HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2016-05-17_AgendaPacket
WEBSITE: www.atascadero.org
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR Code
with your smartphone
to view Planning
Commission Website
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 17, 2016 – 7:00 P.M.
Historic City Hall Council Chambers
6500 Palma Avenue, 4th Floor
Atascadero, California 93422
CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call: Chairperson Jan Wolff
Vice Chairperson Duane Anderson
Commissioner David Bentz
Commissioner Mark Dariz
Commissioner Jerel Seay
Commissioner Charles Bourbeau
Commissioner Dennis Schmidt
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 three minutes.
Please state your name 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.)
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, May 17, 2016
Page 2 of 4
WEBSITE: www.atascadero.org
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR Code
with your smartphone
to view Planning
Commission Website
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 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES OF MAY 3, 2016
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
2. STRATEGIC PLANNING UPDATE
PUBLIC HEARINGS
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Prior to a project hearing Planning Commission Members must disclose any communications they have had on any quasi-judicial
agenda items. This includes, but is not limited to, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps, Variances, Co nditional Use
Permits, and Planned Development Permits. This does not disqualify the Planning Commission Member from participating and
voting on the matter, but gives the public and applicant an opportunity to comment on the ex parte communication.
(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 for the record and can address the
Commission for three minutes. After all public comments have been received, the public hearing will be closed, and the Commission
will discuss the item and take appropriate action(s).)
3. PLN 2015-1563, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR
10075, 10085 ATASCADERO AVE. (EL MOJON COURT)
Project Title: PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188 El Mojon Court, 6 Lot Subdivision
City Staff: Alfredo Castillo, Associate Planner, Email: acastillo@atascadero.org, Phone: 805-470-3436
Project Location: 10075, 10085 Atascadero Avenue, Atascadero CA 93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN: 056-211-037 and 038
Applicant/Property Owner: DA2 Development, LLC, 7650 Portola Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Description: A proposed subdivision of two existing parcels of record to be subdivided into six (6) lots.
Applicant proposes construction of a new residential street, to be privately maintained, to access
the proposed lots from Atascadero Avenue. As a part of the construction of the new street, up to
143-inches in Diameter Breast Height (DBH) of native Coast Live Oak, and Blue Oak trees are
proposed to be removed. Proposed residential homes will be limited to areas identified as "build
areas" to reduce impacts to native trees. Homes are proposed to be constructed as each individual
lot is sold.
General Plan Designation: Single-Family Residential (SFR-Y)
Zoning District: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
Environmental
Review Dates:
Begins: April 27, 2016
Ends: May 16, 2016
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
Based on the Initial Study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is
proposed. The MND is available for public review from 4/27/16 through 5/16/16 at 6500 Palma
Ave., Community Development Department from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
This document can be found electronically in PDF format on the City’s website at
http://www.atascadero.org/environmentaldocs.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, May 17, 2016
Page 3 of 4
WEBSITE: www.atascadero.org
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR Code
with your smartphone
to view Planning
Commission Website
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting will be on June 7, 2016 at City Hall Council Chambers, 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 at, or prior to, this public hearing.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, May 17, 2016
Page 4 of 4
WEBSITE: www.atascadero.org
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR Code
with your smartphone
to view Planning
Commission Website
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Planning Commission meets in regular session on the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City
Hall, Council Chambers, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Commission in the order of
the printed Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on
file in the office of the Community Development Department and are available for public inspection during City Hall
business hours at the Front Counter of City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, and on our website,
www.atascadero.org. 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. Commission meetings are audio recorded, and may be reviewed by the public. Copies of
meeting recordings are available for a fee. Contact the City Clerk for more information (470-3400).
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 or the City Clerk’s Office,
both at (805) 470-3400. 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 SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, “PUBLIC COMMENT”, the Chairperson will call for anyone from the audience having business
with the Commission to approach the lectern and be recognized.
1. Give your name for the record (not required)
2. State the nature of your business.
3. All comments are limited to 3 minutes.
4. All comments should be made to the Chairperson and Commission.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any
other individual, absent or present.
This is when items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Commission’s attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will
be allowed for Public Comment Portion (unless changed by the Commission).
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
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 Co mmission regarding the matter being
considered to step up to the lectern. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the lectern and be recognized by the Chairperson.
2. Give your name (not required).
3. Make your statement.
4. All comments should be made to the Chairperson and Commission.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any
other individual, absent or present.
6. All comments limited to 3 minutes.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the Community Development
Department at 470-3402 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Digital presentations brought to the meeting should
be on a USB drive or CD. You are required to submit to the Recording Secretary a printed copy of your presentation
for the record. Please check in with the Recording Secretary before the meeting begins to announce your presence
and turn in the printed copy.
The Chairperson will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public
comments will be heard by the Commission.
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 1 of 6
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Regular Meeting – Tuesday, May 3, 2016 – 7:00 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m.
Chairperson Wolff called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Commissioner Schmidt
led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Bentz, Dariz, Bourbeau, Schmidt, Seay, Vice
Chairperson Anderson, and Chairperson Wolff
Absent: None
Others Present: Recording Secretary, Annette Manier
Staff Present: Community Development Director, Phil Dunsmore
Assistant Planner, Katie Banister
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by
Commissioner Schmidt to approve the Agenda.
Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
Chairperson Wolff closed the Public Comment period.
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
None
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 5-17-16
1
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 2 of 6
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT ACTION MINUTES OF MARCH 15, 2016
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by
Vice Chairperson Anderson to approve the
consent calendar.
Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
2. PLN 2016-1587, TREE REMOVAL FOR 5393 BARRENDA AVE.
Assistant Planner Banister gave the staff report and she and Community Development
Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following member of the public spoke during public comment: Chip Tamagni, A&T
Arborists. Mr. Tamagni answered questions from the Commission.
Chairperson Wolff closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by
Commissioner Bourbeau to adopt PC
Resolution 2016-A to allow the removal of
one (1) native tree, based on findings and
subject to mitigation.
Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote.
Property Owner/Applicant: Wanda Cebulla, 5393 Barrenda Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Certified Arborist: Chip Tamagni, A&T Arborist, PO Box 1311, Templeton, CA 93465
Project Title: PLN 2016-1587 / TRP 2016-0198
Project Location: 5393 Barrenda Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 029-061-030 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project Description:
The project consists of a request to remove a 44 -inch diameter valley oak. The tree is 8
feet from the home and 6 feet from a failing retaining wall. The residents have applied
for a building permit (BLD 2016-13342) to replace the retaining wall and the repairs will
destabilize the tree and create a hazard.
General Plan Designation: High Density Residential (HDR)
Zoning District: High Density Residential Multi-family (RMF-20)
City Staff: Katie Banister, Assistant Planner, kbanister@atascadero.org, Phone: 470-3480
Staff
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission adopt PC Resolution 2016-A approving Tree Removal
Permit 2016-0198.
2
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 3 of 6
PUBLIC HEARINGS
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Prior to a project hearing Planning Commission Members must disclose any communications they have had on any quasi-judicial
agenda items. This includes, but is not limited to, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps, Variances, Conditional Use
Permits, and Planned Development Permits. This does not disqualify the Planning Commission Member from participating and
voting on the matter, but gives the public and applicant an opportunity to comment on the ex parte communication.
(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 t o provide
testimony to the Commission following the applicant. Speakers should state their name for the record and can address the
Commission for three minutes. After all public comments have been received, the public hearing will be closed, and the Commission
will discuss the item and take appropriate action(s).)
3. PLN 2016-1586, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 8355 CARMELITA AVE.
EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Commissioner Bourbeau and Chairperson Wolff drove by the property.
Assistant Planner Banister gave the staff report, and she and Community Development
Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Commission. Ms. Banister referred to
emails received from neighbors opposing the project, which were distributed before the
meeting (Exhibit A).
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Damon Meeks,
Jennifer Meeks, Chip Tamagni, Jeff Clayton, Don Port, Jeff Cannon, Gere Sibbach,
Carolyn Veek, Edward Veek, Jeanie Dodds, and Abe Dodds.
Damon Meeks distributed a one page sheet containing pictures (Exhibit B) and a
petition in support of his project (Exhibit C). Mr. Meeks answered questions from the
Commission. He stated he is in agreement with all conditions except he would like to
keep both (2) cranes on his property until Jan. 1, 2018 , at which time he will need to
Property
Owner/Applicant:
Damon Meeks, 8355 Carmelita Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: PLN 2016-1586 / CUP 2016-0296
Project Location: 8355 Carmelita Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 031-221-011 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
Description:
The project consists of a proposal for an oversized detached accessory structure in a
residential zone. The 2,000 square foot metal structure with no sides is greater than 50%
of the size of the primary residence. The structure will be used to shade a half -court
basketball court.
General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential SFR-Y
Zoning District: Residential Single Family RSF-Y
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
The proposed project is categorically exempted from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15303: New construction or conversion of small structures
including accessory structures such as garages and carports.
City Staff: Katie Banister, Assistant Planner, kbanister@atascadero.org, Phone: 470-3480
Staff
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission adopt PC Resolution 2016-A approving CUP 2016-0296
allowing the construction of a 2,000 square -foot accessory structure, based on
findings and subject to conditions.
3
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 4 of 6
remove one due to state compliance law. He indicated he would park the cranes behind
the shop so that the neighbor across the street cannot see the cranes.
Chairperson Wolff closed the Public Comment period.
Mr. Dunsmore explained that in the code, you can park one (1) commercial vehicle in a
residential zone.
Chairperson Wolff re-opened the Public Comment period.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Damon Meeks , who
stated that Chip Tamagni offered to store the extra crane on his property at 1565 El
Camino Real.
Chairperson Wolff closed the Public Comment period.
The Commission looked to staff for clarification, and staff’s suggestion would be to
modify Condition 9 to state that commercial vehicle storage shall be allowed to the
standards of the Atascadero Municipal Code. With this, the applicant has the
understanding of what the direction has been from the Commission , and that he needs
to comply with the Municipal Code.
Commissioner Bourbeau commented that he is not in favor of voting to approve the
item, (even though most neighbors are in support of it) for the following reasons:
The property is not zoned for commercial or industrial-type operations.
The applicant is not in compliance.
The structure is very large (181% of the size of the main residence).
The applicant is proposing to park the cranes in an area not allowed in the AMC
(cannot meet required setbacks)
These heavy vehicles are damaging the roads.
He would like to see further conditions regarding landscaping.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by
Commissioner Dariz to adopt PC Resolution
2016-A approving Conditional Use Permit PLN
2016-1586/(CUP) 2016-0296 to allow a 2,000
square foot detached accessory structure in
the SFR-Y zoning district based on findings
and subject to conditions of approval.
Commissioner Schmidt asked if the motion included the revision to Condition 9 , and the
maker of the motion (Bentz) said no. Commissioner Schmidt then re-read Condition 9
to strike the words “for accessory storage in the residential zones shall be removed
4
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 5 of 6
within 30 days of approval of this Conditional Use Permit.” The maker of the motion
said he would agree with this as would Commissioner Dariz who seconded the motion.
MOTION: By Commissioner Bentz and seconded by
Commissioner Dariz to adopt PC
Resolution 2016-A approving PLN 2016-
1586/Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2016-
0296 to allow a 2,000 square foot detached
accessory structure based on findings and
subject to conditions of approval, with a
revision to Condition 9 to read “Commercial
vehicles that are unable to meet the
standards of the Atascadero Municipal
Code for accessory storage in the
residential zones shall be removed.”
“Within 30 days of this Conditional Use
Permit” shall be removed from Condition 9.
Motion passed 6:1 by a roll-call vote.
(Bourbeau voted no)
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
Commissioner Bourbeau mentioned the New Times cover story. Director Dunsmore
talked about the article and gave the Commission an update on upcoming projects
within the City (including the Coco’s restaurant site). He said he would discuss
additional projects in the Director’s report.
Commissioner Bourbeau read an article about new requirements for energy efficiency
when people remodel their homes. He asked for clarification and how would this apply
to our City. Mr. Dunsmore said there are some requirements in the Title 24 Building
code, but the City has not implemented anything at this point in time.
DIRECTORS REPORT
Community Development Director Dunsmore announced that the next Planning
Commission hearing is scheduled for May 17, 2016. The Commission will hear a 6-lot
subdivision on Atascadero Ave., and a report on Strategic Planning/El Camino Real
Corridor Study (long-term outlook).
Mr. Dunsmore gave an update on the new gym in the Spencer’s Shopping Center, and
said that the permit has been issued, and the project is under construction. There are
also other businesses interested in locating in the Spencer’s Center. Mr. Dunsmore
5
PC Draft Action Minutes of 5/3/16
Page 6 of 6
gave an update on the old Wendy’s restaurant site (Wendy’s may return), Walmart, and
answered questions regarding the trail adjacent to the creek (San Gabriel to Portola).
ADJOURNMENT – 9:15 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for May 17, 2016, at
7:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero.
MINUTES PREPARD BY:
____________________________
Annette Manier, Recording Secretary
The following exhibits are available in the Community Development Department:
Exhibit A – Emails from neighbors
Exhibit B – Pictures submitted by Damon Meeks
Exhibit C – Petition submitted by Damon Meeks
Adopted
6
ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE:
5/17/16
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Strategic Planning Update
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission receive and file the update.
SUBJECT:
On April 20, 2016, staff attended a strategic planning update with the City Council. The
intent of this report is to brief the Planning Commission on relevant topics that were
discussed at that meeting and the direction that was provided to staff. Some of these
items will soon become topics of discussion before the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION:
At its November 10, 2015, City Council meeting, the City Council directed staff to review
commercial vacancies throughout the El Camino Real Corridor to better understand
future proposals from property owners and applicants requesting amendments to the
City’s General Plan; particularly, proposed General Plan Land Use Amendments
consisting of commercial land use designations converting to residential uses. This
analysis was formally presented to the City Council on March 22, 2016 (Attachment 1).
At the April 20 strategic planning discussion , staff presented the outcomes of the
corridor study and proposed a strategy for next steps. These next steps that are
consistent with the Community Development Department’s action plan included:
1. Continue the El Camino Real Corridor study by creating an RFP to hire a
consultant to prepare a “Corridor Master Plan”.
2. Consider pursuing grants to assist funding of the Master Plan.
3. Authorize staff to amend the Zoning Regulations Land Use Definitions (AMC) to
add missing definitions and better define existing land uses.
4. Repackage the zoning regulations to allow for a user-friendly format with
graphics, charts and tables that are easy to understand.
5. Repackage the Sign Regulations similar to the zoning regulations.
Staff is now proceeding with these items and will be bringing these to the Planning
Commission for review and action. The first item we will be reviewing will be the up date
to the Zoning Regulations land use definitions which will likely be in June.
7
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
ATTACHMENT 1: EL Camino Real Corridor Study Report
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Preliminary El Camino Real Corridor Study
PLN 2016-1579
RECOMMENDATION:
Council receive and file the Preliminary El Camino Corridor Study.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
At its November 10, 2015 City Council meeting, the City Council directed staff to review
commercial vacancies throughout the El Camino Rea l Corridor to better understand
future proposals from property owners and applicants requesting amendments to the
City’s General Plan; particularly, proposed General Plan Land Use Amendments
consisting of commercial land use designations converting to residential uses.
City staff has completed a preliminary corridor study of the El Camino Real Corridor
and, in conjunction, has analyzed adopted City documents such as the City’s Zoning
Ordinance and the City’s General Plan to compare current land uses with existing
policies.
This preliminary report provides Council the following information:
A snapshot of existing commercial vacancies along the El Camino Real Corridor,
including size of spaces;
Primary commercial nodes;
A review of General Plan policies associated with the corridor; and
Identification of opportunity sites that may be incentivized through zoning and
policies to facilitate a greater economic base or jobs housing balance , residential
infill development, and future corridor planning opportunities.
This is a preliminary report and is intended to be a building block for further discussions
towards the economic growth and prosperity of the El Camino Real Corridor. Recently,
the City has experienced a renewed interest in residential and commercial development
opportunities. This renewed interest is an opportunity to guide development towards the
8
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
intent of our General Plan. The intent of this report is to help gain a common
understanding of what development opportunities exist, where vacan cies are and how
the City might help facilitate economic development. Although this report is not
intended to provide definitive solutions at this time, it identifies questions and outlines
where existing policy supports development. Staff can bring back further refinements
and potential solutions in April as part of the action plan update.
DISCUSSION:
Background:
City staff recently received several requests to process General Plan Amendments to
convert vacant or underutilized commercial land to allow residential uses along the El
Camino Real Corridor. The locations include the following:
1. Property at the corner of El Camino Real and Santa Barbara at Dove Creek
within the Commercial Retail Zone.
2. Property adjacent to Solana Road and El Camino Real within the Commercial
Retail Zone.
3. Property between El Camino Real and HWY 101 across from La Uva Lane in the
Commercial Park (CPK) zone.
Rather than considering General Plan Amendments for these locations in isolation it is
better to understand the larger picture, including current residential and commercial
opportunities and where best to accommodate the demand for each land use.
Atascadero has long suffered from a jobs/housing imbalance that continues to grow as
the demand for workforce housing increases. In order to remain successful, the City
needs to reserve land for business that can support jobs in addition to potential tax
revenue.
The City’s adopted General Plan recognizes that the El Camino Real Corridor is a key
to the long term goals and economic vibrancy. General Plan Goal LOC 3 states:
Transform the existing El Camino real “strip” into a distinctive, attractive and efficient
commercial, office and industrial park area which can provide for the long-term economic
viability of the community.
The City’s General Plan Policy 3.1 includes programs to facilitate that creation.
General Plan Policy 3.1:
Encourage retail businesses at efficient and attractive nodes along El Camino Real and
Morro Road with mixed office and residential uses between those nodes.
9
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
Most of these programs are on-going, as illustrated in Attachment 1. Some of the more
pertinent General Plan programs include the following:
Policies
3.3.3 Designated parcels northwest of the Santa Barbara and El Camino Real
intersection known as Dove Creek for mixed-use planned development.
3.3.5 Development incentives to attract new businesses to under-utilized
locations along El Camino Real.
3.3.7 Conditionally allow mixed-use or exclusive multi-family infill development
in the mid-block portions of General Commercial areas along El Camino Real.
3.3.8 Preserve primary intersections for commercial development with a land
use overlay that requires the approval of an overall Master Site Development
Plan prior to approval of any development plans.
In addition to General Plan policy, the City Council adopted a “Prime Commercial Sites”
policy. The purpose of the prime commercial sites policy is to focus support and
proactively seek commercial development at specific locations. The policy identified 11
sites within the City that are considered prime commercial, which makes it more diffic ult
to propose a mix-of uses that undermines these potential or existing comme rcial sites
(Attachment 2).
1. Wal Mart/Annex site
2. K-Mart Center
3. Von’s Center
4. Smart and Final Center (Formerly Albertson’s)
5. Food 4 Less Center
6. Walgreen’s Center
7. Atascadero Oaks Center (Formerly Spencer’s)
8. Mission Oaks Center (Formerly Factory Outlets)
9. Home Depot Center
10. Dove Creek Commercial Center
This policy emphasizes commercial development for these key sites, but does not
address how to create an efficient and distinctive commercial area that can sustain long
term viability. In addition to these 11 sites, the City adopted “Commercial Hot Spots” as
part of strategic planning in 2013. The identified hot spots included:
DeCou Lumber site (behind Stylehouse Furniture)
West Front Village
Dove Creek Commercial
Home Depot center pads
10
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
Quick El Camino Real Facts
7 Miles long
539 Acres
620 Buildings
2,547,245 sf of space
4,120 sf average space size
Wal Mart/Annex
Downtown/Hoff
Colony Square
Since it has been several years, and the both the Prime Commercial sites and
Commercial Hot Spots have begun to develop, the attention can shift to those sites that
have not developed or continue to be underutilized such as the former Spencer’s
shopping center, former De Cou Lumber, vacant property at Dove Creek, and other
opportunities along the corridor.
Since the adoption of the General Plan in 2002 and the “prime commercial” policy in
2004, the City has experienced a major growth period, and an economic recession. The
City is currently experiencing another boom period with an increase in construction
activities in all sectors, particularly in the residential sector. With the increased
residential demand, property owners and speculators are turning to underutilized and
vacant areas of the El Camino Real Corridor to explore possible General Plan
amendments for future residential uses versus retail or business park uses.
Analysis:
Preliminary El Camino Real Corridor Study
The El Camino Real Corridor is approximately 7 miles in length, running north to south
and is adjacent to US Highway 101. Along that stretch, many uses are either adjacent
or directly fronting El Camino Real. The predominate land use s along the corridor fit
within the General Commercial (C-R) category, which includes retail, restaurant,
personal services, offices, auto services, medical services, light manufacturing and a
wide variety of other uses currently allowed in the district. Many non -conforming uses
also exist in this district, including residential uses
and storage uses. The General Commercial land use
acts as a “catch–all” of uses not only for the corridor,
but for the entire City.
The second largest land use category is the
Commercial Park Zone (CPK) which parallels HWY
101 and El Camino Real primarily north of San Anselmo Road to just south of Santa
Cruz Road. This zone was intended to be the City’s clean, or light industrial/business
park zone.
The third largest land use category is the Commercial-Service zone which is intended to
provide for auto-services, building materials, repair, and light industry. This district is
primarily within the south end of the community between Curbaril and Santa Rosa
Road. A total of 540 acres are either directly adjacent or gain access from El Camino
Real. A breakdown of the land uses along the El Camino Real is included below.
11
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
At total of 620 non-residential buildings are located throughout the 7-mile stretch of the
corridor. A total of 2,547,345 sf of non-residential building square footage is within the
corridor with an average building size of 4,120 sf.
Analysis Strategy
The focus area of the analysis included the following areas:
All non-residential designated land uses along El Camino Real
Parcels between El Camino Real and US 101
Parcels within the Downtown Area from US 101 to Lewis Avenue
Residential uses that were directly adjacent or utilized El Camino Real for direct
parcel access through easements or flags
The analysis was done utilizing a field survey of land uses in conjunction with GIS and
current building permit information. This analysis did not include industrial uses along
Traffic Way or commercial professional uses oriented along Morro Road. These specific
areas could be inventoried with a future analysis.
200 Acres
43 Acres
55 Acres 63 Acres
41 Acres
75 Acres
31 Acres
12
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
Total El Camino Real Vacancies
63 total buildings / spaces available
187,945 sf of available space
Average space 2,983 sf
Total Vacancy rate: 7.4%
The vacancy analysis is a “snapshot” in time that incorporates building permit data
during the month of January, 2016. City staff visited sections of the corridor to
determine vacancies based on the following criteria:
Spaces that had “for lease” signs
Spaces that are known to be “vacant”
Visual conformation of vacant or empty store fronts
Contact of business through phone calls to verify the business does or does not
exist
Analysis Findings
A total of 63 buildings had either complete
vacancies or partial spaces that were vacant.
The vacant space totals 187,945 sf, with an
average space vacancy of 2,983 sf. Notable
vacancies not included in staff’s analysis
include some spaces listed below. These were
excluded because building permits are in
process, the spaces are not being actively listed, or there are known leasing issues with
the buildings. The following notable vacancies omitted include:
Former Spencer’s Fresh Market Location (Building permit ready to be issued)
A portion of Former Haggen’s Grocery Store (Building permit in process for
30,000 sf of space for Smart and Final Extra)
Downtown Jack-in-the-box site (known leasing issues with corporate tenant)
Carlton Hotel Restaurant Site (not actively listed, used as event space)
Creek Side Building / Former City Hall (Successor agency not actively marketing
property yet)
The total vacancy rate for all non -residential buildings as of January 2016 along the El
Camino Real corridor is estimated to be 7.4%. This figure was computed based on the
total building square footage along the corridor divided by the estimated vacant
buildings space, as determined by staff’s field survey. The perceived vacancy rate,
however, is actually higher due to the buildings that are currently working on interior
improvements or waiting for other approvals. For example, the former Spencer’s
grocery has an approved permit for a new fitness center, Smart and Final is currently
installing interior improvements in the former Haggen’s, and other new retail and
restaurant spaces are working on development plans. Further breakdown of vacancy
rates in the El Camino Real Corridor are below:
13
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
These vacancies can be placed into three (3) distinct types:
General Commercial /retail spaces;
Office Professional spaces;
Repair Services and manufacturing.
Vacancy Type Number of
Buildings / Spaces
Vacant SF Average Size of
vacant spots (sf)
El Camino
Corridor
building
Vacancy Rate
General
Commercial
42 119,759 2,851 4.7%
Office/Professional 15 33,637 2,242 1.3%
Services /
Manufacturing
6 34,549 5,758 1.3%
Total 63 187,945 2,983 7.4%
Vacancies were spread throughout the corridor. However, vacant spaces were
prominent in three locations:
Downtown Atascadero (due to ownership issues (i.e. Carlton, Vetter properties
etc.)
San Anselmo intersection area (due to San Jacinto center);
Curbaril intersection area (Wendy’s, Gary Bang, recycling center).
The vacancies are concentrated in these areas due to many factors including smaller
spaces in the Downtown and San Anselmo area, absentee property owners in the
Downtown, and large anchor tenants vacating spaces in the Curbaril area. In the
Curbaril area, vacancies will be temporary as Smart and Final is now moving in, the
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
Commercial Vacancy Rates
4.7%
1.3%1.3%
General commercial / retail
Office / Professional
Services / Manufacturing
14
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
former Harley Davidson dealer is on the market, Wendy’s restaurant is considering
returning, and the former recycling center will soon be available.
To provide a comparison with other nearby communities, City staff reviewed 2015 data
provided by Beacon Economics and Stafford McCarty Commercial Real Estate.
Vacancy Type City of San Luis
Obispo
City of Paso
Robles
City of
Atascadero
El Camino
Corridor
Industrial / Warehousing 2.3 1.1 1.3
Office/Professional 5.3 7.5 1.3
Retail 1.3 2.6 4.7
Along the El Camino Real Corridor, industrial and office professional vacancies are
lower than the City of San Luis Obispo and Paso Robles; however, Atascadero’s retail
vacancies are significantly higher than these cities. Spaces that are currently listed “for
lease” in buildings that have been typically used for “retail” type of uses rent from as low
as $0.80 a square foot to as high as $2.00 a square foot. This is a significant p rice
range, and significantly lower than rents collected on a per square foot basis in either
San Luis Obispo or Paso Robles. It is important to understand these statistics are only
applicable to the El Camino Real Corridor and not Citywide.
Most of the retail spaces were developed between the late 1970’s to mid to late 1990’s
throughout the corridor, with notable exceptions. Over the last five years, City Staff has
noted a lack of façade improvements to existing commercial spaces. In addition, th e
largest inventory of spaces in the City are less than 2,500 sf in size (a total of 39 vacant
spaces). These trends in the City’s vacant spaces lead to the following:
Smaller, lower priced spaces, while great for initial business start -up costs, can
lead to marginal business ventures that have a harder time ensuring the
business stays afloat.
Property owners have not re-invested significantly in façade or space upgrades
to attract new tenants or easily transform spaces to expand or shrink as needed ;
Larger spaces are harder to find in the City, with a significant lack of available
inventory for spaces ranging from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet.
Some of the more prominent vacancies have not been filled due to issues
outside of market forces.
Similar land uses exist in multiple zoning districts, therefore in some parts of the
City there appears to be a lack of synergy. The lack of synergy may depress
rents and not attracting the desired land uses. Although flexibility is good, retail
relies on synergy and visibility, while business parks and service uses have
different location needs.
The retail corridor is too spread out and the location and quality of retail spaces
does not facilitate success.
15
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
With lower rents, and retail vacancies higher than surrounding communities, the El
Camino Real Corridor is facing pressure to convert vacant or underutilized parcels into
residential uses. Therefore, this analysis warrants a close look at the City’s residential
inventory and what is in the pipeline.
Atascadero Residential Market Performance
The local residential market continues to be robust. Attachment 5 illustrates where
construction is taking place, future units are entitled, and potential new residential
developments are currently undergoing entitlement review. Ma jor residential projects
include:
The Knolls at the Avenida – Phase I (60 units under plan check)
Woodbridge Townhomes (35 units under construction)
Oakridge Estates (4 units under construction)
Emerald Ridge (located just south of Wal-Mart) (132 units)
Principal Mixed-Use (Across from Miner’s Hardware) (38 Units)
Atascadero Groves (45 units)
Hartberg Multi-Family (75 units – pre-app review)
Eagle Ranch Specific Plan (up to 587 units – EIR/Specific Plan review)
The following is a breakdown of residential construction pipeline projects.
With Existing Entitlement= approved by planning but pending construction permits
Undergoing Entitlement review = under planning review (i.e. Emerald Ridge Apartments)
A total of 1,420 residential units are in the pipeline for development. Even without Eagle
Ranch, the number of units that can be expected to be reasonably constructed within
the next five years significantly exceeds the City’s Regional Housing Needs
Units Under
Construction 176
Units With
Existing
Entitlement 467
Potential Units
Undergoing
Entitlement
Review 777
Housing Projects
16
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
Assessment (RHNA) that was identified in the City’s Housing Element. Our RHNA
projects that we need to accommodate a total of 312 units by 2019.
The residential market continues to be robust. There are opportunities for infill
development along the El Camino Real corridor. However, those infill opportunities
should support existing major and neighborhood commercial nodes. As a part of the
corridor study, staff completed a preliminary analysis of potential new development
areas for future residential uses in the corridor. The analysis of residential construction
is included as Attachment 5.
Advance Planning Opportunities for the Corridor
As a part of the preliminary corridor analysis, staff reviewed areas for future planning
consideration. These consideration areas are labeled in Attachment 3 as “opportunity”
areas for both commercial / non-residential areas and residential areas. In comparison
with other communities, Atascadero has a very limited amount of available commercial
land. Much of the land is broken up into small parcels or is
underutilized/underdeveloped. Very few deep parcels remain. Those that remain are at
risk of being further reduced in size due to development that may be inconsistent with
the General Plan such as proposed residential development on a commercial lot. Staff
has identified opportunity sites along the El Camino Real Corridor that provide some of
the following:
Existing parcels that may be combined to form areas required for larger shell
buildings to house clean tech industries or other industries that provide high
quality jobs to the local economy;
Potential interface issues may be minimized such as adjacency to sensitive land
uses(i.e residential);
Availability of infrastructure such as sewer;
Support for future commercial nodes or support for jobs creating business park;
Implementation of General Plan programs and policies.
Staff identified multiple areas along the corridor that could become opportunity sites if
property owners, adjacent residents, and the City work together to help improve the
economic outlook for the community.
17
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
Future Analysis Areas Location
1. San Anselmo / El Camino Real – Vacant
commercial properties exist adjacent to the former
Atascadero Ford site across from the K-Mart
shopping center. These four large parcels are
vacant and currently allow Commercial-Retail
development. Other adjacent parcels appear
underutilized.
2. Solano Avenue / El Camino Real –. This location
suffers from a poor retail location. South of Solano,
the area is already developed with service
commercial and non-retail uses. The land use
category is currently retail.
3. Uptown Atascadero – This location north of the
downtown is sandwiched between EL Camino and
residential properties. Its narrow depth and small
lots limits commercial development. There are
several large Colony homes in this block, that
further limit flexibility. It is currently zoned for Retail.
18
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
4. Mid-El Camino Real – This area is south of the
WalMart site between HWY 101 and El Camino.
Most of the properties here are underutilized south
of the factory outlets. This area is zoned CPK and
is the City’s designated “Business Park” zone. It
also allows retail. Sites to the east allow a mix of
low and medium density residential.
5. West Del Rio Marketplace – The large, nearly flat
site facing the west side of US 101 is within the
Rural Residential Zone. Its freeway frontage and
access to Del Rio road invite a greater potential,
especially as the overpass is improved and
regional retail is developed in the Annex and Wal
Mart properties.
In preparation for the April 20th strategic planning discussion, staff could develop an
action plan that outlines specific strategies. These strategies could include a re -
examination of the Commercial Hot Spots or the Prime Commercial Policy. The City
may also wish to pro-actively earmark specific sites to help facilitate development or
redevelopment.
Expanding the Preliminary Corridor Study – A concept plan for the corridor
The El Camino Real Corridor has been identified since the City’s incorporation as the
key commercial hub. The 1980 General Plan mentioned the corridor directly and noted
similar observations that can still be made today:
19
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
The 1992 General Plan also calls out a strategy along the El Camino Real Corridor. An
excerpt from the 1992 General Plan includes:
The 2002 General Plan contains goals, policies and programs to transform the corridor.
The City has participated in corridor visioning completed by outside organizations,
including Cal Poly in 2011 and SLOCOG in 2008 and 2011 . The City has policies in
place that can be utilized to help us view the bigger picture. Given current development
trends, we now need to make some decisions to ensure that the City can continue
providing a healthy economic base in addition to accommodating a large portion of the
County’s housing demand. Both of these can be accomplished. This preliminary
corridor plan serves as a start. With information taken from the Cal Poly 2011 Plan, this
assessment, and SLOCOG, we can build the groundwork and begin to formulate
strategy that responds to current demand while proactively facilitating economic
development.
The El Camino Real Corridor can be a key to the City’s economic success and growth.
Now that things are progressing with some of the downtown properti es, and regional
retail will soon be in place at Del Rio, the focus can shift to other underutilized sites to
help facilitate both retail and job based commercial development while still focusing
residential development on appropriate sites.
CONCLUSION:
The El Camino Real Corridor has been an economic hub of the City since its foundation
in the early 1900’s. Since incorporation, the City has recognized the corridor is one of
the prime economic engines of the Community. The City’s General Plan has outlined
programs and policies to enhance the corridor, and the corridor has slowly improved as
commercial nodes have begun to emerge. For example, the Vons center has
undergone significant enhancements in recent years and Colony square will soon
progress to be the key attraction near the downtown, along with the walking bridge and
the Hoff property.
With a booming housing market, the El Camino Real Corridor’s vacant and underutilized
parcels that are designated for non-residential uses are being explored due to the
20
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
availability of public services, infrastructure, and ease of transportation choices. These
same attributes are also needed for the successful development of commercial
property. Conversion of commercial land use designation to residential desi gnations
may hinder the future potential of larger commercial parcels to develop as intended by
the General Plan. Our General Plan recognizes that retail development should be
focused within nodes adjacent to arterial road intersections and that other areas may be
appropriate for other commercial uses. The City has a great plan in place and
implementation of the plan will help keep things moving in a forward direction.
The City Council asked Staff to examine the El Camino Real Corridor for the following:
Commercial Vacancies throughout the corridor.
Viable hot spots along El Camino Real.
Locations that the City is willing to convert.
Sites that might be possible for clean technology or alternative development.
Through this preliminary analysis, the following takeaways can be made:
The Vacancy Rate for El Camino Real is actually lower than other cities in the
County;
Significant vacancies are for spaces that are less than 2,500 square feet;
Significant lack of available commercial space for spaces between 5,000 to
10,000 sf exists throughout the corridor and in the City;
The City has a diluted commercial corridor;
The City has over 600 residential units available for construction in the next 18
months;
An additional 800 units may be entitled over the next t wo years for residential
construction ranging from apartments, townhomes, small lot single family
dwellings, and typical large lot residential development;
The City has a lack of large, green field development areas for clean tech or
other job generating uses that provide living wages to our local economy; and
There are opportunities to combine parcels and create nodes and districts for
various commercials and job generating uses that provide a greater jobs/housing
and revenue balance;
ATTACHMENTS:
1. General Plan Programs and Policies 3.1
2. City Council Prime Commercial Sites Policy
21
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
ATTACHMENT 1: General Plan Program and Policies
22
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
ATTACHMENT 2: City Council Prime Commercial Sites Policy
23
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 3/22/16
24
September 2, 2003
Page 1 of 20
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Alfredo R. Castillo AICP, Associate Planner, 470-3436, acastillo@atascadero.org
PLN 2015-1563
El Mojon 6 Lot Subdivision
SUBJECT:
The applicant is proposing subdividing two existing 6.6 acre lots into six (6) lots of one
(1) gross acre or more. A new, City standard residential street, would be constructed
with the proposed subdivision. As a part of the construction of the new street, one (1)
Coast Live Oak and one (1) Blue Oak tree will be removed and additional native trees
may be removed based on the proposed "build areas" of the subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Planning Commission approve Draft Resolution PC 2016-A certifying
Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001;
2. The Planning Commission approve Draft Resolution PC 2016-B approving
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (VTSM) 2015-0109 and Tree Removal Permit
TRP 2015-0188, to allow six (6) lot subdivision on APN 056-211-038 and 037.
Situation and Facts
1. Applicant / Property Owner: DA 2 Development LLC, 7650 Portola Road,
Atascadero, CA 93422
2. Project Address: 10075 and 10085 Atascadero Avenue, Atascadero, CA
93422, APN 561-211-037/038
4. General Plan Designation: Single-Family Residential (RSF)
5. Zoning District: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
6. Site Area: 6.6 acres
7. Existing Use: Vacant / Residential Infill
8. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001
ITEM NUMBER: 3
DATE: 5-17-16
25
DISCUSSION:
Background
The existing 6.6 acre site at 10075 and 10085 Atascadero Avenue is currently vacant.
The property owner has submitted an application to subdivide the property into six (6)
lots with a minimum of one (1) gross acre for each lot. The minimum lot size in the RSF-
Y zone is one (1) gross acre. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the req uired
minimum lot size for this zoning district.
Surrounding Land Use and Setting
North: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
South: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
East: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
West: Atascadero Avenue ROW / Residential Suburban (RS)
ANALYSIS:
The proposed project consists of a request for a Tentative Subdivision Map (formerly
known as Tract Maps) to subdivide two existing lots at 10075 and 10085 Atascadero
Avenue totaling 6.6 acres into six (6) smaller lots in the Residential Single-Family (RSF-
Y) zone. The proposed lot sizes range in size from 1.0 acre to 1.24 acres.
26
The Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC) Section 9-3.152 sets the minimum lot size for
RSF zoning district. The minimum lot size for the RSF-Y district is one (1) gross acre in
area. The AMC defines “gross acre” as the total area of a lot, inclusive of roads and
easements. The proposed subdivision meets all required elements of Title 11,
Subdivision Design, Maps, and General Requirement for Maps.
Subdivision Design
The proposed subdivision has an average lot size of 1.09 acres. The six (6) lots are
accessed from a proposed new cul-de-sac. Each lot will be constructed individually and
there is a proposed “build area” that has been included in ord er to quantify the number
of native trees that may be removed. It is expected that new residential homes will be
placed in the proposed build areas to take advantage of a streamlined environmental
review. Staff will work with the applicant and the applicant’s arborist to site new homes
that will reduce native tree removals. The proposed “buildable” areas are shown in
Attachment 3.
Tract 3085 Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
Individual home designs will be selected by the developer on a lot by lot basis.
Proposed homes in the subdivision will not exceed building heights consistent with AMC
27
Section 9-4.113(a), which is no taller than 30-feet and will meet all standard setback
requirements.
Proposed Public Improvements
The proposed project includes the construction of a new local residential street,
tentatively named “El Mojon Court” or the “mile-stone” that is approximately 450-feet in
length. This street would be privately maintained by the residents through a
maintenance agreement as a part with either CC&Rs, a Homeowners Association, or
another City approved maintenance instrument. As part of the proposed development,
utilities in the subdivision are required to be underground, and the appl icant is
responsible for removing or relocating existing utility poles the front the Atascadero
Avenue portion of the project. A condition has been included per the City Engineer’s
recommendation.
Stormwater / Drainage / Post Construction Stormwater
The proposed project is required to comply with Post-Construction Storm Water
Management requirements mandated by the State of California per State Water Bo ard
Resolution No R3-2013-0032. The proposed new development will be required to retain
all stormwater drainage on-site at pre-development level. A hydrology report will be
required at the time of final map / public improvement plan submittal to comply with this
requirement. Conditions have been placed to ensure the applicant meets these new
State Standards including on-site basins for individual lots or through a common basin
for the lots and roadway conveyed through easements.
Tree Removal Permit
The applicant has submitted an application for a Tree Removal Permit for the removal
of one (1) Live Oak tree totaling 5-inches DBH and one (1) blue oak tree totaling 7-
inches in DBH. Per the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance and Guidelines, these
removals are considered roadway improvement removals and are mitigated at a higher
fee / replacement when compared to Single-Family Residential removals. Either six (6),
5-gallon trees to be located within the project or a fee of $316.66, or combination
thereof.
An additional 143-inches of DBH may be removed on the six (6) individual lots as they
are developed. This is based on the proposed building pad areas that have been
included. At the time of lot development, an Arborist Report will be required based on
the location of the proposed residence and driveway. Any native trees removed will be
subject to the Native Tree Ordinance and will be required to be mitigated. City staff will
work with the project arborist to reduce the amount of tree removals to the extent
feasible.
28
General Plan Consistency
The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Land Use Element
Goals and Policies based on the following determinations:
The proposed subdivision is compatible with the City’s existing Zoning
Ordinance, which requires a minimum lot size of one (1) gross acre. The average
lot size within 300-feet of the proposed project is approximately 1.1 acres, which
is consistent with Land Use Policy 2.1;
The proposed subdivision is not proposing intensive grading on-site of the six (6)
lots and has included building envelope to avoid native trees and site slopes,
consistent with Land Use Policy 5.3;
The proposed development ensures that areas will remain undisturbed through
the identification of building envelopes, as well as an open space easemen t as
required by the Mitigated Negative declaration to preserve an existing swale,
consistent with Land Use Policy 6.1;
The proposed development has reached out to local Native American nations
including the Chumash and Salinan Nations to ensure that no p re-historical
resources are disturbed with development, consistent with AB 52 and Land Use
Policy 6.2;
The proposed project includes improvements such as a new roadway that will
minimize native tree removals, as well as, provides building envelopes that
protects native trees for additional disturbances consistent with Land Use Policy
7.1.
Tree Removal Permit Findings
In considering any tree removal request, at least one of the required findings must be
made by the Planning Commission. Staff has identified the following finding as
appropriate for the application request, as the two trees proposed for removal are
located in the area proposed for through access between the sites and San Benito
Road.
The native trees are obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably
designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified be a report from the site
planner and determined by the Community Development Departmen t based on the
following factors:
a. Early consultation with the City,
b. Consideration of practical design alternatives,
c. Provision of cost comparison (from applicant) for practical design alternatives.
29
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
Consistent with the California Government Code (CGC) § 66474 (Subdivision Map Act)
and the Atascadero Municipal Code Title 11, Subdivision, staff recommends the
Planning Commission make the following findings:
The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and applicable
zoning requirements, as identified in the General Plan consistency analysis that
was completed in this Staff Report, including five (5) major land use development
policies pertaining to residential development within the City of Atascadero.
The proposed project is suitable for the type of proposed development. The site’s
General Plan designation is Single-Family Residential (SFR) and contained a
corresponding zoning designation of RSF-Y. The site is gently sloping in a
predominately large lot single-family residential neighborhood. Construction of
single-family residential homes is consistent with the type of use and density
envisioned by the City’s General Plan.
The proposed density of the project is 1 unit per gross acre, which is consistent
with the General Plan’s maximum density of 2.0 units per gross acre for this land
use designation. 2nd units are permitted within this land use designation / zoning
district and if all lots developed with 2nd units, the proposed d evelopment will not
exceed the maximum allowed density per the City’s General Plan. The proposed
subdivision meets the RSF-Y minimum lot size designation of one (1) gross acre
per lot, therefore, the proposed project is physical suitable for the proposed
density of the project.
The proposed project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) evaluated potential
impacts to fish, wildlife, and their habitat. A Biological assessment of the
proposed project concluded that, with implementation of mitigation, the pro posed
project would result in a less than significant impact to special status plant and
wildlife species and to native trees. Further, the proposed project would have no
impact on wildlife corridors or waters of the US.
The proposed project will not cause serious health problems as discussed in
detail in MND. The site has been thoroughly investigated for the potential
presence of hazards and hazardous materials and, with the incorporation of
mitigation measures, development of the project would not have the potential to
create a significant hazard to the public or environment, which includes mitigation
for temporary construction dust and noise, therefore, the proposed subdivision
will not cause serious health problems.
The proposed project consists of a six (6) lot residential subdivision for the
construction of six (6) single-family homes and would not interfere with existing
access or use easements on the site. The project will provide for all appropriate
access for public utilities. Further, the project would provide for public access to
the site via a new, City Standard, residential street that includes a cul -de-sac for
30
emergency turn-arounds and safety. Accordingly, the design of the subdivision
will not conflict with access through or use of the properties within the proposed
subdivision.
The vesting tentative subdivision map includes a variety of inter-related on-site
and off-site improvement necessary to serve the buildout of the six (6) lots
created by the map. These improvements including grading and drainage of the
proposed new street must be complete prior to the recordation of parcels in
order to insure the orderly development of the surrounding area.
Proposed Environmental Determination
Staff has prepared a Draft MND that was circulated to public agencies and interested
members of the public. The Environmental Analysis identified concerns regarding
potential impacts to aesthetics, air quality, biology, cultural resources, geology and soils,
water quality, noise, and circulation. Mitigation measures pertaining to these areas are
included. The proposed project is projected to increase traffic on both the new proposed
street and Atascadero Avenue by 60 trips per day. The Level of Service (LO S) of
Atascadero Avenue is considered a LOS A and is a designated Minor Arterial per the
City’s General Plan Circulation Element, therefore, the potential increase in traffic is
considered less than significant. An additional mitigation measure has been included to
protect an existing drainage swale on Lot 4 for a neighboring property owner and that
may contain potential habitat for special status species.
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. Staff
is recommending that the Planning Commission certify the Proposed MND 2016-0001.
Conclusion
The applicant is proposing a parcel map to subdivide two 6.6 acre legal lots into six (6)
lots for residential development. A new residential street will provide access to these
proposed lots and will feed into Atascadero Avenue, which is a designated Minor
Arterial. A Tree Removal Permit has been submitted for the removal of two native trees
for the construction of the roadway. Additional tree removals will be needed to be
completed as individual lots are submitted for building permits. The MND, analyzed the
removal of up to 143-inches of DBH across the proposed six (6) lots. Any native tree
removals will require mitigation per the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance.
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Atascadero Municipal
Code based on the above analysis and incorporated conditions. Staff recommends the
approval of the MND, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, and the Tree Removal Permit
as proposed in the attached draft resolutions.
31
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Commission may include modifications to the project and/or conditions of
approval for the project.
2. The Commission may determine that more information is needed on some
aspect of the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to
develop the additional information. The Commission should clearly state the type
of information that is required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The Commission may deny the project. The Commission must specify the
reasons for denial of the project and make an associated finding with such
action.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan, and Zoning
Attachment 2: Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
Attachment 3: Proposed Buildable Areas
Attachment 4: Draft Resolution PC 2016-A (Certification of MND)
Attachment 5: Draft Resolution PC 2016-B (VTSM / TRP)
32
Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan and Zoning
Zoning: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y)
General Plan Designation: Single-Family Residential (SFR-Y)
Project Site
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Ave
33
Attachment 2: Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
34
Attachment 3: Proposed Buildable Areas
35
Attachment 4: Draft Resolution PC 2016-A Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001
RESOLUTION PC 2016-A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFY PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2016-
0001 FOR, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 2015-0109 AND TREE
REMOVAL PERMIT 2015-0188
ON APN 056-211-037 / 38
(10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue / DA Development LLC)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from DA 2 Development, LLC (7650
Portola Road, Atascadero, CA 93422) Applicant and Owner, to approve a six (6) lot Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map and Tree Removal Permit on a 6.6-acre site located at 10075 and
10085 Atascadero Avenue (APN 056-211-037, 038); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001
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 May 17, 2016 to consider the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the project will have no
significant impacts with project specific mitigation measures incorporated; and,
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, hereby
certifies Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001 based on the following Findings,
and as shown in Exhibit A:
1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with
CEQA; and,
2. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning
Commission, and the information contained therein was considered by the Planning
Commission, prior to recommending action on the project for which it was prepared; and,
3. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation
measures are incorporated into the project; and,
4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals; and,
36
5. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable; and,
6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or
indirectly; and,
7. The added mitigation measure is more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential
significant effects, and it will not, in itself, cause any potentially significant effect on the
environment.
37
On motion by Commissioner ______ and seconded by Commissioner _____ the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: (6)
NOES: (0)
ABSTAIN: (0)
ABSENT: (0)
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
______________________________
Jan Wolff
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
______________________________
Phill Dunsmore
Planning Commission Secretary
t:\- 15 plns\pln 2015-1563 10075 atascadero ave subdivision\pln 2015-1563-el mojon.docx
38
Exhibit A: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001
39
40
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PROPOSED MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2016-0001
6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5035
Findings:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
Determination:
Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the Initial Study 2016-0001 (made a part hereof by
reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined that the above project will
not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the
project (see attachment).
Prepared By: Stefanie Farmer, Planning Intern / Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP, Associate Planner
Date Posted: April 27, 2016
Public Review Ends: May 16, 2016
Attachments: - Location & Zoning Map
- Aerial
- Site Plan / Grading Plan
- Elevations / Sections
- Site Photos
- Fault Map
- National Wetlands Inventory Map
Project Title: El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
Lead Agency: City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
Contact Person: Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP, Phone: (805) 470-3436, Email: acastillo@atascadero.org
Project Location: 10075 Atascadero Avenue, Atascadero CA 93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN: 056-211-038
10085 Atascadero Avenue, Atascadero CA 93422
(San Luis Obispo County) APN: 056-211-037
Cross-Streets: San Gabriel Road / Atascadero Avenue
Applicant: DA2 Development, LLC, 7650 Portola Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Property Owner: DA 2 Development , LLC, 7650 Portola Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
General Plan
Designation:
Single-Family Residential
(SFR-Y)
Zoning
District:
Residential Single-Family
(RSF-Y)
Project
Description:
A proposed subdivision of two existing parcels of recorded to be subdivided into six (6) lots.
Applicant proposes construction of a new residential street, to be privately maintained, to access
the proposed lots from Atascadero Avenue. As a part of the construction of the new street, up to
143-inches in Diameter Breast Height (DBH) of native Coast Live Oak, and Blue Oak trees are
proposed to be removed. Proposed residential homes will be limited to areas identified as "build
areas" to reduce impacts to native trees. Homes are proposed to be constructed as each individual
lot is sold.
41
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PROPOSED MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 2 of 2
- Hazardous Materials Map
- FIRM
- Arborist Report
- Biological Report
- Initial Study 2016-0001
42
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
04/28/16
part2
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Environmental Review 2016-0001
Lead Agency Name
and Address:
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
Contact Person and
Phone Number:
Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP
City of Atascadero, Phone: (805) 461-5035
General Plan
Designation:
Single Family Residential (SFR-Y)
Zoning: Residential Single Family (RSF-Y)
Surrounding Land
Uses and Setting:
Residential Single Family (RSF-Y)
Rural Suburban (RS)
Other public
agencies whose
approval is
required (e.g., permits,
financing approval, or
participation agreement)
None
43
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 1
Location & Zoning Map
Zoning: Residential Single Family (RSF-Y)
General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential (SFR-Y)
Surrounding Zoning: Residential Single Family (RSF-Y), Rural Suburban
(RS)
Project Site:
10075 Atascadero Ave. /
10085 Atascadero Ave.
44
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 2
Aerial
Project Site:
10075 Atascadero Ave. /
10085 Atascadero Ave.
APN 056-211-038
APN 056-211-037
45
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 3
Site Plan
46
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 4
Elevations / Sections
47
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 5
Site Photos
Atascadero Avenue street frontage looking toward the start of proposed road.
View of existing residences on both sides of proposed road.
48
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Atascadero Avenue looking north from the entrance of proposed road.
Across Atascadero Avenue looking south form the entrance of proposed road.
49
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Looking West from further into the proposed road looking toward Atascadero Avenue.
Looking East into the proposed project site.
50
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Looking further East into the proposed project site.
View of a lot area with native oak trees.
51
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 6
Fault Map
Project Site:
10075 Atascadero Ave. /
10085 Atascadero Ave.
Known Fault
52
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 7
National Wetlands Inventory Map
No known wetlands on-site
53
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 8
Hazardous Materials Map
Project not located near any known hazards.
54
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Attachment 9
Flood Insurance Rate Map
Project not located in known flood zone.
55
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
This Page is left blank
56
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
Timing
FM: Final Map
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Agency
Requirement
FED: Federal
Government
CAL: California
Government
LOC: Local Government
Mitigation Measure 1.d.1: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any
off site glare by including shielding mechanisms to prevent offsite light
spillage and glare. Fixtures shall be shield cut-off type.
BP BS/PS LOC
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply
with all applicable District regulations pertaining t o the control of fugitive
dust (PM-10) as contained in Section 2 “Assessing and Mitigating
Construction Impacts.”
2.4 Fugitive Dust Mitigation Measures: Standard List
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b. Use 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. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be
completed as soon as possible, and building pads should be laid as
soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
e. All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on
grading and building plans; and
f. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to
monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of
the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible
emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite.
Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work
may not be in progress.
BP BS/PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.a.1: To ensure impacts to California legless
lizards are avoided and minimized, development in areas of thick duff
will be avoided. If these areas cannot be avoided, a qualified biologist
shall conduct a preconstruction survey of highly suitable habitat. This
survey will include lightly raking the upper soil layer and leaf litter to
determine if legless lizards are present. If legless lizards are
discovered, they will be moved by hand to areas that will not be
impacted by development activities.
GP PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.a.2: A rare plant survey during the appropriate
bloom period (May-July) is recommended to determine presence or
absence of two sensitive plant species. If present, these species
should be avoided during future development. If any plant speci es are
listed under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the
federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), the appropriate resource
agency shall be contacted for direction on how to proceed prior to
disturbance on the property. Additionally, strands of deer grass shall
be flagged for avoidance during this same botanical survey effort.
GP PS FED/CAL
57
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
Timing
FM: Final Map
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Agency
Requirement
FED: Federal
Government
CAL: California
Government
LOC: Local Government
Mitigation Measure 4.b.c.1: The southern end of the proposed project
area shown in Figure 1 of the Biological Report shall be designated
with a permanent open space easement that restricts the area from
further development. This easement shall be recorded concurrently
with the final map.
FM PS/CE LOC
Mitigation Measure 4.d.1: To protect nesting birds the Applicant should
avoid vegetation clearing and earth disturbance during the typical
nesting season (February 1 – September 15). If avoiding construction
during this season is not feasible, a qualified biologist shall survey the
area two days prior to activity beginning on the site. If nesting birds are
located, they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged or
the nest has naturally failed. A buffer zone of 50 feet will be placed
around all non-sensitive passerine bird species and 250 feet for all
raptor species. Activity will remain outside of buffers until the
applicant’s biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the
nest is no longer active. If special status bird species are located, no
work will begin until an appropriate buffer is determined by consultation
with the City, the local CDFW biologist, and/or the USFWS.
GP PS LOC
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: Grading and excavation and grading work
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
drip line of all trees.
5. All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced
for protection with 4-foot chain link, snow or safety fencing
placed per the approved tree protection plan. Tree protection
fencing shall be in place prior to any site excavation or
grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all
construction activities.
6. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be
clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal.
7. Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and
sewer should be redirected from under the canopy of any
trees that are to remain.
8. Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the
foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges acro ss any
root systems.
9. Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the
drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand.
10. At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction
equipment.
GP PS LOC
58
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
Timing
FM: Final Map
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Agency
Requirement
FED: Federal
Government
CAL: California
Government
LOC: Local Government
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: Tree protection fencing shall be installed at
the locations called out in the Oak Tree Protection Plan. An inspection
of the tree fencing shall be done by City staff or Arborist prior to
issuance of building permits. All areas within the drip line of the trees
that cannot be fenced shall receive a 4-6” layer of chip mulch to retain
moisture, soil structure, and reduce the effects of soil compaction.
GP PS LOC
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: An on-site meeting with the arborist, owner,
and City Staff, is required to determine home design and layout that
increases the preservation of native trees.
Ongoing PS/BS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: A mandatory meeting between the arborist
and grading/trenching contractor shall take place prior to work start.
This activity shall be monitored by the arborists to insure proper root
pruning is taking place. Any landscape architects and contractors
involved shall not design any irrigation or other features within any drip
line unless previously approved by the project arborists.
GP BS/PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.5: All utilities shall remain outside the driplines
of native trees, to the extent feasible. If roads exist between two trees,
the utilities shall be routed down the middle of the road or completely
hand dug. All trenches in these areas shall be exposed by air spade or
hand dug with utilities routed under/over the roots.
GP/BP BS/PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.6: Soils within the drip line that have been
compacted by heavy equipment and/or construction activities must b e
returned to their original state before all work is completed. Methods
include adding specialized soil conditioners, water jetting, adding
organic matter, and boring small holes with an auger (18” deep, 2 -3’
apart with a 2-4” auger) and the application of moderate amounts of
nitrogen fertilizer.
GP/BP BS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.7: Grading shall not encroach within the drip
line unless approved by the project arborist. Grading should not disrupt
the normal drainage pattern around the trees. Fills s hould not create a
ponding condition and excavations should not leave the tree on a
rapidly draining mound.
GP/BP BS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.8: Any exposed roots shall be re-covered the
same day they were exposed. If they cannot, they must be covered
with burlap or another suitable material and wetted down 2x per day
until re-buried.
GP PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.9: Paving within the drop line consists of placing
base material on existing grade. Any grade lowering removes
important surface roots. Pavers can be used with limitations. The base
material must be above natural grade and the curbing to retain the
pavers shall not be trenched any deeper than six inches into the natural
grade.
BP BS/PS LOC
59
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
Timing
FM: Final Map
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Agency
Requirement
FED: Federal
Government
CAL: California
Government
LOC: Local Government
Mitigation Measure 4.e.10: No liquid or solid construction waste shall
be dumped on the ground within the drop line of any native tree. The
drip line areas are not for storage of materials either. Any violations
shall be remedied through proper cleanup approved by the project
arborist at the expense of the owner.
GP/BP CE/PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.11: All native tree pruning shall be completed by
a licensed and insured D49 tree trimming contractor that has a valid
city business license.
GP/BP PS CAL / LOC
Mitigation Measure 4.e.12: All landscape under the drop-line shall be
drought tolerant or native varieties. Lawns shall be avoided. All
irrigation trenching shall be routed around drop lines; otherwise above
ground drip-irrigation shall be used.
GP/BP PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 4.e.13: 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, the
construction-related tree protection measures are no longer required for
tree protection, and suggest additional fertilization, insecticide,
fungicide, soil amendments, and mycorrhiza applications that will
benefit tree health.
FO PS 17.d.1
Mitigation 5.d.1: In the event that human remains are discovered on
the property, all work on the project shall stop and the Atascadero
Police Department and the County Coroner shall be contacted. The
Atascadero Community Development Department shall be notified.
If the human remains are identified as being Native American, the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be
contacted at (916) 653-4082 within 24 hours. A representative from
both the Chumash Tribe and the Salinan Tribe shall be notified and
present during the excavation of any remains.
GP BS/PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: The grading permit application plans shall
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.
GP BS/CE CAL
Mitigation Measure 6.b.2: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded
with an appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket,
hydro-mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after
completion of earthwork. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate
erosion control methods in place. The contractor will be responsible for
the clean-up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by
construction vehicles.
GP BS/CE CAL
60
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
Timing
FM: Final Map
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FI: Final inspection
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
AMWC: Water Comp.
Agency
Requirement
FED: Federal
Government
CAL: California
Government
LOC: Local Government
Mitigation Measure 6.b.3: The contractor will be responsible for the
clean-up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by
construction vehicles. An approved device must be placed prior to
commencement of grading activities. This device shall be approved by
the City Engineer.
GP/BP BS/CE CAL
Mitigation Measure 6.c.1: Import soils used to raise site grade should
be equal to or better than on-site soils in strength, expansion, and
compressibility characteristics.
GP BS CAL
Mitigation Measure 6.c.2: Post-construction care should include long-
term drought tolerant landscaping and irrigation solutions that do not
allow for frequent changes in soil moisture content or irregular
application of water around the perimeter of the structures.
BP PS CAL
Mitigation Measure 6.c.3: Unstable soils during grading to excessive
subsurface moisture should be corrected by including aeration or the
use of gravels and/or geotextiles as stabilizing measures.
GP BS/CE CAL
Mitigation Measure 8.h.1: Construction will comply with section the
California Building and Fire Codes. New residences in the City are
required to install fire sprinklers. Fire protection measures shall include
the use of non-combustible exterior construction and roofs and fire-
resistant building materials deemed appropriate by the fire marshal and
chief building official.
BP FD CAL/LOC
Mitigation Measure 12.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with
the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for weekday and weekend
hours of operation of equipment (between 7 am and 9pm).
GP/BP PS LOC
Mitigation Measure 16.a.b.1: Payment of Circulation System Fee (TIF)
shall be made prior to the issuance of building permits for all residential
and non-residential uses. Those traffic impact fees shall be collected
consistent with California Government Code Section 66498.5.
BP PS LOC
Mitigation Measure 17.d.1: Landscaping plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for review and approval.
Landscaping must consist of drought tolerant species, utilize drip
irrigation, and follow state drought tolerant landscaping standards.
BP PS LOC
61
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
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
Agriculture and Forest
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology /Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population / Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities / Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant effect” or “potentially significant
unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
4/27/16
Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP Date
Planner
62
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16
part2
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers excep t "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply do es 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) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or
less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With 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 t he mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they
reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described
in (5) below, 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). In
this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from th e
earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinance s). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used o r individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental
effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
63
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 22
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
SOURCES: Project Description Report; Atascadero Municipal Code; Atascadero General Plan; Elevation Report; Oak
Tree Protection Plan
DISCUSSION:
1.a. The proposed project consists of six (6) singl e family residential lots of approximately one acre each that will be
accessible by a new local road. This proposed road will connect to Atascadero Avenue which is surrounded by single
family homes in a rural setting. The project site is currently two vacant lots with a gentle sloping topography. Each
proposed lot has a building envelope with a 25-foot plus setback from the road and a drive way that connects to the
proposed road in compliance with AMC Section 9-4.106. Within each building envelope, the proposed housing meets
the requirements of Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC) Section 9-4.113 by including building heights of 25-feet for their
one story and two story options. Future development on these proposed lots will be behind existing development from
Atascadero Avenue, will blend in with the surrounding neighborhood and is not near an adopted scenic vista from the
City of Atascadero, therefore having no significant impact.
1.b. This proposed project includes a new local road connecting to Atascadero Avenue and is not within a state scenic
highway. Up to seventy two (72) native oak trees may be removed upon subdivision development. This number
assumes that all native trees would be removed from “buildable” areas, however consistent with the City’s Native Tree
Ordinance, Staff will work with future property owners to minimize tree removals. Additionally, the plan intends to
preserve a large oak tree at the entrance of the parcels and most of the mature oaks. Additional steps will be taken to
preserve as many other native trees consistent with the Atascadero Tree Ordinance and the Oak Tree Protection Plan.
Therefore the project is determined to have less than significant impact.
1.c. The proposed architecture is consistent with the character and quality of the surrounding homes in the area by
implementing multiple roofline variations, additional corners to rooms, large square and rectangular windows, and by
preserving large shady spaces surrounding homes with native trees. Additionally, each proposed building envelopes
meet AMC Section 9-4.106 front setback requirements of at least 25 -feet, AMC 9-4.107 minimum side setback of five
(5) feet, AMC Section 9-4.108 rear setback of ten (10) feet minimum, and AMC Section 9 -4.113 max building height of
25-feet for their one story and two story options. Therefore the impact is considered less than significant.
1.d. All proposed lighting within the development area will be residential in nature. The AMC contains language under
section 9-4.137, exterior lighting, stating that “no light glare shall be transmitted or reflected in such concentration or
intensity as to be detrimental or harmful to persons or to interfere with the use of surr ounding properties or streets.”
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1.d.1 would help to ensure that the residences do not create a substantial light
source that adversely affects nighttime views, reducing this impact to less than significant thresholds.
64
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 23
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Aesthetics
Mitigation Measure 1.d.1: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any off site glare by including shielding mechanisms
to prevent offsite light spillage and glare. Fixtures shall be shield cut -off type.
2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST 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 as sessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in the
Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))??
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
SOURCES: Farmland Mapping and Monitoring San Luis Obispo County Map 2012; City of Atascadero Geographic I
formation System (GIS); San Luis Obispo County Natural Resources -Agricultural Resources Map
DISCUSSION:
2.a. The property is not shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency as prime farmland. Therefore, no impact.
2.b. The property is not in an agricultural zone and is not under a Williamson Act contract based on review of
Atascadero GIS / San Luis Obispo County Agriculture Resources mapping information. Therefore, no impact.
2.c. The project does not involve rezoning of forest land or timberland. New single family development on these
proposed lots is consistent with the existing zoning designations. Therefore, no impact.
2.d.e. The project will not result in a loss of forest land and will not result in a conversion of forest land to non -forest use
or farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact.
65
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 24
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
3. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district 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)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
SOURCES: San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 2012; APCD
Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map; Project Description, Civil Plan Set
DISCUSSION:
3. a.c. Six (6) residential lots are proposed for development. This will include six (6) homes, one (1) on each lot, with a
proposed new local road. According to the Screening Criteria for Project Air Quality An alysis (Table 1-1, SLOAPCD,
2014), Single Family Housing would have to be at or over 71 dwelling units in order to be expected to exceed the APCD
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Numerical Threshold. Additionally, this project would have to produce at or over 91 dwelling
units in order to be expected to exceed the APCD Ozone Precursor Significance Threshold (Table 1 -1, SLOAPCD,
2014). Therefore, since this project is producing significantly less development and will not exceed APCD standard
levels, the impact is determined to be less than significant.
3.b. Construction activities, including site grading, have the potential to produce small quantities of air pollution that
include dust and equipment exhaust. Air quality impacts from construction will be temporary and short term. As
discussed in the Civil Plan Set, the project shall be conditioned to comply with all ap plicable APCD regulations
pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM-10) as showed in Section 2 “Assessing and Mitigating Construction
Impacts” of the April 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce air quality impacts. With the implementation of
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1, the impact is considered less than significant.
3.d.e. The construction of the project will not concentrate pollutants or create objectionable odors based on proposed
uses and screening criteria established by the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District. Furthermore, upon
reviewing the APCD Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) Map to determine if the proposed project site falls within an
area subject to NOA requirements, the site is not within an area with NOA. Therefore the impact is considered less than
significant.
66
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 25
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Air Quality
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to
the control of fugitive dust (PM-10) as contained in Section 2 “Assessing and Mitigating Construction Impacts.”
2.4 Fugitive Dust Mitigation Measures: Standard List
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b. Use 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. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible, and building pads
should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
e. All of these fugitive dust mitigation measure s shall be shown on grading and building plans; and
f. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the
implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visi ble emissions below 20%
opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may
not be in progress.
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 regulation s 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?
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?
67
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 26
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
SOURCES: Project Description; Atascadero Tree Ordinance; Biological Report; Arborist Report; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Survey’s National Wetland’s Inventory (NWI) Map; United States Geologic survey (USGS) topographic Map
DISCUSSION:
4.a. Attachment 2 of the Biological Report identifies listed and special-status species. There are two sensitive wildlife
species and five sensitive plant species that have potential to occur, however most of the sensitive species were
determined to have no potential to occur based on lack of suitable habitat or lack of species observation. Currently,
none of these species were found on the proposed project side. Suitable habitat was identified for California legless
lizard. Additionally, suitable habitat was identified for three special-status plant species; however the survey was
conducted outside of the blooming period. With the implementati on Mitigation Measure 4.a.1 and Mitigation Measure
4.a.2, the impact is considered less than significant.
4.b.c. According to the Biological Report, the far southern portion of the project site has an upland swale. Figure 1 of
the Biological Report displays the swale with east to west surface flows. The swale is isolated from jurisdictional water
features and lacks riparian vegetation. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey’s National Wetland’s Inventory
(NWI) Map and the United States Geologic survey (USGS) topographic maps, this area was not identified as a wetland.
According to the Biological Report’s conclusion, this swale may be considered a single criterion wetland by California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW ) based on the domination of deer grass and is recommended for avoidance.
However, upon review of the Preliminary Grading Plan with proposed building envelopes , development will not occur in
the identified area established in Figure 1 of the Biological Report. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure
4.b.c.1, the impact is less than significant.
4.d. The Biological Report identifies six (6) passerine an d one (1) raptor species during the survey, including acorn
woodpecker, American Crow, mourning dove, Bewick’s wren, oak titmouse, and red -shouldered hawk. Nests of these
species are protected from disturbance under Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bi rd Treaty Act (MBTA).
Additionally, oak titmouse is considered a sensitive species by CDFW. According to the Biological Report, impacts to
these nesting birds may occur if grading and vegetation clearing/trimming occurs during the typical nesting period
(February 1 – September 15). Potential direct impacts include nest disruption or abandonment from vegetation clearing
or trimming, construction noise, and equipment vibration. Indirect impacts to nesting birds may include loss of nesting
and foraging habitats. With the implementation Mitigation Measure 4.d .1, the impact is considered less than significant.
4.e.f. The Arborist Report identifies seven two (72) native trees for possible removal within the proposed project area,
which consists of blue oak, live oak, scrub oak, and valley oak trees. While there are a few hundred or more trees in
the entire project area, the building placement has the potential to save up to 30% of native trees in each lot. With the
incorporation of mitigation measures 4.e.1-13, the project will have less than significant impacts.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure 4.a.1: To ensure impacts to California legless lizards are avoided and minimized, development in
areas of thick duff will be avoided. If these areas cannot be avoided, a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey of highly suitable habitat. This survey will include lightly raking the upper soil layer and leaf lit ter
to determine if legless lizards are present . If legless lizards are discovered, they will be moved by hand to areas that will
not be impacted by development activities.
Mitigation Measure 4.a.2: A rare plant survey during the appropriate bloom period (May -July) is recommended to
determine presence or absence of two sensitive plant species. If present, these species should be avoided during
future development. If any plant species are listed under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA), the appropriate resource agency shall be contacted for direction on how to proceed
prior to disturbance on the property. Additionally, strands of deer grass shall be flagged for avoidance during this same
68
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 27
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
botanical survey effort.
Mitigation Measure 4.b.c.1: The southern end of the proposed project area shown in Figure 1 of the Biological Report
shall be designated with a permanent open space easement that restricts the area from further development. This
easement shall be recorded concurrently with the final map.
Mitigation Measure 4.d.1: To protect nesting birds the Applicant should avoid vegetation clearing and earth disturbance
during the typical nesting season (February 1 – September 15). If avoiding construction during this season is not
feasible, a qualified biologist shall survey the area two days prior to activity beginning on the site. If nesting birds are
located, they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged or the nest has naturally failed. A buffer zone of 50
feet will be placed around all non-sensitive passerine bird species and 250 feet for all raptor species. Activity will
remain outside of buffers until the applicant’s biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the nest is no
longer active. If special status bird speci es are located, no work will begin until an appropriate buffer is determined by
consultation with the City, the local CDFW biologist, and/or the USFWS.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: Grading and excavation and grading work 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 drip line of all trees.
5. All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for protection with 4 -foot chain link, snow or
safety fencing placed per the approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be in place prior to
any site excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all construction activities.
6. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree
seal.
7. Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer should be redirected from under the
canopy of any trees that are to remain.
8. Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges
across any root systems.
9. Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand.
10. At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the locations called out in the Oak Tree Protection
Plan. An inspection of the tree fencing shall be done by City staff or Arborist prior to issuance of building permits. All
areas within the drip line of the trees that cannot be fenced shall receive a 4 -6” layer of chip mulch to retain moisture,
soil structure, and reduce the effects of soil compaction.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: An on-site meeting with the arborist, owner, and City Staff, is re commended to determine
home design and layout that increases the preservation of native trees.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: A mandatory meeting between the arborist and grading/trenching contractor shall take place
prior to work start. This activity shall be monitored by the arborists to insure proper root pruning is taking place. Any
landscape architects and contractors involved shall not design any irrigation or other features within any drip lin e unless
previously approved by the project arborists.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.5: All utilities shall remain outside the driplines of native trees, to the extent feasible. If roads
exist between two trees, the utilities shall be routed down the middle of the road or completely hand dug. All trenches in
these areas shall be exposed by air spade or hand dug with utilities routed under/over the roots.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.6: Soils within the drip line that have been compacted by heavy equipment and/or construction
activities must be returned to their original state before all work is completed. Methods include adding specialized soil
conditioners, water jetting, adding organic matter, and boring small holes with an auger (18” deep, 2 -3’ apart with a 2-4”
69
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 28
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
auger) and the application of moderate amounts of nitrogen fertilizer.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.7: Grading shall not encroach within the drip line unless approved by the project arborist.
Grading should not disrupt the normal drainage pattern around the trees. Fills should not create a ponding condition
and excavations should not leave the tree on a rapidly draining mound.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.8: Any exposed roots shall be re-covered the same day they were exposed. If they cannot, they
must be covered with burlap or another suitable material and wetted down 2x per day until re-buried.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.9: Paving within the drop line consists of placing base material on existing grade. Any grade
lowering removes important surface roots. Pavers can be used with limitations. The base material must be above
natural grade and the curbing to retain the pavers shall not be trenched any deeper than six inches into the natural
grade.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.10: No liquid or solid construction waste shall be dumped on the ground within the drop line of
any native tree. The drip line areas are not for storage of materials either. Any violations shall be remedied through
proper cleanup approved by the project arborist at the expense of the owner.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.11: All native tree pruning shall be completed by a licensed and insured D49 tree trimming
contractor that has a valid city business license.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.12: All landscape under the drop-line shall be drought tolerant or native varieties. Lawns shall
be avoided. All irrigation trenching shall be routed around drop lines; otherwise above ground drip -irrigation shall be
used.
Mitigation Measure 4.e.13: 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, the construction-related tree protection measures are no longer required for tree
protection, and suggest additional fertilization, insecticide, fungicide, soil amendments, and mycorrhiza applications that
will benefit tree health.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signif icance of
a historical resource as defined in '15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5?
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: Project Description; City of Atascadero GIS
DISCUSSION:
5.a.b.c. The City of Atascadero GIS show that there are no known historic or archaeological resources located on or
adjacent to the site. Therefore no impact.
5.d. No known human remains have been found or documented in the vicinity of the project. The site may have a
potential to have human remains on-site due to no known archeological study completed directly on-site. In addition,
70
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 29
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
know Native American burial sites have been located around the p roject area. With implementation of mitigation
measure 5.d.1, the potential for a significant impact is rendered to less than significant thresholds.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Cultural Resources
Mitigation 5.d.1: In the event that human remains are discovered on the property, all work on the project shall stop and
the Atascadero Police Department and the County Coroner shall be contacted. The Atascadero Community
Development Department shall be notified. If the human remains are identified as being Native American, the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted at (916) 653 -4082 within 24 hours. A
representative from both the Chumash Tribe and the Salinan Tribe shall be notified and present during the excavation of
any remains.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as deli neated
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 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: Project Description; City of Atascadero GIS; Geotechnical Engineering Report
DISCUSSION:
6.a.i. As illustrated by Attachment 6, the project is not located on any known earthquake faults. The propose d property
71
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 30
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
contains no unusual geological formations. Additionally, the Geotechnical Engineering Report concludes the site is not
within an Earthquake Fault Zone identified on the State of California Earthquake Fault Zone Map. Therefore, no impact.
6.a.ii. Although there are no known faults within the project area, there are faults located near the City that have been
known to create seismic events. The faults closest to the site, which would most affect the proposed project are
Rinconada Fault and San Andreas Fault Zone. They are approximately 1.95 miles and 28 miles away from the
proposed project site, respectively. The City adopts the California Building Code as its building code and updates this
code during each required adoption cycle. This code is continually updated with requirements to make building safer
during a seismic event. Incorporation of the latest California Building Code requirements at the time of building permit
submittal will reduce the exposure of people and structures to strong g round shaking to a less than significant level.
6.a.iii.iv. Geographical information systems and the Geotechnical Engineering Report show the project site to be in an
area of low risk for both landslides and liquefaction. Therefore, no impact.
6.b. Construction activities on the site will be required to comply with sedimentation and erosion control measures
prescribed by the City Engineer. To ensure proper erosion control measures are in place, mitigation measures 6.b.1 –
6.b.3 have been included to reduce any top soil loss to a less than significant impact.
6.c.d. The Geotechnical Engineering Report’s expansion determination indicates that the bea ring soils lie in the “Low”
expansion potential range. Evaluation of the subsurface indicated soils generally medium dense to very dense silty
clayey sand overlain by loose silty slightly clayey sand. Mitigation measure 6.c.1 has been included to reduce impacts
to less than significant.
6.e. The site will be served by local utility systems and will not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems. Therefore no impact.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: The grading permit application plans shall include erosion control measures to prevent so il,
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.b.2: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an appropriate erosion control method
(erosion control blanket, hydro-mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of
earthwork. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place. The contractor will be
responsible for the clean up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles.
Mitigation Measure 6.b.3: The contractor will be responsible for the clean-up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto
public streets by construction vehicles. An approved device must be placed prior to commencement of grading
activities. This device shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.1: Import soils used to raise site grade should be equal to or better than on -site soils in strength,
expansion, and compressibility characteristics.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.2: Post-construction care should include long-term drought tolerant landscaping and irrigation
solutions that do not allow for frequent changes in soil moisture content or irregular application of water around the
perimeter of the structures.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.3: Unstable soils during grading to excessive subsurface moisture should be c orrected by
including aeration or the use of gravels and/or geotextiles as stabilizing measures.
72
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 31
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of
an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
SOURCES: Air Pollution Control District (APCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 2012; Atascadero Climate Action Plan;
Project Description
DISCUSSION:
7.a. According to the Screening Criteria for Project Air Quality Analysis (Table 1-1, SLOAPCD, 2014), a Single Family
Housing development would have to be at or over seventy-one (71) dwelling units in order to be expected to exceed the
APCD GHG Numerical Threshold and as well as be at or over ninety-one (91) dwelling units in order to be expected to
exceed the APCD Ozone Precursor Significance Threshold.
The proposed residential lots will not exceed air quality and emissions thresholds set by the Screening Criteria for
Project Air Quality Analysis (Table 1-1, SLOAPCD, 2014). Therefore the project’s impacts are determined to be less
than significant.
7.b. The construction of the project will not concentrate pollutants or create objectionable odors. The project is
consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan. There for the impact is determined to be less than significant.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazard ous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people living or working
in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people living or
73
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 32
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
SOURCES: EnviroStor; City of Atascadero GIS
DISCUSSION
8.a.b.c. According to Attachment 8, the proposed project does not generate or involve the use of significant amounts of
hazardous materials. There are no known hazardous materials on the site or nearby. Therefore, no impact.
8.d. The property is not a listed hazardous material site on the EnviroStor database. Therefore, no impact.
8.e.f. The property is not near an airport. Therefore, no impact.
8.g. The site is within the Fire Department’s five minute or less response area. During building permit review, the fire
department will verify appropriate fire hydrant locations. Sprinklers are required on all new residential structures. The
project will not impair implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan, therefore no impact.
8.h. The proposed project is within the urban service and not located near wildlands. Geographical information systems
show the project site to be in a high fire hazard zone. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 8.h.1 will result in a less
than significant impact.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Hazardous and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure 8.h.1: Construction will comply with section the California Building and Fire Codes. New residences
in the City are required to install fire sprinklers. Fire protection measures sha ll include the use of non-combustible
exterior construction and roofs and fire-resistant building materials deemed appropriate by the fire marshal and chief
building official.
9. 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?
74
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 33
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course o f a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding
on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
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: Roadway Drainage Report; Project Description; City of Atascadero GIS; FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
DISCUSSION:
9.a. Construction will have a less than significant impact on water quality standards. Erosion, sediment and
environmental control measures shall be implemented as necessary to ensure reduced pollutant releases and minimize
potential environmental impacts of the project; therefore the project will have a less than significant impact.
9.b. Water will be provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company, therefore the project will not deplete ground water
supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. There are only six (6) new residential lots being proposed, therefore the
impact is less than significant.
9.c. The proposed project will not alter the course of a stre am, river or identified waters of the United States (US). The
Roadway Drainage Report discusses two areas of drainage. Area one will convey the runoff towards Atascadero
Avenue and area two will convey the runoff towards the back of the project. Area one is 4,200 square feet and area two
is 8,900 square feet. The drainage will be conveyed through grass lined swales along the roadway. Culvert pipes will
be used at each private driveway for access. Construction activities are subject to review for compli ance with City
drainage and grading regulations. Drainage will not be permitted to create or intensify any hazards for persons or
property in the vicinity, therefore the project will have less than significant impact.
9.d.e.f. This proposed project will follow the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Post Construction
Requirements by directing runoff to pervious surfaces along with filtering and retaining runoff on site. Therefore, the
project will have less than significant impact.
9.g.h.i.j. City of Atascadero GIS shows the proposed project area outside of the 0.2 percent annu al chance flood plain.
According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the proposed project site is located outside the 100 -year flood hazard area.
The project area is not subject to inundation by a tsunami. Therefore the project will have no impact.
75
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 34
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
SOURCES: Atascadero General Plan 2025; Project Description
DISCUSSION:
10.a. The project will not physically divide an established community. The proposed project is in compliance with the
General Plan Policy 2.1 ensuring that new development is compatible with existing and surrounding neighborhoods.
Single-family housing is consistent and compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Therefore, no impact.
10.b. The Atascadero Zoning Ordinance indicates that single-family dwellings are an appropriate use in Single-Family
Residential (SFR-Y) General Plan designation as well as Residential Single-Family (RSF-Y) zone. Surrounding
properties are zoned Residential Single Family (RSF-Y) and Rural Suburban (RS). The site’s zoning and use is
consistent with the General Plan. The property is listed not in Table V-21 in the General Plan as a potential site for low-
income housing. Therefore, no impact.
10.c. The project is consistent with the open space and conservation policies identified in the General Plan. Therefore,
no impact.
11. 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?
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: Geotechnical Engineering Report; City of Atascadero GIS
DISCUSSION:
11.a.b. No mining is proposed as a part of this project. No known mineral resourc es have been identified in the area.
Therefore, no impact.
76
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 35
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
12. 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 or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
SOURCES: Project Description; Noise Element; Noise Ordinance
DISCUSSION:
12.a.b. The project use is consistent with surrounding residential land uses and standards establis hed in the local
general plan and noise ordinance. The project will not result in significant exposure of persons to the generation of noise
levels or ground borne vibration and noise levels. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact.
12.c. The project will not create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project, and therefore will have a less than significant impact.
12.d. Construction is expected to involve some heavy machinery and use of impact tools that will temporarily increase
the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Construction activities shall
comply with Mitigation Measure 12.d.1 and therefore will have a less than significant impact.
12.e.f. The project is not located within an airport land use plan or private airstrip. The project will not expose people
living or working in the project area to excessive noise levels, and therefore will have no impact.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Noise
Mitigation Measure 12.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for
weekday and weekend hours of operation of equipment (between 7 am and 9pm).
77
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 36
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
13. 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?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people , necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES: Project Description; General Plan Housing Element; 2010 US Census
DISCUSSION:
13.a. The project proposes six (6) residential lots on two (2) currently vacant parcels. Based on the 2010 US Census,
the City’s average household size is 2.51 persons per unit. The total projected population of the project at build out is
approximately fifteen (15) persons. This represents less than 1% of the City’s total population of 28,310, based on the
2010 US Census. Therefore, the proposed residences as a part of the proposed project will not have substantial growth
inducing effects. The proposed project will have a less than significant impact on growth.
13.b.c. This proposed project does not displace any existing housing or people. Therefore, no impact.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES -- Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
SOURCES: Atascadero General Plan; Atascadero Municipal Code; City Fire Department; City Police Department; City
Public W orks Department
78
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 37
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
DISCUSSION:
Development Impact Fees: Development Impact Fees will be required of any new project for which a building permit is
issued. The concept of the impact fee program is to fund and sustain improvements which are needed as a re sult of
new development as stated in the General Plan and other policy documents within the fee program. Development
Impact Fees fall into the following categories: Drainage Fees; Streets, Road, Bridge Fees; Sewer Fees; Public Safety
Fees; Park Fees; and Miscellaneous Fees. In addition, school fees are collected by the Atascadero Unified School
District. The amount of impact fees to be paid will be determined at the time of issuance of building permit.
Fire and Police: The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Department. Impact fees were charged in
order to pay the cost of providing new Police and Fire Department services to the project site. Both the Police and Fire
Departments of the City of Atascadero have indicated that they wi ll be able to adequately service the proposed project.
Therefore the project will have a less than significant impact.
Schools: At buildout, the city’s population will overburden the existing school system unless additional classroom space
is added. The Atascadero Unified School District charges impact fees to fund additional schools as needed. State law
restricts mitigation of school impacts to the levying of these fees and other measures adopted by the
School district. Provision of adequate facilities for the population is the responsibility of the school district. Fees will be
required through construction permits for the residence. With payment of impact fees, the proposed project’s impact to
school facilities is less than significant.
Parks: The Quimby Act requires five (5) acres per one thousand (1000) persons. The proposed project will only increase
the population by approximately 15 persons, which represents less than 1% of the City’s total population of 28,310,
based on the 2010 US Census. The proposed project will not increase demand on existing City parks and recreation
facilities. The additional development of six (6) residential lots will be required to cont ribute to park development fees in
order to provide additional park space when the population becomes in need of additional space. Therefore, the impact
is less than significant.
Other public facilities: The construction of the project is not expected to have significant impacts on any other public
facilities.
15. 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: Project Description; Atascadero General Plan
DISCUSSION:
15.a. Residents are expected to use existing parks and recreational facilities; however the numbers are not expected to
result in substantial physical deterioration of any facilities and the collection of impact fees for this project site will offset
the additional use. Therefore the project will have a less than significant impact.
15.b. The proposed project does not include recreational facilities and does not require the expansion or construction of
recreational facilities. Therefore, the project will not have an adverse effect on the environment and will have a less
than significant impact.
79
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 38
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance
of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways
and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency
for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or
otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
SOURCES: Circulation Element; ITE Trip Generation Calculator; Project Description
DISCUSSION:
16.a.b. The ITE Trip Generation Calculator determined the proposed project of six (6) single-family residential lots will
produce 57 daily trips. According to the General Plan Circulation Element, Atascadero Avenue is currently at level of
service “A” and this project is not expected to impact daily traffic volumes. In order to address cumulative impacts over
time, Mitigation Measure 16.b.1 help reduce future impacts to less than significant levels .
16.c.d. No changes will occur to the air traffic patterns, and the project will not increase hazards due to sharp curves or
incompatible uses. Therefore the project will have no impact.
16.e. The Fire department determined the proposed project provides adequate emergency vehicle access, therefore no
impact was found.
16.f. The proposed project is within a low density rural residential area and according to the Atascadero Bike Plan,
Atascadero Avenue is designated as a Class II bike lane. The project is consistent with the area circulation, the
Atascadero Bike Plan, and the General Plan. Adequate parking will be provided on-site for the proposed project. Transit
facilities serving the project site are expected to be adequate for the surrounding setting. Therefore the project will have
a less than significant impact.
80
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 39
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Transportation / Traffic
Mitigation Measure 16.a.b.1: Payment of Circulation System Fee (TIF) shall be made prior to the issuance of building
permits for all residential and non-residential uses. Those traffic impact fees shall be collected consistent with California
Government Code Section 66498.5.
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --Would the project:
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: Project Description; Regional Water Quality Control Board; Atascadero Mutual Water Company
DISCUSSION:
17.a.b.e. The proposed project will be serviced by the City’s sewer system. The applicant will be required to connect all
residential units to the City’s sanitary sewer s ystem. The City’s sewer system has capacity to treat all wastewater
generated by the proposed project and will not result in the construction or expansion of new or existing wastewater
facilities, therefore the impact is less than significant.
17.c. Consistent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Post Stormwater Construction standards, all new
discharges are contained on-site and mimics pre-construction stormwater flow. Therefore, impact is less than
significant.
17.d. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) has indicated that it can provide water to the proposed project.
All property within the City limits is entitled to water from the AMWC . The project is not expected to require a significant
quantity of water for the proposed use. Water is pumped from several portions of the largest underground basin in the
county, the Paso Robles Formation, using a series of shallow and deep wells. The water company anticipates that it will
be able to meet the city’s needs through build out and beyond .
81
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 40
part2
Initial Study 2016-0001
PLN 2015-1563 / TRP 2015-0188 / TTM 2015-0109
El Mojon Court 6 Lot Subdivision
10075 & 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The AMWC water demand at build out is estimated to be at 134 thousand gallons per year for each residential unit,
which totals to 804 thousand gallons per year for this project. In light of the drought, landscaping will be consistent with
the City’s water efficient landscaping ordinance. Turf will not be permitted to be installed by the developer in any portion
of the proposed project for consistency with the City’s ordinance. This is i ncluded as a mitigation measure creating a
less than significant impact with proposed mitigation.
17.f.g. Solid waste will be collected by the City of Atascadero, through contract personnel, and processed to the
Chicago Grade landfill. There is sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore the impact is less than
significant.
Proposed Mitigation Measures – Utilities
Mitigation Measure 17.d.1: Landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review
and approval. Landscaping must consist of drought tolerant species , utilize drip irrigation, and follow state drought
tolerant landscaping standards.
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE --
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 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?
d) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term
environmental goals?
DISCUSSION: The project site consists of six (6) residential parcels which are being proposed for a new residential
development, consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project has been analyzed as
required by CEQA and the Atascadero Municipal Code. Project -related impacts have been identified and mitigation
measures have been included within the proposal to reduce the effect of the proposed project as described herein.
SOURCES:
General Plan Land Use Element, City of Atascadero, 2002
Zoning Ordinance, part of Municipal Code, City of Atascadero, as amended through 2015.
Land Use Element Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Crawford, Multari, & Clark, adopted 2002
CEQA Handbook, Air Quality Control District, April 2012
General Plan Safety Element, City of Atascadero, 2002
82
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 41
part2
General Plan Circulation Element, 2002
General Plan Noise Element, adopted 2002
Noise Ordinance, City of Atascadero, 2004
Flood Insurance Rate Map, community-panel number 06079C0834G
PROJECT SOURCES:
Project Description
Site Improvement Plans, Grading Plan,
Tree Protection Plan
Architectural Plans
Traffic Impact Study
Biological Report
83
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
04/28/16 Page 42
part2
Attachment 10
Arborist Report
See Attached
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY 2016-0001
Attachment 11
Biological Report
See Attached
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
Attachment 5: Draft Resolution PC 2016-B – VTSM / TRP Approval
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2016-B
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING
A SIX (6) LOT VESTING TENATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (TTM 2015-
0109) AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2015-0188 WITHIN THE
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF-Y) ZONE AT APN 056-211-037,
038
(10075/10085 Atascadero Avenue / DA2 Development, LLC)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from DA 2 Development, LLC (7650
Portola Road, Atascadero, CA 93422) Applicant and Owner, to consider a six (6) lot Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map (TTM 2015-0109) and Tree Removal Permit (TRP 2015-0188) for
the removal of one (1) Coast Live Oak and one (1) Blue Oak tree totaling 12-inches DBH and up
to 143-inches DBH of native tree removals associated with the development of six (6) single
family lots; and,
WHEREAS, the site’s General Plan Designation is Single Family Residential (SFR);
and,
WHEREAS, the site’s Zoning District is Residential Single Family (RSF-Y); and,
WHEREAS, an application has been received to subdivide two (2) recorded lots totaling
6.6 acres into six (6) lots that meet the minimum lot size standard in the Residential Single
Family (RSF-Y) zoning district; and,
WHERAS, a Tree Removal Permit is required for the removal of any native tree four (4)
inches DBH or greater; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001
were prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on May 17, 2016 studied and considered the proposed Vesting Tentative
Subdivision Map (TTM) 2015-0109 and proposed native tree removals (TRP 2015-0188) , after
studying and considering the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project,
and
135
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings of Approval for Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and the proposed Specific
Plan. (Government Code§§ 66473.5 and 66474(a) and (b))
The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning
requirements, as identified in the General Plan consistency analysis that was
completed in this Staff Report, including five (5) major land use development policies
pertaining to residential development within the City of Atascadero.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. (Government Code§
66474(c)).
The proposed project is suitable for the type of proposed development. The site’s
General Plan designation is Single family Residential (SFR) and contained a
corresponding zoning designation of RSF-Y. The site is gently sloping in a
predominately large lot single family residential neighborhood. Construction of single
family residential homes is consistent with the type of use and density envisioned by
the City’s General Plan.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
(Government Code § 66474(d))
The proposed density of the project is 1 unit per gross acre, which is consistent with
the General Plan’s maximum density of 2.0 units per gross acre for this land use
designation. 2nd units are permitted within this land use designation / zoning district
and if all lots developed with 2nd units, the proposed development will not exceed the
maximum allowed density per the City’s General Plan. The proposed subdivision
meets the RSF-Y minimum lot size designation of one (1) gross acre per lot, there the
proposed project is physical suitable for the proposed density of the project.
4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. (Government Code § 66474(e))
The proposed project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluated potential impacts to
fish, wildlife, and their habitat. A Biological assessment of the proposed project
concluded that, with implementation of mitigation, the proposed project would result
in a less than significant impact to special status plant and wildlife species and to
native trees. Further, the proposed project would have no impact on wildlife corridors
or waters of the US.
136
5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not ca use serious
health problems. (Government Code § 66474(f))
The proposed project will not cause serious health problems as discussed in detail in
Mitigated Negative Declaration. The site has been thoroughly investigated for the
potential presence of hazards and hazardous materials and, with the incorporation of
mitigation measures, development of the Project would not have the potential to
create a significant hazard to the public or environment, which includes mitigation for
temporary construction dust and noise, therefore the proposed subdivision will not
cause serious health problems
6. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through
or use of property within the proposed subdivision. (Government Code §
66474(g))
The proposed project consists of a six (6) lot residential subdivision for the
construction of six (6) single family homes and would not interfere with existing
access or use easements on the site. The Project will provide for all appropriate
access for public utilities. Further, the Project would provide for public access to the
site via a new, City Standard, residential street that includes a cul-de-sac for
emergency turn-arounds and safety. Accordingly, the design of the subdivision will
not conflict with access through or use of the properties within the proposed
subdivision.
7. The installation of public improvements are necessary prior to recordation of a
Final Map in order to insure orderly development of the surrounding area
(Government Code § 66411.1(b)(2).
The vesting tentative subdivision map includes a variety of inter -related on-site and
off-site improvement necessary to serve the build out of the six (6) lots created by the
map. These improvements including grading and drainage of the proposed new street
must be complete prior to the recordation of parcels in order to insure the orderly
development of the surrounding area.
SECTION 2. Findings for Approval of Tree Removal. The Planning Commission finds as
follows:
1. The trees are obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed
to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and
determined by the Community Development Department based on the following
factors:
Early consultation with the City;
Consideration of practical design alternatives;
Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives.
SECTION 3. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a
regular session assembled on May 17, 2016, approved Vesting Subdivision Map Tract 3085
(TTM 2015-0109) subject to the following:
137
1. EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
2. EXHIBIT B: Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 3085
3. EXHIBIT C: Grading Plan
4. EXHIBIT D: Utility Plan
5. EXHIBIT E: Building Envelopes
6. EXHIBIT F: Tree Mitigation Chart
138
On motion by Commissioner ______ and seconded by Commissioner _____ the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: (0)
NOES: (0)
ABSTAIN: (0)
ABSENT: (0)
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
______________________________
Jan Wolff
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
______________________________
Phill Dunsmore
Planning Commission Secretary
139
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval TTM 2015-0109
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Tract 3085 (El Mojon Court)
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Planning and Building Services Conditions
1) The approval of this application shall become final and effective for the
purposes of issuing building permits, provided the required conditions of
approval have been satisfied, fourteen (14) days following the Planning
Commission approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is
filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance.
On-Going PS
2) The applicant 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.
On-going CA
3) Approval of this Tentative Parcel 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.
On-going PS
4) An initial one (1) year extension may be granted through an extension of
entitlement consistent with Atascadero Municipal Code section 9-2.117(a).
All subsequent map extensions, as available consistent with the
Subdivision Map Act, shall be made consistent with section 9-2.117 (b)
and Title 11 of the Atascadero Municipal code.
On-going PS
5) Consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, the approved Vesting Tentative
Subdivision Map (TTM) was deemed completed on April 28, 2016.
On-Going PS
6) The Community Development Department shall have the authority to
approve minor changes to the project that (1) increase the square footage
of the project by less than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or
appearance, and/or (3) address a construction design issue that is not
substantive to the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map.
BP PS
7) A final parcel 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.
PM PS
8) All subsequent final maps, site work, construction permits, grading, and
site improvements shall be consistent with Exhibit B through D.
BP PS
9) Any proposed residential structures and driveways shall be located in the
proposed building envelope as identified in Exhibit E.
BP PS
140
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
10) A condition or note on the Final map shall include language referring back
to project approvals and building envelopes as shown in exhibit E of the
PC Resolution 2016-00XX.
FM PS
11) A deed notification shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map
noticing future homeowners of adopted building envelopes consistent with
PC Resolution 2016-00XX, Exhibit E.
FM PS
12) A maintenance agreement shall be recorded at time of Final Map to clearly
identify future maintenance roadway, common drainage areas, and any
other shared facilities. An association is not required to be established;
however, a mechanism for future funding of maintenance of shared
improvements is required.
FM PS
13) Consistent with the certified Mitigation Measures of certified Mitigated
Negative Declaration 2016-0001, the southern end of the proposed project
area shown in Figure 1 of the Biological Report shall be designated with a
permanent open space easement that restricts the area from further
development. This easement shall be recorded concurrently with the final
map.
FM PS
14) The applicant shall either pay $316.66 into the tree mitigation fund and/or
replant six (6) five-gallon native trees on subject property or any
combination thereof for removals of native trees in the proposed new
roadway (El Mojon Court).
Tree Removal
/ site
improvement
permit
PS
15) Future property owners shall work with City Staff and project arborist to
reduce the number of native trees removed as a part of individual lot
development, to the extent feasible.
BP PS
16) An arborist shall be retained at time of building permits to ensure native
trees which are to remain on site are protected during construction of on-
site improvements and each new building.
BP PS
Public Works Department Conditions
17) The Subdivider shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection agreement with
the City.
FM CE/PS
18) The Subdivider shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of
existing utilities.
FM CE
19) Upon approval by the City Engineer of the improvement plans, the
Subdivider shall prepare a reproducible Mylar plan set for signature by the
City, Atascadero Mutual Water Company and public utility companies.
FM CE
20) The applicant shall provide an engineer’s estimate for all work shown on
the subdivision improvement plans.
FM/BP CE
21) Building plans will not be approved by the Public Works Department until
the subdivision improvement plans are approved (Mylar plan set signed by
BP CE
141
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
the City Engineer) and the Final Map is recorded.
22) Prior to the final inspections and approval of the subdivision improvements
the applicant shall provide to the City Engineer record drawings, signed by
the Engineer of Record. The record drawing submittal shall consist of the
following:
One plan set of reproducible Mylar.
One set of prints of the approved record drawings.
One electronic file of the plan set (PDF file)
One electronic file of the plan set in AutoCAD. The AutoCAD file
set shall be complete and ready to use and shall include all
critical data files, 3D features, points, etc.
FM CE
23) The location of the new street is located between and close to two (private)
driveways and has the potential to create vehicular conflicts. Therefore, in
an effort to combine points of access along Atascadero Ave, the
Subdivider shall negotiate with the adjacent northerly property owner for
the abandonment of the adjacent off-site driveway, to be replaced by a
new driveway connection to the new street. If successful, the Subdivider
shall reconstruct the existing driveway to connect to the new street.
Should the Subdivider be unable come to an agreement with the adjacent
property owner, the condition can be terminated provided the Subdivider
submits documentation showing a reasonable effort of negotiations has
been attempted, as determined by the City Engineer.
BP CE/PS
24) 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
BP CE
25) Prior to the final inspection, the Subdivider 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, or, bonded for in
conformance with the Subdivision Map Act.
FM CE
Final Map Conditions Tract 3085:
26) The Final Map shall show the 50-feet wide public right-of-way and offer of
dedication
BP CE
27) A Public Utility Easement (six feet wide) shall be dedicated on each new
lot created and shall be located along and contiguous to the public right-of-
way
FM/BP CE
28) The Final Map shall list on the Certificate sheet, all documents to be
recorded concurrently with the Final Map.
FM/BP CE
29) If required by the City to show building setbacks, building envelopes, or list
mitigations/conditions of approval, said information shall be shown on an
FM/BP CE
142
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
additional information sheet.
30) The Final Map shall show all easements, public and private, unless
provided as a separate instrument to be recorded concurrently with the
Final Map, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer/City Surveyor
FM/BP CE
31) Prior to recording the map, the Subdivider shall set monuments at all new
property corners. A registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall
indicate by certificate on the 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.
FM/BP CE
32) Drainage easements shall be provided as needed to accommodate both
public and private drainage facilities.
FM/BP CE
33) A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in
conjunction with the processing of the Final Map.
FM/BP CE
34) Prior to recording the map, the Subdivider shall have the map reviewed by
all applicable public and private utility companies (cable, telephone, gas,
electric, Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The Subdivider shall obtain
a letter from each utility company indicating their ability to serve the
subdivision and review and approval of the map and easements
FM/BP CE
On-Site / Off-Site Roadway Improvements
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.
FM/BP CE
36) The Subdivider shall design and construct the new street and cul-de-sac in
accordance with City Standards and Specifications for a “Rural Local”
road, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The new street shall not be
split and shall be centered in the public right-of-way or as approved by the
City Engineer. The Subdivider shall remove the existing Oak Tree from
the new roadway.
FM/BP CE
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
FM/BP CE
38) The Subdivider shall remove the existing utility pole and facilities from the
new roadway. New or relocated utility poles shall be placed not closer
than 10 feet from the edge of the road. Exceptions to this may be granted
by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis.
BP CE
39) Street pavement shall be not less than 20 feet wide with 4-foot wide
shoulders. Curb & gutter shall be installed to control drainage when the
longitudinal roadway gradient exceeds 7 percent or the existing soils are
easily erodible (as determined by the soils engineer). When curb & gutter
are required for drainage, the shoulders shall be paved and the curb-curb
width shall be 28 – 36 feet wide (28’ =parking on one side, 36’ =parking on
BP CE
143
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
both sides). If parking is limited to one side only, “No Parking” signage and
red curb shall be placed on the opposite side of the road, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
40) The cul-de-sac shall have a radius of 38 from center to edge of pavement
(assuming curb/gutter is not required).
BP CE
41) Curb & pavement returns at the intersection with Atascadero Ave shall
have a radius of not less than 20 feet; larger radii may be required as
determined by the City Engineer
BP CE
42) The structural pavement section shall be based on a Traffic Index of 5.5. BP CE
43) Subdivision improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered civil
engineer and submitted to the Public Works Department for review and
approval. The plans shall be approved prior to building permit issuance
BP CE
44) A 6-foot wide public utilities easement shall be dedicated along all street
frontages, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
FM CE
Stormwater / Post-Construction Water Quality
45) Discharges to the City storm water collection system are subject to review
under the City’s MS4 permit and the requirements established by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board for discharges to waters of the
United States. The City storm water collection system includes, but is not
limited to, creeks, streams, drainage channels, pipes, culverts, inlets and
drainage structures, for the conveyance of storm water across public and
private properties and rights-of-way. Illicit discharges shall not be
approved and shall be eliminated where known to exist or identified.
Certain non-storm water discharges may not be considered illicit where it
can be shown that these waters are not contaminated.
GP CE
46) A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required prior to
issuance of construction permits. General Construction Activity Storm
Water Permit is required for all storm water discharges associated with a
construction activity where clearing, grading or excavations result in land
disturbance of five or more acres. Storm water discharges of less than five
acres, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale,
also require a permit. Permits are required until the construction is
complete. To be covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the
owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs must submit a
completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the
State Regional Water Quality Control Board.
GP CE
47) A detailed hydraulic analysis is required to be prepared by a registered civil
engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review. The analysis shall
size storm water detention facilities based on the difference between a
post-construction 50-yr storm event and a pre-development 2-yr storm
event. The proposed development must mitigate any situation that
increases flooding and erosion potential downstream of the subject
GP CE
144
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
property.
48) Road drainage shall be conveyed to an adequate point of disposal and
shall be in compliance with the Post-Construction Storm Water
Management requirements mandated by the State of California per State
Water Board Resolution No R3-2013-0032 (effective March 6, 2014).
Drainage easements may be required to be offered to the City, as
determined by the City Engineer
GP CE
49) Improved, concentrated, or diverted storm water run-off shall not be
directed across property lines unless conveyed in an existing waterway, or,
where located within a drainage easement. Clarify how sheet flow will be
induced, or provide the appropriate drainage improvements to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
GP CE
50) A Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) shall be prepared and submitted with
the subdivision improvement plans and shall show and document
compliance with the 2014 Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as
promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWCP
shall be prepared on the City’s form.
GP CE
51) The Subdivider shall prepare an operations and maintenance plan for all
Storm Water Control Measures (SCM) required for this project
GP CE
52) The subdivision improvement plans shall include complete details, detail
references and plan notes for the proposed SCM and improvements
necessary to provide reasonable stormwater treatment. The plans may
include but are not limited to infiltration, detention and settling, bio-filtration,
filtration, and flow-through separation facilities.
GP CE
53) Depending on the final area of impervious surface for the street, a
maintenance agreement, signed by the property owner for annual
inspection and maintenance of post-construction stormwater treatment
facilities (including a detention basin if required) shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Engineer. The maintenance agreement (if
required) shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map and shall run
with the land.
GP CE
54) The development of each lot shall consider surface drainage systems that
include bio-swales or sheet flow through planted areas rather than
subsurface systems as a Best Management Practice (BMP) for post-
development runoff where practicable
GP CE
Grading
55) Grading design shall be in substantial compliance with the Geotechnical
Report prepared for this subdivision AND City regulations and policies
GP CE
56) Subdivision improvement plans shall include an Erosion Control Plan
GP CE
145
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
utilizing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control erosion and
minimize dust.
57) All disturbed surfaces steeper than four horizontal to one vertical (4:1) and
areas used to convey concentrated drainage shall be prepared and
maintained to control erosion by effective planting or other means
approved by the City Engineer. Disturbed surfaces shall be planted with
native species and shall provide an even distribution of new growth over
approximately 70 percent of the disturbed surfaces prior to a final
inspection of the subdivision improvements.
GP CE
Public Utilities
58) The Subdivider shall extend the Public Water System from Atascadero
Ave to the end of the new street, to the satisfaction of the Atascadero
Mutual Water Company (AMWC) and City Engineer. The new water main
shall be capable of providing the required fire flow to serve the subdivision.
GP CE
59) Domestic water service laterals and water meters shall be provided to
each lot per AMWC standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
GP CE
60) Fire hydrants shall be located in accordance with AMWC Standards and
Specifications and to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall and City
Engineer.
GP CE
61) The Subdivider shall extend an 8” diameter public gravity sewer in the new
street to the extent possible, in accordance with City Standards and
Specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
GP CE
62) The Subdivider shall install a gravity sewer lateral to serve each lot in the
subdivision. Laterals shall be constructed in accordance with City
Standards and shall extend to the new street right-of-way. Lots that are
unable to gravity flow to the public sewer shall be required to install a low-
pressure sewer ejector pump system at the time of lot development. The
Subdivider shall provide a private sewer lateral easement beyond the limits
of the public right-of-way over adjacent lots to the point of connection to
the gravity sewer lateral dedicated to a specific lot
GP CE
63) Each lot shall be served with individual services for water, sewer, power,
gas, telephone and cable TV. All wire utilities within the subdivision and
within each lot shall be placed underground.
GP CE
Mitigated Negative Declaration 2016-0001 – Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 1.d.1: All lighting shall be designed to eliminate any off site
glare by including shielding mechanisms to prevent offsite light spillage and
glare. Fixtures shall be shield cut-off type.
BP PS
Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all
applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM-10) as
BP PS
146
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
contained in Section 2 “Assessing and Mitigating Construction Impacts.”
2.4 Fugitive Dust Mitigation Measures: Standard List
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b. Use 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. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as
soon as possible, and building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
e. All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
f. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20%
opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include
holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress
Mitigation Measure 4.a.1: To ensure impacts to California legless lizards are
avoided and minimized, development in areas of thick duff will be avoided. If
these areas cannot be avoided, a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey of highly suitable habitat. This survey will include lightly
raking the upper soil layer and leaf litter to determine if legless lizards are
present. If legless lizards are discovered, they will be moved by hand to areas
that will not be impacted by development activities.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.a.2: A rare plant survey during the appropriate bloom
period (May-July) is recommended to determine presence or absence of two
sensitive plant species. If present, these species should be avoided during
future development. If any plant species are listed under the California
Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA),
the appropriate resource agency shall be contacted for direction on how to
proceed prior to disturbance on the property. Additionally, strands of deer grass
shall be flagged for avoidance during this same botanical survey effort.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.b.c.1: The southern end of the proposed project area
shown in Figure 1 of the Biological Report shall be designated with a permanent
open space easement that restricts the area from further development. This
easement shall be recorded concurrently with the final map.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.d.1: To protect nesting birds the Applicant should avoid
vegetation clearing and earth disturbance during the typical nesting season
(February 1 – September 15). If avoiding construction during this season is not
feasible, a qualified biologist shall survey the area two days prior to activity
beginning on the site. If nesting birds are located, they shall be avoided until
they have successfully fledged or the nest has naturally failed. A buffer zone of
50 feet will be placed around all non-sensitive passerine bird species and 250
feet for all raptor species. Activity will remain outside of buffers until the
applicant’s biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the nest is no
longer active. If special status bird species are located, no work will begin until
an appropriate buffer is determined by consultation with the City, the local CDFW
biologist, and/or the USFWS.
BP / GP PS
147
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: Grading and excavation and grading work 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 drip line of
all trees.
5. All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for
protection with 4-foot chain link, snow or safety fencing placed per the
approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be in place
prior to any site excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place
until completion of all construction activities.
6. Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by
hand and sealed with an approved tree seal.
7. Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer
should be redirected from under the canopy of any trees that are to
remain.
8. Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation
should be redesigned so that it bridges across any root systems.
9. Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of
trees to be saved shall be dug by hand.
10. At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the
locations called out in the Oak Tree Protection Plan. An inspection of the tree
fencing shall be done by City staff or Arborist prior to issuance of building
permits. All areas within the drip line of the trees that cannot be fenced shall
receive a 4-6” layer of chip mulch to retain moisture, soil structure, and reduce
the effects of soil compaction.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: An on-site meeting with the arborist, owner, and City
Staff, is required to determine home design and layout that increases the
preservation of native trees.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: A mandatory meeting between the arborist and
grading/trenching contractor shall take place prior to work start. This activity
shall be monitored by the arborists to insure proper root pruning is taking place.
Any landscape architects and contractors involved shall not design any irrigation
or other features within any drip line unless previously approved by the project
arborists.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.5: All utilities shall remain outside the driplines of native
trees, to the extent feasible. If roads exist between two trees, the utilities shall
be routed down the middle of the road or completely hand dug. All t renches in
these areas shall be exposed by air spade or hand dug with utilities routed
under/over the roots.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.6: Soils within the drip line that have been compacted by
heavy equipment and/or construction activities must be returned to their original
state before all work is completed. Methods include adding specialized soil
conditioners, water jetting, adding organic matter, and boring small holes with an
auger (18” deep, 2-3’ apart with a 2-4” auger) and the application of moderate
amounts of nitrogen fertilizer.
BP / GP PS
148
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 4.e.7: Grading shall not encroach within the drip line unless
approved by the project arborist. Grading should not disrupt the normal drainage
pattern around the trees. Fills should not create a ponding condition and
excavations should not leave the tree on a rapidly draining mound.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.8: Any exposed roots shall be re-covered the same day
they were exposed. If they cannot, they must be covered with burlap or another
suitable material and wetted down 2x per day until re-buried.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.9: Paving within the drop line consists of placing base
material on existing grade. Any grade lowering removes important surface roots.
Pavers can be used with limitations. The base material must be above natural
grade and the curbing to retain the pavers shall not be trenched any deeper than
six inches into the natural grade.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.10: No liquid or solid construction waste shall be dumped
on the ground within the drop line of any native tree. The drip line areas are not
for storage of materials either. Any violations shall be remedied through proper
cleanup approved by the project arborist at the expense of the owner
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.11: All native tree pruning shall be completed by a
licensed and insured D49 tree trimming contractor that has a valid city business
license.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 4.e.13: 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, the construction-related tree protection measures
are no longer required for tree protection, and suggest additional fertilization,
insecticide, fungicide, soil amendments, and mycorrhiza applications that will
benefit tree health
FO PS
Mitigation 5.d.1: In the event that human remains are discovered on the
property, all work on the project shall stop and the Atascadero Police
Department and the County Coroner shall be contacted. The Atascadero
Community Development Department shall be notified. If the human remains
are identified as being Native American, the California Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted at (916) 653-4082 within 24 hours. A
representative from both the Chumash Tribe and the Salinan Tribe shall be
notified and present during the excavation of any remains.
BP / GP PS
Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: The grading permit application plans shall 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.
BP / GP CE
Mitigation Measure 6.b.2: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an
appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket, hydro-mulch, or
straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of earthwork.
All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place.
The contractor will be responsible for the clean-up of any mud or debris that is
tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles.
BP / GP CE
Mitigation Measure 6.b.3: The contractor will be responsible for the clean-up of
any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles. An
approved device must be placed prior to commencement of grading activities.
BP / GP CE
149
Conditions of Approval
El Mojon Court Subdivision
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0109 / TRP 2015-0188
10075 / 10085 Atascadero Avenue
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
This device shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Mitigation Measure 6.c.1: Import soils used to raise site grade should be equal to
or better than on-site soils in strength, expansion, and compressibility
characteristics
BP / GP CE
Mitigation Measure 6.c.2: Post-construction care should include long-term
drought tolerant landscaping and irrigation solutions that do not allow for frequent
changes in soil moisture content or irregular application of water around the
perimeter of the structures
BP / GP CE
Mitigation Measure 6.c.3: Unstable soils during grading to excessive subsurface
moisture should be corrected by including aeration or the use of gravels and/or
geotextiles as stabilizing measures
BP / GP CE
Mitigation Measure 8.h.1: Construction will comply with section the California
Building and Fire Codes. New residences in the City are required to install fire
sprinklers. Fire protection measures shall include the use of non-combustible
exterior construction and roofs and fire-resistant building materials deemed
appropriate by the fire marshal and chief building official.
BP / GP BS
Mitigation Measure 12.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of
Atascadero Noise Ordinance for weekday and weekend hours of operation of
equipment (between 7 am and 9pm).
BP / GP BS
Mitigation Measure 16.a.b.1: Payment of Circulation System Fee (TIF) shall be
made prior to the issuance of building permits for all residential and non-
residential uses. Those traffic impact fees shall be collected consistent with
California Government Code Section 66498.5.
BP PS
Mitigation Measure 17.d.1: Landscaping plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for review and approval. Landscaping
must consist of drought tolerant species, utilize drip irrigation, and follow state
drought tolerant landscaping standards.
BP PS
End Conditions
150
EXHIBIT B: Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Tract 3085
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0108 / TRP 2015-0188
151
EXHIBIT C: Preliminary Grading Plan – Tract 3085
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0108 / TRP 2015-0188
152
EXHIBIT D: Utility Plan – Tract 3085
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0108 / TRP 2015-0188
153
EXHIBIT E: Building Envelopes Exhibit – Tract 3085
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0108 / TRP 2015-0188
154
EXHIBIT F: Tree Mitigation Chart
PLN 2015-1563 / TTM 2015-0108 / TRP 2015-0188
For Roadway Construction Only – Individual Lots will be calculated as building permits are received
155
156