for inadvertent release of fuel from construction areas to
aquatic habitats, avoid all cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles within the vicinities
of existing drainages and associated seasonal wetland habitat. Stage and re -fuel vehicles only
in appropriately marked construction staging areas.
4.a.10.
BR/mm-7: Retain a qualified biologist throughout the duration of construction activities to
monitor for California red -legged frog (CRLF), as well as southwestern pond turtle, California
horned lizard, western toad, and other sensitive species that have potential to occur in
construction zones. The monitor should be pre -approved by the USFWS and CDFG to move
CRLF from affected areas to appropriate habitats on-site, but away from construction zones. At
a minimum, the CRLF monitor should remain on site throughout the duration of all construction
activities that take place within 300 feet of the Graves Creek riparian corridor, due to the
presence of a known population of the species.
4.a.11.
BR/mm-8: To avoid take of active raptor nests, any necessary tree removals should be
conducted between September 15 and February 15, outside of the typical breeding season. If
any tree removals are determined to be necessary between February 15 and September 15, a
raptor nest survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to project implementation
and any planned tree removals. The results of the raptor nest survey should be submitted to
CDFG, via a letter report. If the biologist determines that a tree slated for removal is being used
by raptors for nesting at that time, construction in the vicinity of the nest should be avoided until
after the young have fledged from the nest and achieved independence. If no nesting is found to
occur in the vicinity of proposed development, construction activities could then proceed.
4.a.12.
BR/mm-10: Any public or private access trails retained or created as part of the proposed
project should be limited to pedestrian and equestrian traffic only. Restrict the use of all off-
road vehicles and construct appropriate barriers at existing river access points. Post signs at
regular intervals along public access points to the river that discuss the sensitivity of the
adjacent Salinas River corridor and identify allowable and restricted uses. Signs should
primarily be posted along the outer edge of the designated setback for the Salinas River.
5. b.1
Prior to any tract improvement within the areas of CA-SLO-492, 493, 1076, and 1077, a Phase
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
2 Archaeological Report shall be prepared. All future development shall be conform to the
required mitigations of the Phase 2 study. The sites shall be fenced until mitigation is
complete.
5.b.2.
A Phase 3 mitigation plan shall be developed for all work proposed in CA-SL0-492, 493, 1076,
and 1077.
5.b.3.
A deed disclosure shall be included on included on any future lots that cross sites CA-SLO-
492, 493, 1076, and 1077 notify owner of the possibility of underlying archaeological deposits.
5.b.4.
If human remains are discovered during construction all work shall cease immediately and the
Atascadero Community Development Department and County Coroner shall be notified by the
contractor. No further work shall occur in the area until authorized by the Atascadero
Community Development Department.
6.b.1.
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared and approved by the Water Quality
Control District prior to the issuance of construction permits.
6.b.2.
Erosion/sedimentation and revegetation plans that demonstrates how sensitive riparian areas
will be protected from siltation during and after construction shall be included in the
construction plans and approved by the City Engineer.
6.b.3.
As part of the construction plans, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan which includes the
proper design and placement of sediment/greasetraps to prevent the discharge of pollutants.
As a condition on the drainage plan, the applicant shall maintain the catch basin/greasetraps
on a regular basis to remove pollutants, reduce high pollutant concentrations during the first
flush of storms, prevent clogging of the downstream conveyance system, and maintain the
catch basins sediment trapping capacity.
7.g.1.
Prior to approving construction plans, the PUC application for a bridge crossing of the UPRR
railroad tracks shall be approved by the PUC.
7.g.2.
A second access road and/or an alternative emergency
7.g.3.
Prior to final map, the Fire Department shall approve a mitigation plan to provide adequate
access to the senior cottages.
8.c.1.
All residential portions of the site shall be outside of the Flood Hazard Zone.
8.c.2.
As part of the grading plan, the City Engineer shall determine whether the FEMA Flood Hazard
Zone is being changed by the project. If so, the applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals
from FEMA to change maps prior to approval of construction plans.
8.c.3.
All grading and drainage facilities shall be designed consistent with the City's NPDES
standards.
8.c.4.
A storm water pollution prevention plan shall be approved prior to construction.
11.a.1.
The project shall provide a 100 -foot noise setback buffer with dense landscaping plantings and
evergreen trees along the UPRR frontage. Reconfiguration of building sites on lots 23 and 24
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Conditional Use Permit 2002-0072
will be required.
11.a.2. Disclose to potential buyers that 24-hour average noise levels may exceed the recommended
limits established by the City of Atascadero.
11.a.3. Advise buyers that noise levels during train passbys will be very loud, potentially annoying and
perhaps startling
11.a.4. Advise buyers that noise levels due to operation of trucks, forklifts and loading operations at the
Home Depot commercial center will frequently be loud and potentially annoying.
11.a.5. Locate outdoor living spaces out of direct line -of -site of railroad and Home Depot commercial
center.
Fire Department Conditions
24. All fire hydrants and access roads to be installed prior combustible construction to take place.
25. Relocate fire hydrants w/ consultation w/ fire dept. re: possible reduction on number of hydrants
required.
26. Automatic Fire Sprinklers required for senior housing portion of project.
27. Provide for secondary emergency access according to the following:
a) provide a plans that shows and describes the installation/construction for evacuation of
residents. The plan shall depict safe routing across the Union Pacific Railroad to the west side.
Location of access point shall be midway into senior residential portion of project.
b) Show on plan a dedicated easement for possible future secondary multi use access to be used
by vehicles, pedestrian, bike and equestrian traffic that facilitates use of the SLOCOG access
plan. This dedicated easment plan shall show routing to the North, Northeast direction from the
senior housing portion of the project. Residents within proposed project shall have full deed
disclosure of said easement.
- end of conditions -
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT C: Master Site Plan Seniors Cottages
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Entire Seniors
site to be
landscaped.
�
✓{ 08 rill fl zr' e® � r 1 t 1� 11
llif
'` • 1 a `rte � s'� �' 2�-lar- Aw�-
)'
IF
1'
Class 1 trail
+
1.
with 20 -foot
117.
public access
easement
s>
fill l 111111
I �II
it
jiNlll I -11
if i
Pit
SRI Oil"[ Ili ,/ I �%,'•, � � 4 � - '/llt�/� '}•�
:
#�r -_�,
�1 'ill + �:�— __ �� �r ✓� ii>
i !
Graves Creek
h1.
x '4�` bridge with
Class 1 trail
o�1 111 � �� -` - _�-,.�'` 1,'" ', � � �� � �� 1� '!. ``' '�' �►l�{I1�§' ��
�����-�n � r �,��, _ � .,•� _-°tit :.� -'----- _ �� =�-� � ��, �i �g �� `tt'�
(SEE SWU a.0
5��5i 55144
na ■anarn�
9 A
� r � I�Biic ccs
�llllll
g
11110;
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT D: Master Site Plan Single Family Residential (Sheet 1)
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Al
NN
------ _
jlti ill �I
e
to -
All % 1r --u
FII�� �t i /§ { } li i i
�__-
44
�\
\111t
t'
aF
I t' q � t
1 }+ n
ilk
1�1 1 P. t' I ,`S I ► 11�1�
111 � 1 111 u ua '� \ � .� ; , „• °� 14� \
t 1
�!
u It
y+.._ 1 1 _ 7"- •�� aT _ ,1 'iii +i 11 V1 I
_J I
j Illi.
fit
ilrae e !t1\,VI. U! 111 \ � — � 1v ,' r It4tt ttt t/�jllt
ILI
\\ I .,i if'\L\\
fit\
14,
1 \\\\ �\ Z YI
If)
\ \I
3
��lll 1 liIN
j '� � � I iiinn�+iiasniac5s=55555555]
e � + g � � fF6ii Ei55i6i5iilitf e6i6£ii!!
Class 1 trail
with 20 -foot
public access
easement
Fill slopes to
be landscaped
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT D: Master Site Plan Single Family Residential (Sheet 2)
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
rIt
)\
m{
hln/
III � %I {a r✓'�.�/� � ! �%�'� � ' � n�• rN • �;f q ;-A
.., � I / i 't l � „�R.�'p� \ Eg I 1 t..3 �, -• rte% _ i
rt�l1q�I Ir\�� \si{/J� \\ I �� { `t
,
II./ JJ
W l iil
:it
{li/Jr rrlr r/II \�t,/ �' I 1 l
! I ?iR IIII lIII Illlll I f`a VIII
Il / I I I I / / /141 l 1, 10 / / \\ �� \ i SII
II j<t it'll I I l \
it
U�III 1 13Nr ijill���tq�lj� tiY li ],/' / IIiI
It
\�i I', //M1J I\ Y\ vim: ' AV, ill l
� , a ��\�l// r/ /�j'�` ! ^\ \ \ �• i III 1
err,
If i
\ \ i
F,,IJ4L
(ru tus MS)
II q
t
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
6111111111,
WiffiIIi
•D
`
-
1111■��
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
•D
`
-
1111■��
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT E: Senior Cottage Conceptual Landscape and Site Character
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT F: Senior Cottage Conceptual Elevations and Recreation Center
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Typical senior cottage elevations
Recreation center elevation
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT G: Single Family Conceptual Character Elevations
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
The following elevations represent conceptual architecture of single family houses with a Mediterranean
character. Actual elevations will vary.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT H: Evacuation Plan
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT I: Graves Creek Bridge
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
®'jib
I�
INN
I!
i
IIIIIIIIIC��/1/''�"!'
1111111110
INI
ii�
Elm
6
• ,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT J: UPRR Crossing Bridge
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
■
w■���
,1111 11�}
'
v w 1 I
I:
�fl•■•■•■
�w�£
I f1�yll��n�l 11' I'� ;a ;
� �
%.i'ti"''
.
�
■�■�i■wnr Iw a 1 11� i
S
_�_
�.
1
1 flll �4
ny(
I I
I •
ifl �� ii
—'_
yid
L
'ii wr
■
p
\
—
n
�tY
�ii
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT K: Environmental Setback Map
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0106
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT L: Master Plan of Development Statistical Summary
CUP 2002-0072: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
LOT NUMBER:
ACRES-
UNITS:
COVERED PARKING STALLS:
DENSITY(UNITS/ACRE):
LOT 27
4.40 ACRES
12 UNITS
12 COVERED PARKING STALLS
9.8 UNITS PER ACRE
LOT 28
3.38 ACRES
11 UNITS
11 COVERED PARKING STALLS
9.9 UNITS PER ACRE
LOT 29
0.84 ACRES
9 UNITS
9 COVERED PARKING STALLS
10.7 UNITS PER ACRE
LOT 30
0.92 ACRES
12 UNITS
12 COVERED PARKING STALLS
13.0 UNITS PER ACRE
LOT 31
1.03 ACRES
8 UNITS
8 COVERED PARKING STALLS
7.7 UNITS PER ACRE
LOT 32
1.10 ACRES
8 UNITS
8 COVERED PARKING STALLS
7.2 UNITS PER ACRE
TOTAL 11.7 ACRES 60 UNITS 60 COVERED PARKING STALLS 9.7 UNITS/ACRE AVG
"LUI 27 - (4) PARKING SPACES
*LOT 28 - (30) PARKING SPACES
ORIGINAL
0.56
REMAINDER PARCEL OF
LOT 17
PARCEL MAP AT 99-164
75.40 AC
PROPOSED (NET)
0.72
LOT 1
1.23 AC
LOT 2
0.46 AC
LOT 3
0.38 AC
LOT 4
0.32 AC
LOT 5
0.48 AC
LOT 6
0.49 AC
LOT 7
0.45 AC
LOT 8
0.54 AC
LOT 9
0.35 AC
LOT 10
0.37 AC
LOT 11
0.40 AC
LOT 12
0.48 AC
LOT 13
0.52 AC
LOT 14
0.54 AC
LOT 15
0.49 AC
LOT 16
0.56
AC
LOT 17
0.62
AC
LOT 18
0.72
AC
LOT 19
0.43
AC
LOT 20
0.37
AC
LOT 21
0.42
AC
LOT 22
0.30
AC
LOT 23
0.34
AC
LOT 24
0.79
AC
LOT 25
0.83
AC
LOT 26
0.62
AC
ATTACHMENT 5: Draft Resolution 2003-0107
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2003-0107
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2002-0020 THEREBY ALLOWING A 33 -LOT
CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF APN 049-043-002
CONSISTENT WITH THE PD -9 MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT CUP
2002-0072
(805 El Camino Real / Gearhart)
WHEREAS an application has been received from Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara
Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant & Owner), to consider a project consisting of a
Planned Development overlay zone change of PD -9 with the adoption of a Master Plan of
Development, and a 33 -lot cluster residential tract map with 26 single family lots and a 60 -unit
senior housing complex, on a 72+/- acre lot located at 805 El Camino Real (APN 049-043-002);
and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0054 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is SFR X (Single Family Residential'/2 ac
minimum), CREC (Commercial Recreation) and OS (Open Space); and,
WHEREAS, the site's zoning district is RSF-X (Residential Single Family %2 ac minimum),
LS (Special Recreation) and OS (Open Space) with a Planned Development 9 overlay, and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that a text amendment to PD -9
be approved allowing residential development with the adoption of a Master Plan of Development;
and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Tentative Tract
Map application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which hearing
evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said application; and,
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing held
on October 21, 2003, studied and considered Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020, after first studying
and considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission takes the following actions:
Section 1. Findings of Approval for Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission of
the City of Atascadero fords as follows:
1. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan and
applicable zoning requirements.
2. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan and applicable zoning requirements.
3. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the Planned Development
Overlay District 9 Master Plan of Development (CUP 2002-0072).
4. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
5. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed.
6. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their
habitat.
7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at
large for access through, or the use of property within, the proposed subdivision; or
substantially equivalent alternative easements are provided.
8. The proposed subdivision design and type of improvements proposed will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general public.
Section 2. Recommendation of Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero resolves to recommend that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
subject to the following:
1. Exhibit A: Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
2. Exhibit B: Improvement Plan Sheets 1- 6
3. Exhibit C: Master Site Plan / Grading Sheets 1-3
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
4. Exhibit D: Evacuation Plan
5. Exhibit E: Environmental Setback Map
6. Exhibit F: Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: (X)
NOES: (X)
ABSENT: (x)
ABSTAIN: (X)
:_D • JD y_ b
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Roberta. Fonzi, Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
J ',/ie'.
�:
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans Sheet 1
TTM 2002-0020
I Nit
311 IM
i
�p 1
1
-----------
7 l (
- -----------------—_
-- __ _- -__.
9EEf C21)
a �i
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans: Sheet 2
TTM 2002-0020
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans: Sheet 3
TTM 2002-0020
(SEE 94M c1.1)
I
,
I
a
�
�
/
I
I
I/
I
/ 4
I
/ I
I
'
L
1
1 /
I
1
111 1
�
Y 7�„ I
�i. •:•fir. p. :. •..
I
6 1
1
6 52
1
i
a �
.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans: Sheet 4
TTM 2002-0020
if
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans: Sheet 5
TTM 2002-0020
r
m
Ir '_
.I
■ ill � 1 q�
�r r � 1 1 n ' i�'l i ► i ''ri :: � ����"�
:v1�j Z14 {ii�jpliil' (�
�� �I'i��� I .. • w iii `��i�7 ,� i.� 8 '�'n�'ii.��. �...
IP � 'I 7 I� '.. i■�
111110 t.��li�J��e 1� r ''' .■�
�Ei'ir im ■ —'— ' i
n
I �- r
is
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Exhibit B: Improvement Plans: Sheet 6
TTM 2002-0020
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT C: Master Site Plan / Grading Seniors Cottages (Sheet 1)
TTM 2002-0020: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Entire Seniors
site to be
landscaped.
�
✓{ 08 rill fl zr' e® � r 1 t 1� 11
llif
'` • 1 a `rte � s'� �' 2�-lar- Aw�-
�'
IF
1'
Class 1 trail
+
1.
with 20 -foot
117.
public access
easement
s>
fill l 111111
I �II
it
jiNif illl
Pit
SRI Oil"[ Ili ,/ I �%,'•, � � 4 � - '/llt�/� '}•�
#: -_,
e�r 1 'ill + �:�- __ �� �r ✓� ii> 7.
Graves Creek
h1.
x '4�` bridge with
Class 1 trail
o�1 111 � �� -` - _�-,.�'` 1,'" ', � � �� � �� 1� '!. ``' '�' �►l�{I1�§' ��
�����-�n � r �,��, _ � .,•� _-°tit :.� -'----- _ �� =�-� � ��, �i �g �� `tt'�
(SEE SWU a.0
5��5i 55144
na ■anarn�
9 A
� r � I�Biic ccs
�llllll
g
11110;
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT C: Master Site Plan / Grading Single Family (Sheet 2)
TTM 2002-0020: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
Al
a It1 , ,y I
. t. r
t 1
Ills-
-�
1
e
r--��u
�'------!
44
• \\d\1r.1\ � � t �t� ii 9's[L- � � I'r� ----
1 ; 1, 'C�y+'— 1 j \
aF
4r'./' .. ` Ir I Il' If
g � ra�lt 'Illn
1 }+ n
it
1
�• � u It
� __- y+.._ I 1 _ 7"- •�� � aT _ , ,1 'iii +i 11 {� 1 ��
a
s I \ \\ \: 1 / i k \ 1t1 , 1 t\\
3 '\ ill Ott \\\r \ \ 'r , \� :� ; . {s ''lilt
Itil
fill
\{
l �lltl�
ilrae e t1\,VI. U! 111 ' r 114tt ttt 1/jilt
� � !\ i''Il \�1 \ \ \ � � \g' t\\\\\��� � i• � \\rl � ?Ff/h/, 9/�� I � �tjl
\ \ \ \ � �: ; It 7� j 1 111
if'\L\\ \\ t \�-\ \—tti Ti' li ° V� iii 4
!/ 1 tttl l tea\
3
�f��lll�n�i li ���\�.\.�, \ � ,, �_\ ��S i ntl�lulf�€(� �-�t11 �tV•ll
# V b i
j '� � � I iiinn�+iiasniac5s=65555555]
e � 1 g � � fF6ii Ei55i6i5iilitf e6i6£ii!!
Class 1 trail
with 20 -foot
public access
easement
Fill slopes to
be landscaped
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT C: Master Site Plan / Grading Single Family (Sheet 3)
TTM 2002-0020: PD -9 Master Plan of Development
rIt
)\
m{
hln/
III � %I {a r✓'�.�/� � ! �%�'� � ' � n�• rN • �;f q ;-A
.., � I / i 't l � „�R.�'p� \ Eg I 1 t..3 �, -• rte% _ i
rt�l1q�I Ir\�� \si{/J� \\ I �� { `t
,
II./ JJ
W l iil
{li/Jr rrlr r/II \�t,/ �' I 1 11
! I ?iR IIII lIII Illlll I f`a VIII
Il / I I I I / / /141 l 1, 10 / / \\ �� \ i SII
II j<t it'll I I l \
it
U�III 1 13Nr ijill���tq�lj� tiY ti ],/' / IIiI
It
\�i I', //M1J I\ Y\ vim: ' AV, ill l
� , a �/\�l// r/ /�j'�` ! ^\ \ \ �• I III 1
err,
If i
\ \ i
F,,IJ4L
lue MS)
II q
t
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
6111111111,
WiffiIIi
•D
`
-
1111■��
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
•D
`
-
1111■��
Equestrian
Staging area
and future
public park
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT D: Evacuation Plan
TTM 2002-0020
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
EXHIBIT E: Environmental Setback Map
TTM 2002-0020
EXHIBIT F: Conditions of Approval
TTM 2002-0020
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
Planning Services
1.
The approval of this application shall become final, subject to the completion of the conditions of
approval, 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 Tentative Tract Map shall be valid for two 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 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 Parcel Map.
4.
The Tract Map shall be subject to additional fees for park or recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) as
required by City Ordinance.
5.
The applicant shall record CC&R's for the subdivision subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer, City Attorney and Community Development Director. The CC&R's shall identify the
maintenance responsibilities of all private driveways, roads, bridges, sewer facilities, drainage facilities,
common parking areas, site lighting, landscape areas, fencing, and other common facilities. The
CC&R's shall also state that each unit shall have no more than three bedrooms and that all exterior
colors, exterior materials, and yard fencing shall be consistent with the overall master plan of
development.
6.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and 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 subdivision
7.
An irrevocable public recreation, open space and public access easement shall be recorded on Lot 33
and clearly noted on the final map. Lot 33 shall be offered for dedication to the City of Atascadero.
8.
Twenty foot (20 -foot) public access easements shall be recorded across all trail corridors located outside
of street right-of-ways.
9.
Street trees shall be provided on all streets with 50 -foot on -center spacing.
10.
Vehicular barriers that permit pedestrian and equestrian access shall be provided at all access
points to the Salinas River.
11.
A Class I trail shall be provided on the east side Road A continuously to Paso Robles Creek
12.
A landscape and irrigation plan for all common areas, street trees and the equestrian staging area shall
be provided as part of the subdivision tract improvement plans. Landscape plans for the senior cottages
may be deferred until building permits.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
13. The final map shall include the Graves Creek 100 -year flood plain boundary within the Lot 33 open space
parcel as shown on Exhibit A.
14. A deed restriction shall be recorded against lots 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 limiting occupancy of dwelling
units to persons defined as seniors (55 years of age).
15. The emergency services and road maintenance costs of the project shall be 100% funded by the project
in perpetuity. The service and maintenance cost may be funded through a benefit assessment district or
other mechanism established by the developer subject to City approval. The funding mechanism must
be in place prior to or concurrently with acceptance of the any final maps. The funding mechanism shall
be approved by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Administrative Services Director prior to acceptance of
any final map. The administration of the above mentioned funds and the coordination and performance of
maintenance activities shall be by the City
a) All Atascadero Police Department service costs to the project.
b) All Atascadero Fire Department service costs to the project.
c) All streets, sidewalks, streetlights, street signs, roads, emergency access roads, emergency access
gates, and sewer mains within the project.
d) All parks, trails, recreational facilities and like facilities.
e) All open space and native tree preservation areas.
f) All drainage facilities and detention basins.
g) All common landscaping areas, street trees, medians, parkway planters, manufacture slopes
outside private yards, and other similar facilities.
16. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall enter into a legal agreement with the City to reserve 1/2
of the units for sale to residents or workers within the City of Atascadero, including the affordable units.
The agreement shall include the following provisions:
f) The units shall be offered for sale to residents or workers within the City of Atascadero for a minimum
of 60 -days. During this time period offers may only be accepted from Atascadero residents or
workers;
g) The applicant shall provide reasonable proof to the City that at least one of the qualified buyers is a
resident or worker within the City Limits of Atascadero;
h) The Atascadero resident or worker restriction shall apply to the initial sale only;
i) The applicant shall identify which units will be reserved; and
j) The City Attorney shall approve the final form of the agreement.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
17. Prior to recordation of final map, a 30 -year affordable housing deed restrictions shall be recorded
inconsitent with the following table. In -lieu fees for remaining un -built units and fractions of units shall be
based on 2.50% of the construction valuation of the market rate unit. Fees shall be paid at time of
building permit.
Rochelle PD -9
Affordable Housing Plan
Inclusionary
Housing Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
MFR Units 60 units
20% Affordable 12 units
Estimated Valuation 100,000.00
Affordable
Distribution
20% Very Low 2.0 units 2 units 0 units 0%
37% Low 4.0 units 4 units 0 units 0%
43% Moderate 5.0 units 5 units 0 units 0%
11.0 units 11 units 0 units 0% $ -
$0 / MFR unit
Inclusionary
Housing Council Policy Proposed Difference In -Lieu Fee
SFR Units 26 units
20% Affordable 5 units
Estimated Valuation 197,000.00
Affordable
Distribution
100% Moderate 5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units 4%
5.2 units 5.0 units -0.2 units -4% $ 4,925.00
$235 / SFR unit
18. A tract map drawn in substantial conformance with the 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.
Mitigation Measures
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
3.c.1. A bicycle and pedestrian pathway will be provided along the bridge and project driveway to
Graves Creek.
3.c.2. A pedestrian and bicycle pathway shall be provide through the project with a connection to
Graves Creek and the Salinas River.
3.c.3. The following measures shall be noted on the grading plans and implemented during
construction:
A. All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice daily with complete coverage,
preferably in the late morning and after work is finished for the day. Increased watering
frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed water
should be used whenever possible.
B. All clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of
high winds (i.e. greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour) so as to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
C. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered
to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
D. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations shall be
minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
E. Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project revegetation and
landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any
soil disturbing activities.
F. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading shall be sown with fast -germinating native grass seed and
watered until vegetation becomes established.
G. All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved
chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the
APCD.
H. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. In addition, structural foundations shall be completed as soon as possible
following building pad construction.
I. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved surface.
J. All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per day, using non -
potable water.
K. Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt which may have
accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative
Tract Map 2002-0020
from leaving the site.
K. Wheel washers may be required when significant offsite import or export of fill is
involved.
L. All dirt stock -pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed.
4.a.1.
The developed areas of the project will provide a 50 -foot setback from riparian canopy and 100 -
foot setback due to presence of red -legged frog.
4.a.2.
The tract map shall include an open space habitat easement along the Salinas River and
Graves Creek which will includes the archaeological site CA-SLO-493.
4.a.3.
Wildlife Migration Corridors along the Salinas River, Paso Robles and Graves Creeks shall be
provides on the final map.
4.a.4.
BR/mm-1: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall retain a qualified
biological monitor to supervise all construction activities located within or directly adjacent to
sensitive communities including riparian forest, and known and potential wetland areas. The
biological monitor shall conduct a brief training session prior to commencement of construction
to advise construction personnel on the biological sensitivity of various habitats and discuss
various measures for minimizing potential construction -related impacts. The biological monitor
shall visit construction zones located within or near sensitive areas at a frequency and duration
determined appropriate by the City of Atascadero and based on construction timing and
sensitivity of resources at issue. During the periodic site visits, the biological monitor will
ensure that identified construction zones and access routes remain clearly marked and
restricted areas are avoided. Weekly reports will be prepared by the monitor which document
construction activities and associated effects on sensitive biological resources.
4.a.5.
BR/mm-2: Avoid indirect disturbance of riparian vegetation, including scattered willows,
cottonwoods, and valley and coast live oaks, through implementation of the following measures:
a)
Immediately prior to construction, retain the biological monitor, or qualified botanist, to clearly
mark the dripline area of each tree located outside of, but adjacent to proposed development
areas. The dripline area of each tree should be marked with highly visible flagging or
construction fencing.
b)
During construction, avoid all soil disturbance, compaction, and grading activities within, and
adjacent to, the associated dripline of each tree. The biological monitor should be retained
throughout construction activities to ensure that the identified dripline of each tree remains
undisturbed, and to supervise all construction activities adjacent to woodland areas.
c)
Following project implementation, avoid the use of artificial irrigation in areas located adjacent
to or within the associated driplines of all remaining oak trees. Revegetate disturbed areas
located near remaining oaks, with appropriate native vegetation to minimize the need for
artificial irrigation.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative
Tract Map 2002-0020
4.a.6.
BR/mm-3: Designate permanent riparian setbacks for the Salinas Rver corridor and Graves
Creek corridor to preserve sensitive riparian communities. The setback for the Salinas River
should extend from the outer edge of the riparian corridor, and southward 50 feet (Refer to
Figures 3 and 4 of Biological Assessment for locations of recommended riparian setbacks).
The setback for Graves Creek will extend from the outer edges of the riparian corridor, and
upland 100 feet, due to the presence of sensitive species. Permanent riparian setbacks of 100
feet will also be designated for the portion of the Salinas River located west of Graves Creek,
and for Paso Robles Creek.
4.a.7.
BR/mm-4: If direct disturbance of the southern embankment of the Salinas River, located in the
northern portion of the site, cannot be completely avoided, a permit must be obtained from the
Corps to discharge dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S., pursuant to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act. The permit must be obtained from the Corps prior to initiation of any
ground disturbance activities in the vicinities of identified drainages. A Streambed Alteration
Agreement will also be required from the CDFG for disturbance of any portion of the channel
located beneath the top of bank. The applicant should contact the Corps and CDFG well in
advance of project implementation to determine specific permitting requirements and mitigation
responsibilities associated with disturbance of the identified drainages and associated
wetlands.
4.a.8.
BR/mm-5: To avoid or minimize indirect impacts to areas qualifying as Waters of the U.S.
located down-slope from proposed development areas, including areas associated with the
Salinas River and Graves Creek implement the following measures:
a)
Clearly mark the boundaries of all construction areas using highly visible flagging and
construction fencing. Limit all private and construction vehicle traffic to areas located within
designated access route and construction areas.
b)
Implement appropriate erosion control measures during construction and limit construction
activities to dry weather to avoid increased surface water runoff and erosion on site, and
sedimentation in nearby drainages. Install appropriate erosion control devices (i.e., hay bales,
silt fences) around the perimeter of each construction zone and areas experiencing disturbance
of the ground surface. Erosion control devices should be checked on a daily basis by
construction personnel, and periodically by the biological monitor, to ensure proper function.
c)
Avoid stockpiling any soil in areas located adjacent to drainages, or in areas that have potential
to experience significant runoff during the rainy season.
d)
Following completion of construction -related activities, immediately revegetate all disturbed and
barren areas with appropriate native vegetation to reduce the risk of erosion from the site and
sedimentation in adjacent ephemeral drainages. Areas experiencing only temporary
disturbance should be replanted with only native species that are characteristic of various
habitats of the project area.
4.a.9.
BR/mm-6: To reduce the potential for inadvertent release of fuel from construction areas to
aquatic habitats, avoid all cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles within the vicinities
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative
Tract Map 2002-0020
of existing drainages and associated seasonal wetland habitat. Stage and re -fuel vehicles only
in appropriately marked construction staging areas.
4.a.10.
BR/mm-7: Retain a qualified biologist throughout the duration of construction activities to
monitor for California red -legged frog (CRLF), as well as southwestern pond turtle, California
horned lizard, western toad, and other sensitive species that have potential to occur in
construction zones. The monitor should be pre -approved by the USFWS and CDFG to move
CRLF from affected areas to appropriate habitats on-site, but away from construction zones. At
a minimum, the CRLF monitor should remain on site throughout the duration of all construction
activities that take place within 300 feet of the Graves Creek riparian corridor, due to the
presence of a known population of the species.
4.a.11.
BR/mm-8: To avoid take of active raptor nests, any necessary tree removals should be
conducted between September 15 and February 15, outside of the typical breeding season. If
any tree removals are determined to be necessary between February 15 and September 15, a
raptor nest survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to project implementation
and any planned tree removals. The results of the raptor nest survey should be submitted to
CDFG, via a letter report. If the biologist determines that a tree slated for removal is being used
by raptors for nesting at that time, construction in the vicinity of the nest should be avoided until
after the young have fledged from the nest and achieved independence. If no nesting is found to
occur in the vicinity of proposed development, construction activities could then proceed.
4.a.12.
BR/mm-10: Any public or private access trails retained or created as part of the proposed
project should be limited to pedestrian and equestrian traffic only. Restrict the use of all off-
road vehicles and construct appropriate barriers at existing river access points. Post signs at
regular intervals along public access points to the river that discuss the sensitivity of the
adjacent Salinas River corridor and identify allowable and restricted uses. Signs should
primarily be posted along the outer edge of the designated setback for the Salinas River.
5.b.1
Prior to any tract improvement within the areas of CA-SLO-492, 493, 1076, and 1077, a Phase
2 Archaeological Report shall be prepared. All future development shall be conform to the
required mitigations of the Phase 2 study. The sites shall be fenced until mitigation is
complete.
5.b.2.
A Phase 3 mitigation plan shall be developed for all work proposed in CA-SLO-492, 493, 1076,
and 1077.
5.b.3.
A deed disclosure shall be included on included on any future lots that cross sites CA-SLO-
492, 493, 1076, and 1077 notify owner of the possibility of underlying archaeological deposits.
5.b.4.
If human remains are discovered during construction all work shall cease immediately and the
Atascadero Community Development Department and County Coroner shall be notified by the
contractor. No further work shall occur in the area until authorized by the Atascadero
Community Development Department.
6.b.1.
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared and approved by the Water Quality
Control District prior to the issuance of construction permits.
6.b.2.
Erosion/sedimentation and revegetation plans that demonstrates how sensitive riparian areas
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative
Tract Map 2002-0020
will be protected from siltation during and after construction shall be included in the
construction plans and approved by the City Engineer.
6.b.3.
As part of the construction plans, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan which includes the
proper design and placement of sediment/greasetraps to prevent the discharge of pollutants.
As a condition on the drainage plan, the applicant shall maintain the catch basin/greasetraps
on a regular basis to remove pollutants, reduce high pollutant concentrations during the first
flush of storms, prevent clogging of the downstream conveyance system, and maintain the
catch basins sediment trapping capacity.
7.g.1.
Prior to approving construction plans, the PUC application for a bridge crossing of the UPRR
railroad tracks shall be approved by the PUC.
7.g.2.
A second access road and/or an alternative emergency
7.g.3.
Prior to final map, the Fire Department shall approve a mitigation plan to provide adequate
access to the senior cottages.
8.c.1.
All residential portions of the site shall be outside of the Flood Hazard Zone.
8.c.2.
As part of the grading plan, the City Engineer shall determine whether the FEMA Flood Hazard
Zone is being changed by the project. If so, the applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals
from FEMA to change maps prior to approval of construction plans.
8.c.3.
All grading and drainage facilities shall be designed consistent with the City's NPDES
standards.
8.c.4.
A storm water pollution prevention plan shall be approved prior to construction.
11.a.1.
The project shall provide a 100 -foot noise setback buffer with dense landscaping plantings and
evergreen trees along the UPRR frontage. Reconfiguration of building sites on lots 23 and 24
will be required.
11.a.2.
Disclose to potential buyers that 24-hour average noise levels may exceed the recommended
limits established by the City of Atascadero.
11.a.3.
Advise buyers that noise levels during train passbys will be very loud, potentially annoying and
perhaps startling
11.a.4.
Advise buyers that noise levels due to operation of trucks, forklifts and loading operations at the
Home Depot commercial center will frequently be loud and potentially annoying.
11.a.5.
Locate outdoor living spaces out of direct line -of -site of railroad and Home Depot commercial
center.
City Engineer Drainage Conditions
19. This
project drains into the Salinas River, Graves Creek and Paso Robles Creek. The project storm
water will drain in a controlled non-erosive manner into these waterways..
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
20. All requirements of Section 5 "Storm Drainage" of the Engineering Department standard
specifications and drawings will be met.
21. Obtain approval by the City Engineer of the grading & drainage plans and the storm drain design &
facilities. These plans shall show the method of dispersal at all pipe outlets and method of conduct
to approved off-site drainage facilities.
22. Submit calculations to support the design of any structures or pipes. Closed conduits shall be
designed to convey the 10 -year flow with gravity flow, the 25 -year flow with head, and provide safe
conveyance for the 100 year overflow.
23. Concentrated drainage from off-site and onto offsite areas shall be conveyed across the project site
in drainage easements. Acquire drainage easements where needed. Drainage shall cross lot lines
only where a drainage easement has been provided.
24. All drainage released off the project site and into the Salinas River shall comply with the Regional
Water Quality Board Standard and the National Pollution Elimination System, Phase II requirement.
The Regional Water Quality Board shall approve a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
25. This project is surrounded by a 100 -year flood plain. This projects construction document shall
detail the 100 -flood plain elevation on the plans. Grading on this project shall not increase the 100 -
year flood elevation. The project Engineer shall certify the grading was complete according to the
approved plans and all structures are out of the 100 -year flood plain. .
City Engineer Circulation Conditions
26. Road "B". The proposed road from Tract 2454, to the south, to the Grave Creek shall be Rural
Local Standard 401 Type "B" (13 -foot wide lanes). An 8 -foot multi purpose trail shall be constructed
on one side of the road.
27. Bridges. Two bridges are included in this project. One across UPRR and one crossing Graves
Creek. These bridges will include facilities for two-way vehicle traffic, bicycle and pedestrian travel.
A structural engineer will design the bridges, foundations, footings and support structures. The
structural engineer will be responsible for the entire design. The construction documents will be
submitted in a complete document, detailing all the elements.
28. Senior Housing Complex Roads. These roads shall meet Public Works and Fire Department
standards..
29. All public improvements shall be design by a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in
conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and
Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer.
City Engineer Improvement Maintenance
30. . The following items are the responsibility of this development to maintain. They may be maintained
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
through a homeowners association, assessment district, benefit assessment district, landscaping
and lighting district, City acceptance or other mechanism to fund and perform short and long term
maintenance. This mechanism must be in place prior to the recordation of the final map.
a) Road Improvements including road surface, curb, gutter and trails.
b) Bridges across Graves Creek and Union Pacific Railroad. The applicant shall provide for
annual reports on the bridge condition by a qualified Civil Engineer, Structural engineer
or other qualified Professional approved by the City Engineer. The report shall detail the
structural integrity of the bridge and the required maintenance for the bridge. The repair
and maintenance work on the bridge shall be inspected and approved. The report and
repair work will the responsibility of the property owner of this subdivision.
c) Drainage facilities.
d) Open Space.
e) Park.
City Engineer Grading and Drainage
31. Grading and Drainage Plans shall be submitted with the Tract Improvement Plans. These plans will
conform to all State and Local standard.
32. All drainage released off the project site and into the Salinas River shall comply with the Regional
Water Quality Board Standard and the National Pollution Elimination System, Phase II requirement.
The Regional Water Quality Board shall approve a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
City Engineer Wastewater
33. This project proposes 2 sewage lift station. This lift station will meet the following criteria:
a) Sewer lift stations, force mains, gravity mains, laterals and other sewer facilities shall be
privately owned and maintained.
b) Catalogue cuts of equipment that will be installed the lift station shall be submitted and
approved by the Director of Public Works.
c) Lift stations shall be installed with alarm dialers programmed to notify qualified
maintenance personnel when malfunctions occur.
d) Developer shall submit a lift station emergency contingency plan that addressed protection
of public health and the environment from sewage spills and prolonged power outages.
e) Lift Station shall be equipped with duplex pumps.
34. Sewer connection permit shall be issued separately (from building permit) after public sewer
extension has been completed and has received a satisfactory final Public Works inspection. Final
project inspection shall be contingent upon completion of the public sewer extension and Public
Works final inspection. Applicant shall pay sewer Extension (Annexation), Connection and
Reimbursement fees (if applicable) upon issuance of building permit. All sewer main taps will be
done by the City of Atascadero and the developers shall pay a sewer tap fee.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
City Engineer Standard Conditions
35. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of Atascadero
Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings and/or as directed by the City
Engineer.
36. In the event that the applicant is allowed to bond for the public improvements required as a condition
of the final map, the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City
Council.
37. An engineer's estimate of probable cost shall be submitted for review and approval by the City
Engineer to determine the amount of the bond.
38. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall record concurrently with the Final Map..
39. An encroachment permit shall be obtained prior to the issuance of building permit.
40. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection agreement with the City
41. A six (6) foot Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be provided where needed.
42. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities.
43. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable TV and telephone)
underground. Utilities shall be extended to the property line frontage of each lot or its public utility
easement.
44. The applicant shall monument all property corners for construction control and shall promptly
replace them if disturbed.
45. The applicant shall acquire title interest in any off-site land that 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.
46. Slope easements shall be provided as needed to accommodate cut of fill slopes.
47. Drainage easements shall be provided as needed to accommodate both public and private drainage
facilities.
48. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the map.
49. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other 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.
50. The final map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to the map being placed on the agenda for
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
City Council acceptance.
51.
Prior to recording the final map, the applicant shall submit a map drawn in substantial conformance
with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein. The City in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall submit the
map for review and approval.
52.
Prior to recording the final map, the applicant shall set monuments at all new property corners. A
registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate by certificate on the parcel map,
that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to
enable the survey to be retraced.
53.
Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall pay all outstanding plan check/inspection
fees.
54.
Prior to recording the map, the applicant shall complete all improvements required by these
conditions of approval.
55.
Prior to recording the map, the applicant shall have the 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.
56.
Upon recording the final map, the applicant shall provide the City with a black line clear Mylar (0.4
mil) copy and a blue line print of the recorded map and a digital copy of the map.
57.
Prior to the final inspection of any public improvements, the 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.
58.
. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit a written 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 (AMWC):
59.
The applicant shall provide a deed restriction on all lots contiguous to the easterly tract boundary
that expressly prohibits the construction of septic systems, the drilling of wells or the keeping of
livestock. The applicant shall provide the easement by separate instrument, shall show the
easement on the final map, and shall address the restrictions in the CC&R's for the project.
60.
The applicant shall manage the manure that accumulates as a result of operation of the equestrian
facility in a manner that does not allow contaminated storm water run-off to flow onto the River
Parcel or in a manner that could contaminate the community's water supply.
61.
The applicant shall record instruments separate from and concurrent with the final map that
discloses the following to all property owners within the subdivision. AMWC shall review and
approve the form and content of the instruments relative to these conditions of approval before the
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
record.
a) AMWC operates community water wells on the parcel adjacent to the subdivision (the
"River Parcel'). That development and operation of community wells and other water -related
facilities on the River Parcel will be of an industrial nature. Impacts to the subdivision will
result from operations on the River Parcel that produce intermittent and continuous noise
and dust. Other activities will include the drilling of wells, excavation of recovery ponds,
construction of pipelines, hauling, handling and storage of hazardous materials, and
construction of well and treatment buildings.
b) The existence of an easement that prohibits the construction of septic systems, the drilling
of wells or the keeping of livestock within construction of septic systems or wells within
150 -feet of the easterly tract boundary.
c) The possible future uses of the River Parcel that could include residential subdivisions,
public parks or other uses.
62. All proposed trail access points on to AMWC property, the Salinas River or the De Anza trail shall
include appropriate signage and vehicular barriers to prevent property damage, damage to the
riparian environment, vandalism, uses inconsistent with AMWC policies, or other inappropriate or
illegal uses. AMWC shall approve all access points onto its property. The City or an entity
established to maintain the trail system shall maintain and control all access points onto AMWC
property in a manner consistent with other access points onto AMWC property. At its discretion,
AMWC may withdraw access rights to properties owned by AMWC without notifying the property
owners within the subdivision.
63. In addition to the existing easements and other rights granted to AMWC by the Deed of Water
Rights and Related Easements affecting Remainder Parcel of 54 -PM -43 recorded as Document No.
2000-001974, Official Records, the applicant shall provide the following water -related easements to
AMWC. The easements shall be for water facilities that include, but are not limited to, community
wells, treatment buildings, water mains, and access roads.
a) 50 -foot wide access and water main easements to AMWC across the proposed
subdivision. The easements shall follow the roadway alignment s shown on tentative map.
The easements shall include any bridges, at -grade crossings, underpasses or other means
used to cross the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way and Graves Creek.
b) Easements for future water facilities and access to those facilities on those portions of Lots
27, 28, 29, and 31 that are within the 100 -year floodway or floodway fringe or are otherwise
not planned for the construction of housing units as shown on the tentative map.
c) Easements for the future extension of a water main from the access road for Lots 28-32 to
the northwesterly tract boundary. The easements shall have a minimum width of 20 -feet.
The easements shall allow construction of a water main from the end of the access road to
the southwest corner of Lot 32, the northwest corner of Lot 32, and the northwest corner of
Lot 31.
64. All access rights granted by the applicant to AMWC relative to these conditions of approval shall be
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
equal or superior to the rights granted the property owners within the subdivision. The easements
shall benefit AMWC and all future property owners of the River Parcel or subdivisions thereof. The
applicant shall not place restrictions on the access rights granted by the easements required by
these conditions of approval such as, but not limited to, prohibitions against hauling hazardous
materials or large equipment or hours of use.
65. Before recording the final map, the applicant shall submit water system improvement plans to
AMWC for review and approval. All water system improvements shall be constructed in
conformance with the AMWC Specifications and Details. The water main between EI Camino Real
and Road A shall have a diameter of 12 -inches. The water main along Road A shall have a
diameter of 12 -inches. The water main serving Lots 27-32 shall have a diameter of 12 -inches.
Smaller diameter water mains may connect to the 12 -inch diameter main serving Lots 27-32 to
provide a looped system. In addition to the water main at the bridge crossing of Graves Creek,
another point of connection to the water distribution system south of Graves Creek shall be provided
to provide a looped system for the portion of the water distribution system that serves Lots 27-32.
66. Before recording the final map, the applicant shall destroy all existing wells on the property. The
wells shall be destroyed in conformance with the Well Standards of the California Department of
Water Resources.
67. Before issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain a "Will Serve" letter from the AMWC.
68. Before issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay all installation and connection fees
required by the AMWC.
Fire Department Conditions
69. All fire hydrants and access roads to be installed prior combustible construction to take place.
70. Relocate fire hydrants w/ consultation w/ fire dept. re: possible reduction on number of hydrants
required.
71. Automatic Fire Sprinklers required for senior housing portion of project.
72. Provide for secondary emergency access according to the following:
c) provide a plans that shows and describes the installation/construction for evacuation of
residents. The plan shall depict safe routing across the Union Pacific Railroad to the west side.
Location of access point shall be midway into senior residential portion of project.
d) Show on plan a dedicated easement for possible future secondary multi use access to be used
by vehicles, pedestrian, bike and equestrian traffic that facilitates use of the SLOCOG access
plan. This dedicated easement plan shall show routing to the North, Northeast direction from
the senior housing portion of the project. Residents within proposed project shall have full deed
disclosure of said easement.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-0107
October 21, 2003
Conditions of Approval / Mitigation Monitoring Program
Tentative Tract Map 2002-0020
\\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\- ZCH - Zone Change\ZC 03\ZCH 2003-0069. PD -9 Rochelle SFR + Seniors
Amendment\ZCH 2003-0069.PC-SR. 10-21-03.wmf.doc