The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 10/25/2005 i 1 lion CITY OF A TASCADERC) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Tuesday, October 25, 2005 7:00 P.M. Atascadero Lake Pavilion 9315 Pismo St. Atascadero, California D V RE E ELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION: • (Immediately Following Redevelopment Agency Meeting) 1. PUBLIC COMMENT--CLOSED SESSION 2. CALL TO ORDER a) Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code 54956.8) Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney Property: Renzaglia, 6900 Valle Ave. 3. ADJOURN 4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley ROLL CALL: Mayor Scalise Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley Council Member Clay Council Member Luna Council Member Pacas 1 COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for.Community Forum, unless changed by the Council.) APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may take action on items listed on the Agenda.) PRESENTATION: 1. Certificate of Appreciation presentation to the California Conservation Corps(CCC). A. 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 Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the item before'action is taken.) 1. City Council Meeting Minutes - September 13, 2005 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of September 13, 2005. [City Clerk] 2. City Council Meeting Minutes - September 27, 2005 City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of September 27, 2005.. [City Clerk] 3. Temporary Road Closure - Los Osos Road ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve a request from the Public Works Department for the temporary road closure of Los Osos Road for two weeks to complete a culvert replacement project. [Public Works] 2 4. Atascadero Corporation YardRelocation Proiect —Rejection of All Bids (City Bid No. 2005-030) Fiscal Impact: $1,000,000.00 budgeted in FY 2005-2007. ■ Recommendation: Council reject all bids for the Atascadero, Corporation Yard Relocation project. [Public Works] 5. Employee- Salary Schedule and Modification to` Labor Organization Agreements ■ Fiscal Impact: The costs for the proposal are contained within the Annual Operating Budget. • Recommendations: Council: 1. Approve modifications to labor agreements for Service Employees International Union, Local 620 (SEIU) and Mid-Management and Professional Employees; and, 2. Approve Addendum to City Manager Employment Agreement;and, 3. Approve the revised Salary Schedule, effective July 1, 2005. [City -Manager] B. MANAGEMENT: 1. Oak Ridge Estates (3-F Meadows) Intersection State Route 41 and Los Altos Road Improvements Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council find that the proposed improvements for the intersection of State Route 41 (Morro Road) and Los Altos Road meet the requirements of the Atascadero Municipal Code. [Public Works] 2. Atascadero Short Range Transit Plan ■ Fiscal impact: None. However, if farebox recovery ratio does not rise to 20% within the next two years, state and federal funding will be in jeopardy. ■ Recommendation: Council receive an update on the Atascadero Short Range Transit Plan, adopt public transportation service goals, review concepts for public outreach and direct staff to move forward with public input as outlined. [Public Works] C. COMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): Mayor Scalise 1. County Mayor's Round'Table 2. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board 3. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO) 4. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) 3 Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley 1. Finance Committee 2. Air Pollution Control District (APCD) 3. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC) 4. League of California Cities -Grassroots Network 5. City/ Schools Committee 6. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC) Council Member Clay 1. S.L.O. County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources Advisory Committee 2. Nacimiento Water Purveyors Contract Technical Advisory Group 3. North County Water Purveyors Group Council Member Luna 1. Finance Committee Council Member Pacas 1. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) 2. City/ Schools Committee 3. Atascadero Youth Task Force D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Clerk 3. City Treasurer 4. City Attorney 5. City Manager E. ADJOURNMENT: Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, 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 City Council at or prior to this public hearing. Correspondence submitted at this public hearing will be distributed to the Council and available for review in the City Clerk's office. 1, Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the October 25, 2005 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was posted on October 18, 2005 at the Atascadero City Hall Annex, 6905 EI Camino Real, Suite 6, Atascadero,CA 93422 and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that location. Signed this 18th day of October,2005 at Atascadero, California. r � Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk City of Atascadero 4 City of Atascadero WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Q- e City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., at the Atascadero Pavilion on the Lake, 9315 Pismo St., Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Council 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 City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall Annex business hours at the,Central Receptionist counter and on our website, www.atascadero.org.- An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero Library, 6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by the public during Council 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 City Clerk's office. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager's Office or the City Clerk's Office, both at(805) 461-5000. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS Members of the audience may speak on any itemonthe agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will.announce when the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way: • You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor • Give your name and address (not required). • Make your statement • All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council • No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other, individual, absent or present • All comments limited to 5 minutes(unless changed by the Council) • No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item. If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Access to hook up your laptop to the City's projector will be provided. You are required to submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy, The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be heard by the Council. TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Under Agenda item,"COMMUNITY FORUM", the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the Council to: • Please approach the podium and be recognized • Give your name and address (not required) • State the nature of your business This is the time items not on the Agenda maybe brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council). 16O HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA 011 business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager 14 days preceding the Council meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council, please mail or bring a written communication to the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline. 5 City of Atascadero i Certificate of Appreciation California Conservation Corps (CCC) WHEREAS, the California Conservation Corps (CCC) is a state agency that brings together youth &the environment to the benefit of the both; and WHEREAS, each year the CCC provides more than three million hours of public service conservation work and disaster assistance throughout the state and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero wish to recognize the California Conservation Corps (CCC) through the SLO Community Fire Safe Council Chipping Program, for providing a valuable service to the citizens of Atascadero; and WHEREAS, this chipping program reduces the accumulation of tree branches and brush; and WHEREAS, the chipping program not only reduces danger of fire, it reduces air pollution from the need to burn waste vegetation; and WHEREAS, be it known that Doug Holloway & Skip Cleverly, acting as Supervisors for .the CCC crews, and under the direction of Bruce Bonifas, have provided exemplary service to the citizens of Atascadero. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, Wendy Scalise, Mayor of the City of Atascadero, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize the California Conservation Corps for their efforts on behalf of the community of Atascadero;and we offer our thanks. WITNESS THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO: Wendy Scalise, Mayor City of Atascadero, California October 25, 2005 ITEM NUMBER: A 1 DATE: 10/25/05 . �. r CITY OF ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES Tuesday, September 13, 2005 7:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION: 6:33 p.m. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT - CLOSED SESSION — None 2. CALL TO ORDER a) Conference with Labor Negotiator (Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6) Agency Negotiators: City Manager, Assistant City Manager Employee Organization: Service Employees Intl. Union Local 620 3. ADJOURN: 6:58 p.m. 4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that the City Council met in closed session to discuss labor negotiations and gave further direction to their labor negotiator. REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M. Mayor Scalise called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Council Member Luna led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Clay, Luna, Pacas, O'Malley and Mayor Scalise Absent: None CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 1 of 10 Others Present: City Clerk /..Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson, Deputy City Clerk Grace Pucci Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Public Works Director -Steve Kahn, Community Development Director Warren Frace, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Fire Chief Kurt Stone, Police Chief John Couch, Deputy Public Works Director Geoff English, Deputy Executive Director of Redevelopment Marty Tracey, Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris, Assistant Planner Lisa Wilkinson and City Attorney Patrick Enright. COMMUNITY FORUM: Pastor Tom Gaddis led those present in prayer. Mary and Rick Chastain asked Council to consider having a Vietnam Veterans' memorial site set aside in the Sunken Gardens area, and gave the Council a handout with additional information concerning a memorial. (Exhibit A) There was Council discussion and support for having a veterans' memorial site in the Sunken Gardens. Ann Ketcherside asked the Council and City Manager if they feel they are going to get FEMA money for one building and use it for the Youth Center. Eric Greening spoke about problems at the Dove Creek project and asked what the city can do about preservation of the wetland. He also asked if therewouldbe an update to the city's transit plan. Mayor Scalise closed the Community Forum period. City Manager Wade McKinney and Community Development Director Warren Frace addressed questions raised during the Community Forum period. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Pacas to approve the agenda. Motion passed 5.0 by a roll-call vote. CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 2 of 10 10 COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: Council Member Pacas spoke about the second unit amnesty program and asked for clarification on the City's policy. She distributed a letter to Council regarding the program. (Exhibit B) City Manager McKinney clarified the second unit amnesty policy. Council agreed that they had decided there would be no fees for those second units that qualified for the amnesty program. There was Council consensus to calculate the fees in the following way. Those with an existing guesthouse or second unit would inform the city and once the building was certified as being up to code, that it would be accepted with no new fees charged. Council Member Luna gave an update on the Council of Governments funding for purchase of the right of way for the 41/101 interchange project. PRESENTATIONS: 1. Proclamation for National Preparedness Month — September 2005 Mayor Scalise read the proclamation and presented it to Fire Captain Tom Way. Captain Way thanked Council and spoke about the importance of public preparedness. Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard presented a Resolution from the executive management team recognizing City Manager Wade McKinney for his leadership and service to the City of Atascadero. City Manager McKinney expressed his appreciation for the Resolution. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. City Council Meeting Minutes — August 9, 2005 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of August 9, 2005. [City Clerk] 2. June 2005 Accounts Payable and Payroll ■ Fiscal Impact: $1,771,206.89. ■ Recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and payroll vendor checks for June 2005. [Administrative Services] CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 3 of 10 3. June 2005 Treasurer's Report ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve the City Treasurer's report for June 2005. [City Treasurer] 4. Adoption of Title 5, Chapter 12, Film Ordinance & Resolution Establishing Rules, Regulations and Fees ■ Fiscal Impact: Unknown. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt on second reading, by title only, the Draft Film Ordinance, thereby amending Atascadero Municipal Code Title 5 to add Chapter 12; and, 2. Adopt the Draft Resolution establishing rules, regulations, and fees for motion picture and television productions. [City Manager] 5. 1155 EI Camino Real Custom Planned Development 26: The Village at Oakhaven (Zone Change 2005-0099)(Wehn Group, LLC) ■ Fiscal Impact: There will be minor negative impact, the project will be required to cover most of the costs of development with the conditions included. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Text Change 2005-0099 establishing a Planned Development 26 Overlay District based on findings; and, 2. Council adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B approving Zone Change 2005-0101 based on findings. [Community Development] 6. Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund ■ Fiscal Impact: All costs are paid for by SLESF grant funds and do not affect the General Fund. ■ Recommendation: Council designate 2005/2006 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) monies for equipment improvements and other frontline Police services. [Police] 7. Annual Pavement Marking Services Award ■ Fiscal Impact: $64,736.92 inpreviously allocated funds. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize City Manager to execute a contract with Safety Striping, in the amount of $64,736.92, for annual painting of traffic control pavement markings. [Public Works] CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 4 of 10 12 8. Final Map 2005-0106 (Parcel Map AT 04-0374) 5740 Rosario Avenue (TPM 2004-0063)(Malcom ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Accept Final Parcel Map 2005-0106 (Parcel Map AT 04-0374); and, 2. Accept offer of dedication for Public Access Easement and Public Utility Easement. [Public Works] 9. Final Map 2005-0108 (Parcel Map AT 04-0343) 7685 Sinaloa (TPM 2004- 0064)(Eddings) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Accept Final Parcel Map 2005-0108 (Parcel Map AT 04-0343); and, 2. Reject the offer of dedication for Public Access Easement and Public Utility Easement without prejudice to future acceptance. [Public Works] 10.Final Map 2005-0115 (Parcel Map ATAL 04-0250) Morro Road (LLA 2004- 0065)(Moresco Properties LLC) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Accept Final Parcel Map 2005-0115 (Parcel Map ATAL 04-0250); and, 2. Reject the offer of dedication for Public Access Easement and Public Utility Easement without prejudice to future acceptance; and, 3. Relinquish temporary construction easements per deeds recorded July 18, 1997 as Instrument No. 97-037569 and Instrument No. 97-037570. [Public Works] 11.Final Map 2005-0111 (Tract 2657) N. Ferrocarril Road (TTM 2004- 0056)(Gearhart) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Accept Final Tract Map 2005-0111 (Tract 2657); and, 2. Reject the offer of dedication for Public Utility Easement without prejudice to future acceptance. [Public Works] 12. Request to Place a Memorial Bench at Atascadero Lake Park (Wikoff) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve a request by Caroline Wikoff to install a Memorial Bench at Atascadero Lake Park in honor of her daughter, Jessica Wikoff. [Community Services] CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 5 of 10 13 MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Pacas to approve Items #A-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Luna abstained on Items #A-1, 4 and 5) (Item #A-4.1 Ordinance No. 479, Item #A- 4.2 Resolution No. 2005479, Item #A-5.1 Ordinance No. 480, Item #A-5.2 Ordinance No. 481) B. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendment (ZCH 2005-0100)(City of Atascadero ■ Fiscal Impact: Revenue neutral to the City. ■ Recommendations: Planning Commission Recommends: Council: 1. Adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Negative Declaration 2005- 0043; and, 2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Text Change 2005-0100 establishing development standards for fence height, lot line adjustments affecting flag lots, and landscape requirements. [Community Development] Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered questions of Council Council Member Clay suggested that the RSF-Y zone be included in the changes to allowed fencing. Council Member Luna stated he cannot support this if Council will not see exemptions to the minimum landscape requirements; he would like those to go to the Planning Commission and then to Council. He also expressed concern about the paved width of access ways to flag lots and its impact to trees. Council Member O'Malley stated his concerns with right of way issues and would like to see full use of the right of way as well as more improvements to walking paths, especially on arterials and larger capacity roads. He expressed caution about eroding the language for landscape buffers. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening expressed concern with 8. b) of the Negative Declaration, which he feels might encourage more water use. Joanne Main questioned increasing the widths of landscaping buffers for parking lots abutting public streets and how it might impact any project currently in the pipeline. CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 6 of 10 14 Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley to adopt Draft Ordinance A with the following changes: 1. Page 99, Item #9-4.164 (2): The accessway to the rear lot shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to Gibs standa4s) for residential zones, except where the access way is more than one hundred fifty (150) feet long, it shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet wide. with twenty(20) feet of payemen . For all other zones, the accessway shall be at least thirty (30) feet wide. with-a-pavedroadwaAt least twentv_feuF MA\ feet wide 2. Add: In RSF-Y zone on lots of 1 acre net or larger, five foot fencina will be allowed. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Pacas to approve the landscape standards as written. Motion passed 3:2 by a roll-call vote. (Luna, O'Malley opposed) MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Negative Declaration 2005-0043. Motion passed 5:0 by a voice vote. (Resolution No. 2005-080) Mayor Scalise recessed the hearing at 8:20 p.m. Mayor Scalise called the meeting back to order at 8.27 p.m. 2. TEFRA Hearing — Housing Authority Request for Permission to Increase the Bonding Amount for the Senior Housing Proiect at 9705 EI Camino Real ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution allowing the Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo to issue additional tax- exempt bonds to assist in financing their Atascadero Senior Apartment Project. [City Manager] Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report. 40 CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 7 of 10 15 . PUBLIC COMMENT George Moylan SLO City Housing Authority spoke about the TEFRA Hearing and why it is necessary. Eric Greening spoke about the need for a safe pedestrian crossing near this project on EI Camino Real given the increase in the senior population at this site. Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt the Draft Resolution allowing the Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo to issue additional tax-exempt bonds to assist in financing their Atascadero Senior Apartment Project. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2005- 081) C. MANAGEMENT: 1. City Council Strategic Initiative — Improve the City's Financial Condition — Community Education Program and Report on Survey Results ■ Fiscal Impact: An additional $60,000 appropriation. Sales tax collection in FY 04-05 is expected to be $3,600,000. A '/4 cent increase would yield the City an additional $900,000 in revenues, and a '/2 cent increase would yield $1,800,000. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Direct staff to continue with public education efforts; and, 2. Appropriate an additional $60,000 from the General Fund Reserve to fund public education initiatives; and, 3. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the Lew Edwards Group for a public information program. [City Manager] Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT Ann Ketcherside questioned the scope of the survey and the number of times taxes have been raised since the last election. Eric Greening stated his reasons for the City not entering into an agreement with the Lew Edwards Group, and indicated he would like to see an open forum format led by the city on where the money comes from, where it goes and what the constraints are. CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 8 of 10 16 Daphne Fahsing asked how the survey participants were picked, and stated her opinion that the proposed public education is really convincing citizens to agree with what the city wants. Joanne Main commended the company that did survey, stating she was included in survey and felt it was very professionally handled. She stated it is time to let this go to the voters. Ann Ketcherside stated she thinks this should go to the voters of Atascadero. Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. Council Member Luna stated that the survey was somewhat useful but he is somewhat negative on the amount of money being asked of Council to allocate towards indoctrination of the public so that a sales tax measure would pass; he therefore cannot support this. Mayor Scalise suggested a presentation at the next Council meeting from the Lew Edwards Group. MOTION: By Mayor Scalise to direct staff to continue the public education efforts by appropriating an additional $60,000 from the General Fund Reserve to fund a public education interest initiative; and, to authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the Lew Edwards Group for a public information program. Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Pacas to go to alternative #1, proceed with a public education campaign coordinated by staff, and staff come back with a budget for education. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed) D. COMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS: Mayor Scalise 1 . Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO): Attended state LAFCO convention and San Luis Obispo is doing an excellent job in identifying their land use. CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 9 of 10 17 Council Member Luna 1. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA): There is a need for project study reports for the various interchanges that are deficient in Atascadero. When projects come forward the city should be requiring funds for project study reports. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Manager City Manager Wade McKinney reported on 1) his meeting with the Director of CAL TRANS regarding project study reports for various interchanges and finding ways to shorten and reduce the cost of the process, 2) Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee will be in town on Thursday for a hurricane relief effort, and 3) Homebuilders Association public dedication will be held tomorrow. F. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Scalise adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on September 27, 2005. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerk's office: Exhibit A—Mary Chastain handout concerning memorial at Sunken Gardens Exhibit B-Council Member Pacas, letter re amnesty for second units CC Draft Minutes 09/13/05 Page 10 of 10 18 ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/25/05 5 isis � i e CITY OF A TASCADERO ' CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES Tuesday, September 27, 2005` 7:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M. Mayor Scalise called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Council Member Pacas led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Clay, Luna, Pacas, O'Malley and Mayor Scalise Absent: None Others Present: City Clerk/ Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Community Development Director Warren Frace, Police Chief John Couch, Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris and City Attorney Patrick Enright. COMMUNITY FORUM: Mary Chastain spoke to the Council concerning the creation of a veterans monument - memorial sign for the Sunken Gardens. Tahoma Hemmingway Moulder spoke in support of a veteran's memorial in Atascadero. Eric Greening stated he supports the creation of a War Memorial in Atascadero. He also spoke about energy conservation and possible was to achieve it in Atascadero. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 Page 1 of 10 19 Mayor Scalise closed the Community Forum period. Council Member Clay stated that he also supports the creation of a War Memorial in Atascadero. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve the agenda. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: Council Member Clay thanked the Atascadero community and city staff for their support of the Hurricane Katrina Relief Fund. Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley announced that the Air Pollution 'Control District will be presenting a local builder with the Pollution Prevention Recognition Award. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. July 2005 Accounts Payable and Payroll ■ Fiscal Impact: $2,048,277.66. ■ Recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and payroll vendor checks for July 2005. [Administrative Services] 2. Title 9 Planning and Zoning Tent Amendment / Zone Change 2005-0100 (City of Atascadero) ■ Fiscal Impact: Revenue neutral to the City. • Recommendations: Council: 1. Approve on second reading, by title only,draft Ordinance A-1 approving Zone Change 2005-0100 based on findings; and, 2. Approve on second reading, by title only, draft Ordinance A-2 approving Zone Change 2005-0100 based on findings. [Community Development] 3. Notice of Completion: 2004-2005 Annual Overlay Program Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council 1. Accept Granite Construction Company's work as complete; and, 2. Authorize the City Manager to sign and file the Notice of Completion. [Public Works] CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 20 Page 2 of 10 4. Atascadero Corporation Yard Relocation Award (City Bid No. 2005-030) ■ Fiscal Impact: Engineer's estimate of $1,000,000.00. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with the lowest responsible bidder for construction of the new Public Works maintenance facilities at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The amount will be determined at the bid opening on September 26, 2005. [Public Works] 5. Temporary Road Closure / Honda Avenue ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve the request from MGE Underground Inc. for the temporary closure of a portion of Honda Avenue. [Public Works] 6. Final Map 2004-0093 (Tract 2624) 9190 San Diego WaV (TTM 2004- 0052)(JRM Enterprises) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Accept Final Tract Map 2004-0093 (Tract 2624); and, 2. Accept the offer of dedication for street widening; and, 3. Authorize City Manager to enter Subdivision Improvement Agreement with applicant. [Public Works] Mayor Scalise announced that Item #A-4 has been pulled. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Pacas to approve Items #A-1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed to Item #A-2.2) (Item #A-2.1 Ordinance No. 482, Item #A-2.2 Ordinance No. 483, Item #A-6 Contract No. 2005-037) B. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Local Hazard Mitigation_Plan (LHMP) Approval ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt the -Draft Resolution, approving the Disaster Mitigation Act 2000 (DMA 2000) Local Hazard Mitigation Pian for Atascadero, California. [City Manager] Assistant to City Manager / City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. Anna Davis, URS Corporation, gave a further explanation of some of the details of the Mitigation Plan. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 Page 3 of 10 21 PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening stated that neighborhood networks should be developed for evacuation purposes. He also spoke about public protection against radiation exposure, and preparation for multiple simultaneous disasters. Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley to adopt the Draft Resolution, approving the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for Atascadero. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2005-082) 2. Marchant Avenue Condominiums: General Plan Amendment (GPA 2005- 0014) Zone Map Change (ZCH 2005-0098) Zone Text Change (ZCH 2005- 0102) Conditional Use Permit (CUP 2005-0156) Condominium Tract Map (TTM 2005-0066)(5000 Marchant Ave.)(Gearhart) • Fiscal Impact: Loss of Transient Occupancy Tax revenues of approximately $4,000.00. ■ Recommendations: Planning Commission recommends: Council: 1. Adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0042; and, 2. Adopt Resolution B approving General Plan Amendment 2005-0014 based on findings; and, 3. Introduce for first reading by title only, draft Ordinance A, approving Zone Map Change 2005-0098 based on findings; and, 4. Introduce for first reading by title only, draft Ordinance B, approving Zone Text Amendment 2005-0102 modifying PD-10 overlay district code text based on findings; and, 5. Adopt Resolution C approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2005-0156 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, 6. Adopt Resolution D approving Tentative Tract Map 2005-0066 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring. [Public Works] Deputy Community Services Director Steve McHarris gave the staff report and answered questions of Council PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening asked if there will be pedestrian access from Marchant to Hwy 41 during and after construction. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 22 Page 4 of 10 Mary Chastain, Chairperson Chamber of Commerce Board, stated they support this project as the 101/41 improvements will make this property unusable unless converted to residential. Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. Council Member Pacas commented that she is not convinced that closure of the intersection will create that big of an impact to the neighbors. She would be in favor of going through the transition of the freeway, seeing if there is an impact and then make the change. She is also concerned about the loss of Transient Occupancy Tax revenues and potential flooding in that area. MOTION: BY Mayor or Pro Tem O'Malley'Malle and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0042; and, adopt Resolution B approving General Plan Amendment 2005-0014 based on findings; and, introduce for first reading by title only, draft Ordinance A, approving Zone Map Change 2005-0098 based on findings; and, introduce for first reading by title only, draft Ordinance B, approving Zone Text Amendment 2005-0102 modifying PD-10 overlay district code text based on findings; and, adopt Resolution C approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment 2005-0156 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Resolution D approving Tentative Tract Map 2005-0066 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Pacas opposed) (Resolution Nos. 2005-083, 2005-084, 2005-085 and 2005-086) 3. West Front Village: General Plan Amendment (GPA 2003-0005) Planned Development Zone Code Text 2003-0058, Zone Change (ZCH 2003-0088) Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0108) Tentative Tract Map 2003- 0035 (8870 West Front Rd., 8760 Portola Rd.)(Shannon — West Front Properties) • Fiscal Impact: Total annual projected revenue for the City of $245,708.00. ■ Recommendations: Planning Commission recommends: Council: 1. Adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0165; and, 2. Adopt Resolution B approving General Plan Amendment 2003-0005 based on findings; and, 3. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Code Text Change 2003-0058 establishing a PD-23 overlay district based on findings; and, CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 Page 5 of 10 23 4. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B approving Zone Change 2003-0088 based on findings; and, 5. Adopt Resolution C approving Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0108) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, 6. Adopt Resolution D approving Tentative Tract Map 2003-0035 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring. [Community Development] Community Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works Director Steve Kahn and Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris gave the staff report and answered questions of Council Council Member Luna asked if there is a nexus for the added conditions from the Planning Commission. City Attorney Patrick Enright stated that there is sufficient legal nexus for the additional conditions. Jon Knight, RRM Design Group, applicant's representative, reviewed the proposed project, handed out additional proposed amendments to the conditions (Exhibit A) and answered questions of the Council. Paul Matos, Omni Means, reviewed the traffic issues associated with this project and answered questions of the Council Richard Shannon Applicant, addressed some of the issues brought u b the Council pp P Y 9 including the access easement agreement with the neighbors, payment for traffic signals, fire fund contribution and signage. Mr. Shannon answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT Richard Mullen stated his concerns regarding traffic impacts on Santa Rosa Road, the 50 foot freeway signs, the 3-way stop sign at West Front and Portola, and the signal at the intersection of West Front and Santa Rosa Road. Denise Morey, Portola Road resident, stated she is unhappy about the project; traffic is her biggest concern. She asked Council to proceed with the PSR as soon as possible and indicated she agreed with Mr. Mullen concerning the proposed signs. Mike Healey, Coromar resident, expressed his concerns with the traffic impacts this project will have on this neighborhood. He explained the traffic problems that already exist in the area and how this development will only increase the problems. Robert Gobrum stated that this is an emotional issue and urged Council to plan wisely and consider all the ramifications when approving a project. . CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 24 Page 6 of 10 Dave Smith stated his property backs up to this proposed project and requested a landscape buffer to screen his property from the project. He also expressed his concern for the safety of children with the increased traffic. Mr. Smith stated he is opposed to the project. Jerry Holland explained why Atascadero needs more hotel rooms to compete with Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo. Jed Nickolson, attorney representing Hank Monardo, an adjoining property owner, explained why the Council should not made a decision on this issue tonight stating that the alternate plan before the Council tonight, was not included in the agenda packet, was not shared with the adjacent property owners, was not considered by the Planning Commission, and not addressed in the mitigated negative declaration. In addition he stated that there were no good faith negotiations between his client and Mr. Shannon until yesterday. Jeff Wilshusen, President of the Atascadero Police Association, stated that the Council has the full support of the Police Association for this project. Hal Carden expressed his support of this project by listing several benefits of this proposal, including reducing the density of the current zoning for less neighborhood impact, improvement to traffic flow, bed tax and sales tax revenue, and improvement of the property. Donna Healey, Coromar resident, said that she supports the development of the hotel, but is opposed to the rest of the project as it will damage their neighborhood with increased density and traffic. Travis Kinney stated that he is not happy about the growth of Atascadero but he supports this project as it improves this vacant lot and it is being developed by local j people. Mike Ryan, real estate broker, he explained that he introduced the hotel people involved in this project to the developer, and they have stuck with the project for the last year because Atascadero is a viable market. Mr. Ryan said that he supports this project. Mayor Scalise closed the Public Comment period. Mayor Scalise recessed the hearing at 9:53 p.m. Mayor Scalise called the meeting back to order at 10:03 p.m. Mayor Scalise asked the City Attorney to address the concerns mentioned by the public. Jon Knight addressed the concerns mentioned by the public He also stated that the applicant has agreed with Mr. Smith to install a landscape buffer on his property. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 Page 7 of 10 25 There was Council consensus on the memo of amendments to the conditions of approval submitted by RRM. Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley suggested adding a condition that the applicant will agree to offer $1,500 to Mr. Smith for landscape buffering on his property. Mayor Scalise stated she would like to delete Conditions 19-A and 12-A on page 165, stating that funding for fire protection facilities is only a concept only at this time and no fees are in place. She believes it is unfair to put this burden on this project. Council Member Luna disagreed with Mayor Scalise and stated the fees could be capped. Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley indicated he would like to see these fees implemented at some point, but is reluctant to do it this prematurely. He asked staff if a portion of the TOT taxes could be diverted to areas that must be mitigated in the future. Council Member Pacas agreed with Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley and asked if Council would be willing to make a dedication that some of the revenues from this project will go to improving the fire facilities. There was Council consensus to delete Conditions of Approval 19-A and 12-A. The Council discussed the issue of two 50-foot pylon signs. . 0 Council Member Luna stated he supports the existing ordinance which allows for one pole sign with a minimum height necessary for effective visibility. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Pacas to go along with the developers recommendation for two 50-foot or less signs for required visibility, depending on how staff work with them. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed) Council Member Luna stated a Project Study Report is crucial he would like to see a condition requiring some contribution from the developer. There was no consensus to request developer to contribute to a PSR. Council Member Pacas referred to the letter from Shannon and Rossi and suggested moving item #6, requesting that the Council approve Alternative B-2 as a back up to a successful negotiation with neighbors, to position #1. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 26 Page 8 of 10 , MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0165; and, adopt Resolution B approving General Plan Amendment 2003-0005 based on findings; and, introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Code Text Change 2003-0058 establishing a PD-23 overlay district based on findings; and, introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B approving Zone Change 2003-0088 based on findings; and, adopt Resolution C approving Master Plan of Development (CUP 2003-0108) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Resolution D approving Tentative Tract Map 2003-0035 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring with the following amendments: 1. Applicant will agree to pay up to $1,500 to Mr. Dave Smith for landscape buffering on his property. 2. Delete Conditions 19-A (CUP 2003-0180) and 12-A (TTM 2003-0035). 3. Adopt Exhibit B-2 and the additional conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit and Tract Map. 4. Mitigation Measure AES-5: Two 50-foot pylon signs shall be allowed. 5. CUP Conditions of Approval 36 and 37 and Tentative Tract Map Conditions of Approval 35 and 35: West Front Lane widths shall be approved by the City Engineer. 6. Acceptance of the memo of amendments to the conditions of approval submitted by FIRM, but moving request #6 to the #1 position to read: Council to approve Alternative B-2 as a backup to a successful negotiation with the neighbors. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed) (Resolution Nos. 2005-087, 2005-088, 2005-089 and 2005-090) C. COMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS: Mayor Pro Tem O'Malley 1 . Air Pollution Control District (APCD): Meets tomorrow, one of local builders will be receiving an award. 2. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC): Celebrating its 40th anniversary. Council Member Pacas 1 . City / Schools Committee: Next meeting will be October 12th; joint facility usage is on the agenda and the use of busses for evacuation. CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 Page 9 of 10 27 D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Attorney City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that there will be a dinner reception at the League of California Cities meeting on October 6th E. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Scalise adjourned the meeting at 10:35 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on October 11, 2005. MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerk's office: Exhibit A—John Knight, proposed amendments to conditions,West Front CC Draft Minutes 09/28/05 28 Page 10 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A-3 DATE: 10/25/05 ro i9is ® 19 a Atascadero City Council Staff Report- Public Works Department Temporary Road Closure Los Osos Road RECOMMENDATION: Council approve a request from the Public Works Department for the temporary road closure of Los Osos Road for two weeks to complete a culvert replacement project. DISCUSSION: Background: An old corrugated metal pipe culvert under Los Osos Road is damaged and must be replaced before further erosion and potential failure of a portion of the road occurs. Bids are currently being secured for the construction of this project. Analysis: The project is anticipated to take place October 26th through November 11t", 2005. The entire length of this culvert, which is located near 8275 Los Osos, must be replaced. This will require full closure of the road at this location. Closure of this section of road will not disrupt access to any homes in this neighborhood. Conclusion: Staff recommends that Council approve a request by the Public Works Department for the temporary closure of Los Osos Road for approximately two weeks during this culvert replacement project. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENT: Road Closure map 29 w EXHIBIT A ROAD CLOSURE LOS OSOS ROAD CULVERT PROJECT 1 Itoz .ROAD CLOSED DETOUR SIGH +y a w, ^ o i _ w , t ' e i 30 ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 10/25/05 WI® w s l i9is a 1979 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Public Works Department Atascadero Corporation Yard Relocation Project Rejection of All Bids (City Bid No. 2005-030) RECOMMENDATION: Council reject all bids for the Atascadero Corporation Yard Relocation project. DISCUSSION: Background: The new Recreation Center building is planned for the space currently occupied by the Public Works Corporation Yard. Plans have been prepared to construct new facilities at the Wastewater Treatment Plant to accommodate all Public Works Operations staff. This new facility will consist of a 20,000 square foot maintenance facility that will include office space, break-room and locker-room facilities, vehicle maintenance shop, storage rooms and covered vehicle parking. $1,000,000.00 was allocated in the City's FY 2005-2007 budget for this project. The project was advertised from August 25, 2005 through October 6, 2005. The bids were reviewed for accuracy and compliance with the City of Atascadero bidding requirements. The low bid for the project was $1,589,920.00, submitted by Santa Margarita Construction Company. Analysis: The Engineers Estimate for the project was $875,000.00. The low bid for the Atascadero Corporation Yard Relocation project was $1,589,920.00, which is more than the allocated funds for the project. Construction prices have risen significantly since the initial conceptual development and budgeting for this project. Conclusion: Since the additional funding is not available, staff recommends rejecting all bids. If all bids are rejected, staff will work with the project Architect to reduce the scope of the project and re-bid individual elements of the project to conform to the budget constraints. 31 ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 10/25/05 FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURES- Desi n $75,000 Construction (Original Engineers Estimate $875,000 Inspection/Testing / Construction Administration $25,000 Contingency $25,000 Total Estimated Expenditure: 1 $1,000,000 REVENUES Budgeted Project Funds $1,000,000 Total Revenues: $1,000,000 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the staff recommendations as stated in the staff report. 2. Award the contract to the qualified low-bidder and allocate additional funding. ATTACHMENT: Bid Summary 32 Citof Office of the City Clerk BID SUMMARY TO: Public Works Department FROM: Patti Deirmenjian, Deputy City Clerk BID NO.: 2005-030 OPENED: 2:00 p.m.— 10/6/05 PROJECT: Atascadero Corporation Yard Relocation Four (4) bids were received and opened today, as follows: Bidder Amount Newton Construction P.O. Box 3260 $2,063,000.00 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Rarig Construction, Inc. 4540 Broad Street $1,940,183.00 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Santa Margarita Construction Corp P.O. Box 357 $1,589,920.00 Templeton, CA Wysong Construction Co. 8720-B El Camino Real $1,771,100.00 Atascadero, CA 93422 33 ITEM NUMBER: A-5 DATE: 10/25/05 r. • .moo X8 a ia7e �A��ERoi/ Atascadero City Council Staff Report City Manager's Office Employee Salary Schedule and Modification to Labor Organization Agreements RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Approve modifications to labor agreements for Service Employees International Union, Local 620 (SEIU) and Mid-Management and Professional Employees; and, 2. Approve Addendum to City Manager Employment Agreement; and, 3. Approve the revised Salary Schedule, effective July 1, 2005. DISCUSSION: The City has current labor agreements with the Atascadero Police Association, Atascadero Firefighter's Association, and the Mid-Management and Professional Employees Bargaining Unit. The City has been negotiating with SEIU since February 2005 and agreement has finally been reached. The Mid-Management and Professional Employees Bargaining Unit have agreed to amend their approved MOU to reflect the changes being made to the SEIU MOU. The amendments to the MOU language are as follows: 1. The term of the agreements are for four years, from July 1, 2005- June 30, 2009. 2. COLA increases are 4% in year one (05-06), 3% in year two (06-07), 3% in year three (07-08), 3% in year four (08-09). COLA's are effective July 1 of each year. 3. 2.5% inequity adjustment in the first year for positions out 5% or more from survey city average, effective July 1, 2005 4. 2.5% inequity adjustment in the second year for positions out 7% or more from survey city average, July 1, 2005. 35 ITEM NUMBER: A-5 DATE: 10/25/05 5. The PERS pension plan will be amended to 2.5% @ 55 for all miscellaneous employees effective July 1, 2007. Employee's contribution for their share of the cost shall be 2.15% of payroll, approximately 65% of the cost of the benefit. 6. The "me too" clause will be removed from the MOU. 7. The City will provide SEILI a survey of comparable positions of the cities within San Luis Obispo County in March 2007 and March 2008. If Atascadero's average salary is 5% less than the County average, the City agrees to reopen negotiations relative to salary. An addendum to the City Manager's contract is included, providing for enhancements to deferred compensation benefits. Annually, the City adopts a Salary Schedule. The salary schedule was adopted in June 2005, however, the attached schedule reflects the changes incorporated into the new employment agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs for the proposal are contained within the Annual Operating Budget. ATTACHMENTS: 1. MOU for SEIU 2. MOU for Mid-Management and Professional Employees 3. Addendum to City Manager Employment Agreement 4. Revised Salary Schedule July 1, 2005 36 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE LOCAL 620 SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION R ATASCADE O CHAPTER AND CITY OF ATASCADERO JULY 19 2005 TO JUNE 30, 2009 37 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 0 LOCAL 620 SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION ATASCADERO CHAPTER JULY 1, 2005 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLEI-GENERAL PROVISIONS...............................................................................................................1 SECTION1.1 PREAMBLE..................................................................................................................................1 SECTION1.2 RECOGNITION............................................................................................................................l SECTION1.3 SEVERANCE................................................................................................................................2 SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT....................................................................................................................2 SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT......................................................................................................2 SECTION 1.6 GENERAL PROVISIONS............................................................................................................2 ARTICLE II-RESPECTIVE RIGHTS.................................................................................................................4 SECTION2.1 UNION RIGHTS...........................................................................................................................4 SECTION2.2 CITY RIGHTS..............................................................................................................................6 SECTION 2.3 PEACEFUL PERFORMANCE.....................................................................................................6 SECTION 2.4 RESPECTIVE RIGHTS................................................................................................................7 ARTICLE III-HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME.......................................................................................8 SECTION3.1 HOURS OF WORK......................................................................................................................8 SECTION3.2 OVERTIME..................................................................................................................................8 SECTION3.3 CALLBACK PAY.........................................................................................................................9 SECTION3.4 STANDBY TIME.........................................................................................................................9 SECTION 3.5 PATCHING/PAVING WORK......................................................................................................9 ARTICLEIV-PAY PROVISIONS....................................................................................................................10 SECTION4.1 SALARY.....................................................................................................................................10 SECTION 4.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY...............................................................................................11 SECTION4.3 RETIREMENT............................................................................................................................11 SECTION 4.4 SICK LEAVE/STAY WELL PLAN...........................................................................................12 SECTION 4.5 VACATION LEAVE..................................................................................................................12 SECTION4.6 HOLIDAYS.................................................................................................................................13 SECTION4.7 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE.........................................................................................................13 SECTION 4.8 MILITARY LEAVE....................................................................................................................14 SECTION4.9 WORK GLOVES........................................................................................................................14 SECTION 4.10 WORK SHOES..........................................................................................................................14 SECTION 4.11 SAFETY GLASSES...................................................................................................................14 SECTION 4.12 COMPUTER PURCHASE.........................................................................................................15 SECTION 4.13 CERTIFICATION......................................................................................................................15 ARTICLE V-HEALTH AND WELFARE.........................................................................................................16 SECTION 5.1 HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.......................................................................................16 SECTION5.2 UNIFORMS ................................................................................................................................17 SECTION5.3 PROBATION..............................................................................................................................17 ARTICLEVI-CLOSING PROVISIONS...........................................................................................................18 SECTION 6.1 COMPARATIVE SALARY AND BENEFITS ..............................................._..........................18 SECTION 6.2 REOPENER................................................................................................................................18 SECTION6.3 TERM..........................................................................................................................................18 SECTION 6.4 SIGNATURES............................................................................................................................18 38 ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION 1.1 PREAMBLE This Memorandum of Understanding is made and entered into between the City of Atascadero, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and the Local 620 Service Employees International Union Atascadero Chapter,hereinafter referred to as the"Union"pursuant to California Government Code Section 3500, et seq. and the City's Employer - Employee Relations Policy. The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is the establishment of wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The City and Union agree that the provisions of this MOU shall be applied equally to all employees covered herein without favor or discrimination because of race, creed, color, sex, age, national origin,political or religious affiliations or association memberships. Whenever the masculine gender is used in this MOU, it shall be understood to include the feminine gender. SECTION 1.2 RECOGNITION a. The City of Atascadero recognizes the Union as the recognized and exclusive representative for the following classifications: • Account Clerk I Engineering Technician II • System Administrator • Account Clerk II • Finance Technician 0 Technical Support • Administrative Assistant 0 GIS Analyst I Specialist • Administrative Secretary • Maintenance Leadworker • WWTP Operator I Administrative Support • Maintenance Worker I • WWTP Operator II Assistant 0 Maintenance Worker II • WWTP Operator III • Assistant Planner 0 Office Assistant I • WWTP Operator in Training • Associate Planner 0 Office Assistant II • Zoo Facilities Maintenance • Building Maintenance • Office Assistant III Technician Specialist • Plans Examiner • Zookeeper I • Building Inspector I . Recreation Coordinator • ZookeeperII • Building Inspector II . Registered Veterinary • Central Receptionist Technician • Engineering Technician I • Senior Zookeeper b. This recognition is exclusive of management employees,confidential employees and temporary employees. c. The City agrees to meet and confer and otherwise deal exclusively with the Union on all matters relating to the scope of representation under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act(Government Code Section 3500, et seq.), and as provided under the City's Employer-Employee Relations Policy. 1 e SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page i 39 SECTION 1.3 SEVERANCE a. If any provision of the Agreement should be found invalid, unconstitutional, unlawful, or unenforceable by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted constitutional or legislative provision shall be severed, and all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the duration of the Agreement. b. In the event that any provision of the MOU should be found invalid,unconstitutional,unlawful or unenforceable, the City and the Union agree to meet and confer in a timely manner in an attempt to negotiate a substitute provision. Such negotiations shall apply only to the severed provision of the Agreement and shall not in any way modify or impact the remaining provisions of the existing MOU. SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT a. The City and the Union agree that to the extent that any provision addressing wages,hours,and terms and conditions of employment negotiable under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act found outside this MOU and are in conflict thereof, this MOU shall prevail. b. If, during the term of the MOU,the parties should mutually agree to modify,amend,or alter the provisions of this MOU in any respect, any such change shall be effective only if and when reduced to writing and executed by the authorized representatives of the City and the Union. Any such changes validly made shall become part of this MOU and subject to its terms. SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT a. All wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment that are negotiable subjects of bargaining under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act,including those set in this MOU,shall remain in full force and effect during the term of this MOU unless changed by mutual agreement. b. The City will abide by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act where and when it applies to the Union. SECTION 1.6 GENERAL PROVISIONS The parties agree to meet and confer with respect to any subject or matter within the scope of representation upon request. Provided, however, that any changes which fall within the scope of representation shall be by mutual agreement. Except as set forth in this Memorandum of Understanding, and unless the Union agrees to reopen negotiations on a particular bargaining subject,the parties agree that there shall be no changes during the life of this MOU in the wage rates,benefits,or other terms and conditions of employment subject SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 2 40 to the meet and confer process. In the event any new practice, subject or matter arises during the term of this agreement which is within the scope of representation and an action is proposed by the City,the Union shall be afforded all possible advance notice and shall have the right to meet and confer upon request. In the case of an emergency and, in the absence of an agreement on such a proposed action,the City reserves it's lawful management rights to take any action(s)deemed necessary and the Union reserves its rights to take any lawful action deemed necessary. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 3 41 ARTICLE II - RESPECTIVE RIGHTS SECTION 2.1 UNION RIGHTS The Union shall have the following rights and responsibilities: a. Reasonable advance notice of any City ordinance,rule,resolution,or regulation directly relating to matters within the scope of representation proposed to be adopted by the City Council. b. Reasonable use of one bulletin board at each work site for employees covered by this MOU. c. The right to payroll deductions made for payments or organization dues and for City approved programs. d. The use of City facilities for regular,normal and lawful Union activities,providing that approval of the City Manager or his/her designee has been obtained. e. Reasonable access to employee work locations for officers of the Union and.their officially designated representatives for the purpose of processing grievances or contacting members of the organization concerning business within the scope of representation. Access shall be restricted so as not to interfere with the normal operations of any department or with established safety or security requirements. f. The City will give reasonable notice to the Union if it intends to contract out the functions currently performed by employees within the Unit. Upon request, the City will meet with the Union to explain the reason for the decision to contract out and to solicit Union views on the proposal. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to limit the rights of the City Council to contract out work in its sole discretion. g. Agency Shop/Fair Share. The City shall notify the union when employees are newly assigned into the unit. The notice shall include the employee's name, Department and division and the date of entry into the unit. Employees transferred or hired into the unit subsequent to the effective date of an Agency Shop/Fair Share approval shall have thirty days from the date of their entry into the unit to comply with its terms. Unless a unit employee has: a)voluntarily submitted to the City an effective dues deduction request; b) individually made direct financial arrangements satisfactory to the Union as evidenced by notice of the same from the Union to the City; or c) qualified for exemption upon religious grounds as provided below,upon notice from the Union the City shall process SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 4 42 a mandatory agency fee payroll deduction in the appropriate amount and forward that amount to the Union. The amount of the fee to be charged shall be determined by the union subject to applicable law; and shall therefore not exceed the normal periodic membership dues,initiation fees,and general assessments applicable to union members. As to "core" fee-payers, the agency fee charged shall not reflect expenditures which the Courts have determined to be non-chargeable. The union shall comply with applicable law regarding disclosure and allocation of its expenses and notice to employees of their right to object and pay only the "core fee". The Union shall make available an administrative appeals procedure to unit employees who object to the calculation of the "core fee". Such procedure shall provide for an impartial decision by a representative of the State Mediation & Conciliation Service (SMCS). Such appeals may be consolidated and shall be heard not less often than once per year. A copy of such procedure shall be made available upon request by the Union to unit employees. The City shall promptly remit to the Union all monies deducted under this Article, accompanied by a list of employees for whom such deductions have been made. The City shall make every reasonable effort to distribute to each new employee in the unit a letter, supplied by the union, which describes the agency fee obligation. Any of the above-described payment obligations shall be processed by the City in the usual and customary manner and time frames utilized for dues deductions. Employees on an unpaid leave of absence or temporarily assigned out of the unit for an entire pay period or more shall have agency shop fees suspended. Fee deductions shall have the same priority as dues deductions in the current hierarch for partially compensated pay periods. Religious Exemption from Agency Fee Obligations a) Any employee who is a member of a religious body whose traditional tenets or teachings include objections to joining or financially supporting employee organizations shall not be required to meet the above agency fee obligations, but shall pay be means of mandatory payroll deduction an amount equal to the agency fee to a non-religious,non- labor charitable organization exempt from taxation under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code,as designated by the employee from a list provided by the Union showing authorized deduction agencies as agreed upon between the City and the Union. b) To qualify for the religious exemption the employee must provide to the Union, with a SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 5 43 copy to the City, a written statement of objection, along with verifiable evidence of membership in a religious body as described above. The Union will implement the change in status within thirty days or alternatively,notify the employee and the City that the requested exemption is not valid. SECTION 2.2 CITY RIGHTS a. The authority of the City includes, but is not limited to the exclusive right to determine the standards of service; determine the procedures and standards of selection for employment and promotion; direct its employees; take disciplinary action for "just cause", relieve its employees from duty because of lack of work or for other legitimate reason; maintain the efficiency of governmental operations; determine the methods, staffing and personnel by which governmental operations are to be conducted;determine the content of job classifications; take all necessary actions to carry out its mission in emergencies; exercise complete control and discretion over its organizations and the technology of performing its work;provided,however,that the exercise and retention of such rights does not preclude employees or their representatives from consulting or raising grievances over the consequences or impact that decisions on these matters may have on wage, hours and other terms of employment. SECTION 2.3 PEACEFUL PERFORMANCE a. The parties to this MOU recognize and acknowledge that the services performed by the City employees covered by this Agreement are essential to the public health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City of Atascadero. Union agrees that under no circumstances will the Union recommend, encourage,cause or promote its members to initiate,participate in,nor will any member of the bargaining unit take part in,any strike, sit-down, stay-in, sick-out, slow-down, or picketing(hereinafter collectively referred to as "work-stoppage) in any office or department of the City, nor to curtail any work or restrict any production, or interfere with any operation of the City. In the event of any such work stoppage by any member of the bargaining unit,the City shall not be required to negotiate on the merits of any dispute which may have risen to such work stoppage until said work stoppage has ceased. b. In the event of any work stoppage,during the term of this MOU,whether by the Union or by any member of the bargaining unit, the Union by its officers, shall immediately declare in writing and publicize that such work stoppage is illegal and unauthorized,and further direct its members in writing to cease the said conduct and resume work. Copies of such written notices shall be served upon the City. If in the event of any work stoppage the Union promptly and in good faith performs the obligations of this paragraph, and providing the Union has not otherwise authorized, permitted or encouraged such work stoppage,the Union shall not be liable for any damages caused by SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 6 44 the violation of this provision. However,the City shall have the right to discipline,up to and including discharge,any employee who instigates,participates in,or gives leadership to, any work stoppage activity herein prohibited,and the City shall also have the right to seek full legal redress, including damages, against any such employees. SECTION 2.4 RESPECTIVE RIGHTS The parties agree that during the term of this agreement,upon a request by either party,they shall reopen negotiations on changes to the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Provided, however,that the City shall not modify the Personnel Rules and Regulations subject to meet and confer without mutual agreement. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 7 45 ARTICLE III - - HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME SECTION 3.1 HOURS OF WORK a. Work Period The normal work period shall be seven(7)days with a maximum non-overtime of forty(40) hours. b. Shift Change Notification The City shall give employees reasonable, but at a minimum, a 72-hour notice of routine shift changes. Emergency shift changes shall be made on an as needed basis. c. Rest Periods Rest periods will normally be provided to employees at the rate of fifteen (15)minutes for each four (4) hours worked. Insofar as practical rest period shall be in the middle of each work period. Rest periods cannot be used in conjunction with meal periods, nor may rest periods be taken during the employee's first or last hour of work. Any employee required to work more than sixteen (16) hours within a twenty-four hour period shall be entitled to an eight hour rest period prior to returning to work. If any portion of the eight-hour rest period occurs during the employees' regularly scheduled work hours, the employee shall receive normal compensation for that time.This section shall not apply in the case of emergencies. d. Missed Rest Periods and Mealtime Regular fifteen-minute rest periods are paid time,therefore nothing in this section provides for or implies any additional compensation or benefits if a rest period is not taken. SECTION 3.2 OVERTIME a. Rate Overtime, shall be compensated at the rate of time and one-half the regular rate of pay. All overtime shall be recorded and paid in the following manner: 1 to 15 minutes, overtime compensation- 1/a hour 16 to 30 minutes, overtime compensation-1/2 hour 31 to 45 minutes, overtime compensation—3/a hour 46 to 60 minutes, overtime compensation— 1 hour SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 8 46 b. Hours Paid Overtime shall be paid after forty(40)hours worked in a work period. Paid time off shall be considered time worked for overtime purposes. c. Compensatory Time (CT) Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, employees may be granted CT for overtime credit computed at time and one-half at the mutual convenience of the City and the employee.Employees may accumulate a maximum of eighty(80)hours in their CT account. d. Scheduling Compensatory Time Requests to use CT shall be granted with due regard for operational necessity such as staffing levels. SECTION 3.3 CALLBACK PAY Employees who are called to duty at a time they are not working, and not on standby duty, shall be compensated a minimum compensation of two (2)hours at time and one-half rate of pay. SECTION 3.4 STANDBY TIME a. Employees assigned standby duty shall receive thirty-five dollars($35.00)for each day of standby duty. b. Call-out While on Stand-by Employees who are called to duty at a time they are not working shall be compensated a minimum of two (2) hours at straight time. Employees working in excess of one hour and twenty minutes once called back shall receive time and one-half pay for hours worked in excess of one hour and twenty minutes, or two hours straight time whichever is greater. SECTION 3.5 PATCHING/PAVING WORK The City shall make a reasonable attempt to schedule patching work during days/times when temperatures are not expected to exceed 100 degrees. It is mutually understood that employees working with paving contractors must adhere to the contractors' work schedules. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 9 47 ARTICLE IV - PAY PROVISIONS SECTION 4.1 SALARY This two (2) year agreement shall provide salary increases according to the following formula and schedule: Year 1 (effective July 1, 2005)—4% COLA Year 2 (effective Julyl, 2006)—3% COLA, Year 3 (effective July 1, 2007)—3% COLA Year 4(effective July 1, 2008)—3% COLA The following monthly salaries become effective July 1, 2005 Account Clerk I 7 2,404.95 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 Account Clerk II 11 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 Administrative Assistant 20 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 Administrative Secretary 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Administrative Support Assistant 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Assistant Planner 22 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 Associate Planner 28 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 4,628.26 4,880.67 Building Inspector I 18 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 Building Inspector II 22 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 Building Maintenance Specialist 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Central Receptionist 11 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 Enaineering Technician I 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Engineering Technician H 18 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 Finance Technician 14 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 GIS Analyst 25 3,730.86 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 Maintenance Leadworker 24 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 Maintenance Worker l 8 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 Maintenance Worker Il 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Office Assistant I 5 2,290.43 2,404.95 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 Office Assistant H 9 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 Office Assistant III 11 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 Plans Examiner 27 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 Recreation Coordinator 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Registered Veterinary Technician 12 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 Senior Zookee er 19 3,222.86 3,384.00 3,553.20 3,730.86 3,917.40 System Administrator III 30 4,216.11 4,426.91 4,648.26 4,880.67 5,124.70 Technical Support Specialist 14 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 WWTP Operator I 16 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 WWTP Operator II 20 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 WWTP Operator III 24 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 WWTP Operator in Training 11 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 Zoo Facilities Maintenance Tech 8 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 Zookee er I 8 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 Zookee er Il 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 10 48 a. Movement between steps shall be at twelve-month intervals and subject to satisfactory performance. The initial step movement after hiring, however, shall be after twelve months or after completion of probation,whichever occurs later. Employees may receive step increases at a period of less than twelve (12) months upon recommendation of the department head and approval of the City Manager. b. An employee who is promoted shall receive a salary increase of at least one step (5%). Therefore, the employee shall be placed on step "A", or that step which produces at least a one step salary increase. c. The parties agree that,the survey jurisdictions for unit classifications under this M.O.U. shall be the cities of Arroyo Grande,Atascadero,Grover Beach,Morro Bay,Paso Robles,Pismo Beach, and San Luis Obispo. d. A 2.5%inequity adjustment is reflected in the previous salary table for positions 5%below the survey city average taken in April 2005. The Recreation Coordinator position is more than 7% below average as of April 2005 and this position will receive an addition inequity adjustment of 2.5% on July 1, 2006. e. The City will provide SEIU a survey of comparable positions of the cities within San Luis Obispo County in March 2007 and March 2008. If Atascadero's average salary is 5%less than the county average, the City agrees to reopen negotiations relative to salary. SECTION 4.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY a. Employees shall be reimbursed up to $400.00 per fiscal year for books, tuition and related educational expenses for attending college or other professional training, providing the coursework is job-related, and the employee received a passing grade. SECTION 4.3 RETIREMENT a. Employees will be provided retirement benefits through the California Public Employees Retirement System (Ca1PERS) pursuant to the 2% @ 55 formula including the "single highest year" and the City will pay the employee contribution of seven (7%) percent. Effective November 2003, the City shall commence paying and reporting the value of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) as described in Resolution No. 2003-058. b. Effective July 1, 2007,employees will be provided retirement benefits pursuant to the 2.5% @ 55 formula. Employees will pay 1% towards the employee contribution and 1.15% towards the employer's contribution for a total contribution of 2.15% of payroll. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 11 49 SECTION 4.4 SICK LEAVE/STAY WELL PLAN a. Sick leave accumulates at a rate of eight (8) hours per month. There is no limit to the accumulation. b. Employees with 384 or more hours of accumulated sick leave shall be eligible for the Stay Well Bonus. The Stay Well Bonus will be implemented as follows: 1. The sick leave pay-off will occur during the 52-week period beginning the first day after the second pay period in October and ending on the last day of the second pay period in October of the following year after an employee has accumulated and maintained 384 hours sick leave. 2. Once the eligibility requirements have been met, an employee may opt to receive a pay-off equal to one-third(1/3)of the unused annual allotment of sick leave. (The annual allotment is 95.94 hours). Checks will be prepared by December 15 of each year. 3. In the event an employee covered by this agreement donates up to 12 days of sick leave in any one year, to the Employee Sick Leave Bank, it shall not count against the 48 days accumulation for eligibility to receive the incentive payoff for that year c. In any calendar year, an employee may use accrued sick leave,up to the amount earned during six months of employment,to attend to the illness of a child,parent, or spouse of the employee. In extenuating circumstances, sick leave to be used for dependent care may be requested by the employee to their Department Head,who shall make a recommendation to the City Manager for final approval. SECTION 4.5 VACATION LEAVE a. Paid vacation leave accrues from the date of hire on a bi-weekly basis and increases after completion of the required years of service as follows: Years of Service Accrual Rate Less than 3 years 10 days/yr or 3.08 hrs/pp 3 years completed 12 days/yr or 3.69 hrs/pp 5 years completed 14 days/yr or 4.31 hrs/pp 7 years completed 16 days/yr or 4.92 hrs/pp 9 years completed 18 days/yr or 5.54 hrs/pp 11 years completed 20 days/yr or 6.15 hrs.pp SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 12 50 The above schedule is based on full-time employment. Regular part-time employees shall receive vacation accrual on a pro-rated basis. b. Employees shall be entitled to vacation leave consistent with the City Personnel Rules and Regulations. c. It is agreed and understood that the taking of vacation shall be as scheduled by the Department Head subject to the needs of the City. SECTION 4.6 HOLIDAYS (a) The City shall recognize the following days as official City holidays. Holiday Day Observed New Year's Day January 1 Martin Luther King,Jr. Birthday 3rd Monday in January Lincoln's Birthday 2nd Monday in February Washington's Birthday 3rd Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Independence Day July 4th Labor Day 1 st Monday in September Veteran's Day November 11 Thanksgiving Day 4th Thursday in November Day After Thanksgiving Friday after Thanksgiving Christmas Day December 25 "Floating" Holiday Off As Scheduled; Accrues January 1 a. Each unit member employed by the City as of January 1st of each year shall be eligible for one floating holiday (8 hours). Accrual shall be pro-rated for employees in permanent part-time positions. Floating holidays must have prior department approval and shall be consistent with the efficient operation of the department. The floating holiday may be used between January 1 and December 31 of each year. b. All employees who are covered under this contract and are required by their supervisor to work on a City holiday shall be paid time and one-half 11/2 their base hourly rate for the hours worked on the holiday, plus compensation for the holiday. SECTION 4.7 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Employees shall be granted bereavement leave pursuant to the City Personnel Rules and Regulations in the event of death of his/her spouse,child, step-child,parent,grandparent,grandchild,son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, brother-in-law, sister-in-law or SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 13 51 significant other. SECTION 4.8 MILITARY LEAVE Military leave shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of State and Federal law. All employees entitled to military leave shall give the appointing power an opportunity within the limits of military regulations to determine when such leave shall be taken. SECTION 4.9 WORK GLOVES The City shall continue to provide employees with leather palmed work gloves. The City shall issue regulations establishing reasonable standards for provision of the gloves,replacement of gloves,and the maximum number of gloves made available during any fiscal year. SECTION 4.10 WORK SHOES The City shall contribute One-Hundred and Forty-five ($145.00)Dollars per fiscal year for the purchase of appropriate footwear to employees in the following positions: • Building Maintenance Specialist • Building Inspector I&II • Building Inspector/Plans Examiner • Maintenance Leadworker • Maintenance Worker I&11 • Registered Veterinary Technician • WWTP Operator I,II, III • WWTP Operator-in-Training • Zoo Facilities Maintenance Technician • Zookeeper I&II Proof of purchase is required. Once purchased, such appropriate footwear must be worn while working. SECTION 4.11 SAFETY GLASSES The City shall provide safety glasses and safety prescription glasses, in compliance with OSHA standards,for those employees required to wear them. Maximum reimbursement shall be$250.00. As approved by the Department Head, the City shall replace prescription glasses as needed due to SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 14 52 prescription changes or if the glasses are damaged while being used in the course of duties. If the glasses are damaged due to the negligence of the employee, he/she shall be required to pay the replacement cost. The employee is responsible for obtaining necessary prescriptions. SECTION 4.12 COMPUTER PURCHASE The City agrees to develop an Employee Computer Purchase Program. 'The City agrees to allow employees to purchase hardware and work-compatible software using the City's government discount. All costs shall be the responsibility of the employee. SECTION 4.13 CERTIFICATION The City shall continue its practice of providing reasonable work time and payment for obtaining/maintaining job-related certifications. Travel expenses will be paid pursuant to Section VII of the City's Purchasing Policy. Prior Department Head approval is required. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 15 53 0 ARTICLE V- HEALTH AND WELFARE SECTION 5.1 HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE a. For unit members who elect to have"Family"coverage,the City shall pay a total of$768.66 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependents for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical,dental,vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent(50%) of increased costs for dependents based upon HMO plan costs. b. For unit members who elect to have `Employee +1" coverage, the City shall pay a total of $685.82 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependent for the term of this agreement.City shall pay for increased costs to medical,dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent (50%) of increased costs for the dependent based upon HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1, 2000 as additional compensation. c. For unit members who elect to have "Employee Only" coverage, the City shall pay an amount not to exceed$590.96 per month toward the cost of all medical,dental,vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee for the term of this agreement.City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee based upon HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1,2000 as additional compensation. This amount shall not exceed$240.56 per month. d. The City shall provide term life insurance coverage for each employee in a total amount of thirty thousand ($30,000) during the term of this agreement. e. The City shall provide a term life insurance policy for each eligible dependent enrolled in health coverage in a total amount of one thousand($1,000)dollars per dependent during the term of this agreement. f. The Medical Insurance Committee shall be comprised of one representative from each of the bargaining units (as designated by the bargaining unit) and one from the City. The Committee shall regularly review the health plan and study health insurance issues including,but not limited to, Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO's), cost containment, etc., and make recommendations to the City Manager. g. Flexible Benefits Plan. The City shall make available to employees covered by this MOU a SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 16 54 Flexible Benefit Plan, in compliance with applicable Internal Revenue Code provisions. The plan will enable an employee to on a voluntary basis, cover additional out of pocket premium expenses for insurance through pretax payroll dollars. h. State Disability Insurance — The City shall provide State Disability Insurance as a payroll deduction of each employee. State Disability Insurance shall be integrated with sick leave with the objective of providing full compensation. SECTION 5.2 UNIFORMS The City shall provide uniforms to Unit employees and replace them on an as needed basis,for those employees required to wear uniforms. Jackets will be included as part of the uniform provided. SECTION 5.3 PROBATION The probationary period for newly hired employees shall be twelve months. The probationary period for employees promoted to a higher classification shall be six months in the new classification. The City shall have the option of granting a newly hired employee regular status at any time after nine(9) months of service. SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 17 55 ARTICLE VI CLOSING PROVISIONS SECTION 6.1 COMPARATIVE SALARY AND BENEFITS The parties agree that future Cost of Living Allowances and health benefits for bargaining units shall be equal to all other City employees. Unit employees shall receive any increases in benefits to COLA, health benefits and leave accruals in an amount at least equal to that which is received by other bargaining units. The cost of these additional benefits shall be calculated in a manner to provide accurate comparison with the other bargaining unit. The City will complete a salary study for unit classifications and provide it to SEAT by March-2007. SECTION 6.2 REOPENER The City will provide SEN a survey of comparable positions of the cities within San Luis Obispo County in March 2007 and March 2008. If Atascadero's average salary is 5% less than the County average, the City agrees to reopen negotiations relative to salary only. SECTION 6.3 TERM The term of this MOU shall commence on July 1, 2005, and expire on June 30,2009. SECTION 6.4 SIGNATURES This MOU has been ratified and adopted pursuant to the recommendation of the following representatives: SEIU Date SEIU Date SEIU Date SEIU Date SEIU Date SEIU Date CITY OF ATASCADERO Mayor Date City Manager Date APPROVED AS TO FORM SEIU MOU 2005-2009 Page 18 56 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE MID MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES AND CITY OF ATASCADERO JULY 19 2005 TO JUNE 309 2007 Mid MgmtTrof.MOU 2005-2009 59 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING MID MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES JULY 1,2005 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLEI-GENERAL PROVISIONS...............................................................................................................1 SECTION1.1 PREAMBLE..................................................................................................................................I SECTION1.2 RECOGNITION.............................................................................................. ...........................1 SECTION 1.3 SEVERANCE................................................... ......... .....................................1 SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT................................................... ........ ......... ......... ......... ............2 SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT ......................................................................................................2 SECTION1.6 GENERAL PROVISIONS............................................................................................................2 ARTICLEII-PAY PROVISION..........................................................................................................................3 SECTION2.1 SALARY........................................................................................................................................3 SECTION 2.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY..................................................................................................3 SECTION2.3 RETIREMENT...............................................................................................................................3 SECTION 2.4 SICK LEAVE/STAY WELL PLAN.............................................................................................4 SECTION2.5 SICK LEAVE PAYBACK............................................................................................................4 SECTION2.6 ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE.......................................................................................................4 ARTICLEIII-HEALTH AND WELFARE..........................................................................................................6 SECTION 3.1 HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.........................................................................................6 ARTICLEIV-CLOSING PROVISIONS.............................................................................................................7 SECTION 4.1 COMPARATIVE SALARY AND BENEFITS ............................................................................7 SECTION4.2 TERM.............................................................................................................................................7 SECTION4.3 REOPENER.........................................................................................................7 SECTION4.4 SIGNATURES......................................................................................................7 Mid Mgmt/Prof.MOU 2005-2009 60 ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION 1.1 PREAMBLE This Memorandum of Understanding is made and entered into between the City of Atascadero, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and the Mid Management/Professional Employees, hereinafter referred to as the"Association"pursuant to California Government Code Section 3500,et seq.and the City's Employer - Employee Relations Policy. The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is the establishment of wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The City and Association agree that the provisions of this MOU shall be applied equally to all employees covered herein without favor or discrimination because of race, creed, color, sex, age, national origin, political or religious affiliations or association memberships. Whenever the masculine gender is used in this MOU, it shall be understood to include the feminine gender. SECTION 1.2 RECOGNITION a. The City of Atascadero recognizes the Association as the recognized and exclusive representative for the following classifications: • Accountant • Associate Civil Engineer • Building Maintenance Supervisor • Database Programmer • Senior Building Inspector • Recreation Supervisor b. This recognition is exclusive of management employees and temporary employees. c. The City agrees to meet and confer and otherwise deal exclusively with the Association on all matters relating to the scope of representation under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act(Government Code Section 3500, et seq.), and as provided under the City's Employer-Employee Relations Policy. SECTION 1.3 SEVERANCE a. If any provision of the Agreement should be found invalid, unconstitutional, unlawful, or unenforceable by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted constitutional or legislative provision shall be severed, and all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the duration of the Agreement. b. In the event that any provision of the MOU should be found invalid,unconstitutional,unlawful or unenforceable,the City and the Association agree to meet and confer in a timely manner in an attempt to negotiate a substitute provision. Such negotiations shall apply only to the severed provision of the Agreement and shall not in any way modify or impact the remaining provisions Mid Mgmt/ProL MOU 2005-2009 Page 1 61 of the existing MOU. is SECTION 1.4 SOLE AGREEMENT a. The City and the Association agree that to the extent that any provision addressing wages,hours, and terms and conditions of employment negotiable under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act found outside this MOU and are in conflict thereof, this MOU shall prevail. b. If, during the term of the MOU,the parties should mutually agree to modify,amend,or alter the provisions of this MOU in any respect, any such change shall be effective only if and when reduced to writing and executed by the authorized representatives of the City and the Association. Any such changes validly made shall become part of this MOU and subject to its terms. SECTION 1.5 FULL FORCE AND EFFECT a. All wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment that are negotiable subjects of bargaining under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act,including those set in this MOU,shall remain in full force and effect during the term of this MOU unless changed by mutual agreement. b. The City will abide by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act where and when it applies to the Association. SECTION 1.6 GENERAL PROVISIONS The parties agree to meet and confer with respect to any subject or matter within the scope of representation upon request. Provided, however,that any changes which fall within the scope of representation shall be by mutual agreement. Except as set forth in this Memorandum of Understanding, and unless the Association agrees to reopen negotiations on a particular bargaining subject,the parties agree that there shall be no changes during the life of this MOU in the wage rates,benefits,or other terms and conditions of employment subject to the Meet-and-Confer process. In the event any new practice, subject or matter arises during the term of this agreement which is within the scope of representation and an action is proposed by the City, the Association shall be afforded all possible advance notice and shall have the right to meet and confer upon request. In the case of an emergency and, in the absence of an agreement on such a proposed action, the City reserves it's lawful management rights to take any action(s)deemed necessary and the Association reserves its rights to take any lawful action deemed necessary. Mid MgmVProf.MOU 2005-2009 Page 2 62 ARTICLE II - - PAY PROVISIONS SECTION 2.1 SALARY This four(4) year agreement shall provide salary increases according to the following formula and schedule: Year 1 (effective July 1, 2005)—4% COLA Year 2 (effective Julyl, 2006) —3% COLA Year 3 (effective July 1, 2007)—3% COLA Year 4 (effective July 1, 2008)—3% COLA The following monthly salaries become effective July 1, 2005. Accountant 29 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 4,999.71 Associate Civil Engineer 36 4,880.67 5,124.70 5,380.94 5,649.99 5,932.49 Building Maintenance Supervisor 27 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 Database Programmer 38 5,124.70 5,380.94 5,649.99 5,932.49 6,229.11 Recreation Supervisor 25 3,730.86 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 Senior Building Inspector. 31 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 4,999.71 5,249.70 The salary schedule above includes an inequity adjustment for positions 5% below the survey city average as of April 2005. The Recreation Supervisor and Associate Civil Engineer are 7%below the survey city average as of April 2005 and will receive an additional inequity adjustment of 2.5%on July 1, 2006. SECTION 2.2 EDUCATION INCENTIVE PAY Employees shall be reimbursed up to $400.00 per fiscal year for books, tuition and related educational expenses for attending college or other professional training,providing the coursework is job-related, and the employee received a passing grade. Associate Civil Engineers who are licensed as a Registered Engineer will receive ten percent(10%) in additional pay to their base salary. SECTION 2.3 RETIREMENT a. Employees will be provided retirement benefits through the California Public Employees Retirement System (Ca1PERS) pursuant to the 2% @ 55 formula including the "single highest year" and the City will pay the employee contribution of seven (7%) percent. Effective November 2003, the City shall commence paying and reporting the value of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) as described in Resolution No. 2003-073. Mid Mgmt/Prof.MOU 2005-2009 Page 3 63 b. Effective July 1, 2007,employees will be provided retirement benefits pursuant to the 2.5% @ 55 formula. Employees will pay 1% towards the employee contribution and 1.15% towards the employer's contribution for a total contribution of 2.15% of payroll. SECTION 2.4 SICK LEAVE/STAY WELL PLAN a. Sick leave accumulates at a rate of eight(8)hours (one day)per month. There is no limit to the accumulation. b. Employees with forty-eight(48)or more days of accumulated sick leave shall be eligible for the Stay Well Bonus. The Stay Well Bonus will be implemented as follows: 1. The sick leave pay-off will occur during the twelve- (12) month period beginning the first day after the second pay period in October and ending on the last day of the second pay period in October of the following year after an employee has accumulated and maintained 48 days sick leave. 2. Once the eligibility requirements have been met, an employee may opt to receive a pay-off equal to one-third(1/3)of the unused annual allotment of sick leave. (The annual allotment is 95.94). 3. Checks will be prepared by December 15 of each year. c. Family Care—An employee may use,in any calendar year, accrued sick leave up to the amount earned six (6) months employment to attend to the illness of a child, parent or spouse. SECTION 2.5 SICK LEAVE PAYBACK When an employee terminates employment in good standing, after five (5) years of continuous service, he/she shall be paid one-half of his/her accumulated Sick Leave. SECTION 2.6 ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE a. Each employee will receive forty-eight(48)hours of Administrative Leave,which will vest as of July 1 annually. Except as provided below, Administrative Leave will not be carried over or accrue from one fiscal year to the next. b. If an employee is unable to use his/her Administrative Leave prior to the end of the fiscal year for work related reasons beyond his/her control(as verified by the Department Head),said leave will be carried over into the next fiscal year for a period not to exceed three (3) months. Said time will be available to the employee for use during that period, but will not be accrued for the purpose of payoff in the event of termination. c. In the event an employee covered b this Agreement is employed after January 1 of the fiscal y Mid Mgmt/ProL MOU 2005-2009 Page 4 64 year, the employee shall be eligible for twenty-four (24) hours of Administrative Leave SECTION 2.7 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Employees shall be granted bereavement leave pursuant to the City Personnel Rules and Regulations in the event of death of his/her spouse,child,stepchild,grandchild,parent,grandparent,son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, brother-in-law, sister-in-law or significant other. Mid Mgmt/ProL MOU 2005-2009 Page 5 65 ARTICLE III - HEALTH AND WELFARE is SECTION 3.1 HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE 1. For unit members who elect to have"Family"coverage,the City shall pay a total of$780.18 per month toward the cost of all medical,dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependents for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent (50%) of increased costs for dependents based upon HMO plan costs. 2. For unit members who elect to have `Employee +1" coverage, the City shall pay a total of $697.34 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependent for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent(50%)of increased costs for the dependent based upon HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1, 2000 as additional compensation. 3. For unit members who elect to have "Employee Only coverage, the City shall pay an amount not to exceed$602.06 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental,vision and life insurance premiums for the employee based upon the HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1,2000 as additional compensation.This amount shall not exceed$246.76 per month. SECTION 3.2 LIFE INSURANCE The City shall provide a term life insurance policy on each employee in the amount of Fifty- Thousand Dollars ($50,000). The City shall provide a term life insurance policy for each eligible dependent enrolled in health coverage in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000)per dependent. Mid MgmUProL MOU 2005-2009 Page 6 66 ARTICLE IV - CLOSING PROVISIONS SECTION 4.1 COMPARATIVE SALARY AND BENEFITS The City will complete a salary study for unit classifications and provide it to the Mid Management/Professional Employees Group by March, 2007. SECTION 4.2 TERM The term of this MOU shall commence on July 1, 2005, and expire on June 30, 2009 SECTION 4.3 REOPENER The City will provide SEIU a survey of comparable positions of the cities within San Luis Obispo County in March 2007 and March 2008. If Atascadero's average salary is 5% less than the County average, the City agrees to reopen negotiations relative to salary. SECTION 4.4 SIGNATURES This MOU has been ratified and adopted pursuant to the recommendation of the following representatives: • Mid Mgmt./Prof. Date Mid Mgmt/Prof. Date CITY OF ATASCADERO Mayor Date City Manager Date Mid Mgmt/ProL MOU 2005-2009 Page 7 67 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ADENDUM THIS AGREEMENT is madeand entered into October 25 2005 by and between the City of Atascadero (hereinafter called "City") and Wade G. McKinney (hereinafter called "Employee") modifying a provision to the employment agreement dated September 25, 2001. SECTION 5. BENEFITS 2. Effective September 1, 2005, Employee shall receive forty (40) hours annually for vacation leave in addition to vacation leave provided within this contract and to management employees. SECTION 7. DEFERRED COMPENSATION 2. Effective November 1 , 2005, the City will pay a contribution equal to five percent (5%) of base salary to a tax deferred supplemental retirement plan (i.e. 403b, 401a, or other similar plans) in favor of Employee. All contributions are fully vested in the employee and shall not be available to the City. SECTION 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1 . This Agreement shall amend the Agreement between the parties by modifying the above Section. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of Employee. 3. This Agreement shall become effective upon approval by the City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. CITY OF ATASCADERO BY: Wendy Scalise, Mayor Wade G. McKinney ATTEST: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk 68 CITY OF ATASCADERO SALARY SCHEDULE July 1, 2005 MONTHLY I i 1 2,077.48 2,181.36 2,290.43 2,404.95 2,525.19 2 2,129.42 2,235.89 2,347.69 2,465.07 2,588.32 3 2,181.36 2,290.43 2,404.95 2,525.19 2,651.45 4 2,235.89 2,347.69 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 Office Assistant 1 5 2,290.43 2,404.95 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 6 2,347.69 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 Account Clerk 1 7 2,404.95 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 Zookeeperl Zoo Facilities Maintenance Tech. Maintenance Worker 1 8 2,465.07 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 Office Assistant II 9 2,525.19 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 Police Records Technician 10 2,588.32 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 Account Clerk II WWTP Operator in Training Central Receptionist Office Assistant III 11 2,651.45 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 Permit Coordinator Registered Veterinary Technician 12 2,717.74 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 Building Maintenance Specialist Building Technician Engineering Technician I Administrative Support Assistant OAdministrative Secretary Recreation Coordinator Maintenance Worker II Zookeeper II 13 2,784.03 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 Finance Technician Technical Support Specialist 14 2,853.63 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 15 2,923.23 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 3,553.20 WWTP Operator l 16 2,996.31 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 Police Officer Recruit Support Services Technician 17 3,069.39 3,222.86 3,384.00 3,553.20 3,730.86 Building Inspector I Engineering Technician II 18 3,146.12 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 Support Services Lead Technician Senior Zookeeper 19 3,222.86 3,384.00 3,553.20 3,730.86 3,917.40 Administrative Assistant Technical Trainer II Property Evidence Technician WWTP Operator II 20 3,303.43 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 Accounting Specialist 21 3,384.00 3,553.20 3,730.86 3,917.40 4,113.27 Assistant Planner Building Inspector II 22 1 3,468.60 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 23 1 3,553.20 3,730.861 3,917.40 1 4,113.27 4,318.94 69 CITY OF ATASCADERO SALARY SCHEDULE July 1,2005 MONTHLY 3... Is .. I! ,s .. .: .ra..,. Maintenance Leadworker WWTP Operator III 24 3,642.03 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 Executive Assistant Firefighter GIS Analyst I Recreation Supervisor 25 3,730.86 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 Building Inspector III Police Officer Support Services Supervisor 26 3,824.13 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 4,648.26 Building Maintenance Supervisor Bldg Inspector/ Plans Examiner 27 3,917.40 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 Associate Planner Fire Engineer Senior Police Officer 28 4,015.34 4,216.11 4,426.91 4,648.26 4,880.67 Accountant 29 4,113.27 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 4,999.71 Systems Administrator III 30 4,216.11 4,426.91 4,648.26 4,880.67 5,124.70 Senior Building Inspector 31 4,318.94 4,534.89 4,761.63 4,999.71 5,249.70 Personnel Analyst 32 4,426.91 4,648.26 4,880.67 5,124.70 5,380.94 33 4,534.89 4,761.63 4,999.71 5,249.70 5,512.18 Senior Planner 34 4,648.26 4,880.67 5,124.70 5,380.94 5,649.99 Fire Captain Fire Marshal/Code Compliance Officer Police Sergeant 35 4,761.63 4,999.71 5,249.70 5,512.18 5,787.79 Associate Civil Engineer 36 4,880.67 5,124.70 5,380.94 5,649.99 5,932.49 37 4,999.71 5,249.70 5,512.18 5,787.79 . 6,077.18 Building Official Database Programmer Redevelopment Specialist Zoo Director 38 5,124.70 5,380.94 5,649.99 5,932.49 6,229.11 39 5,249.70 5,512.18 5,787.79 6,077.18 6,381.04 40 5,380.94 5,649.99 5,932.49 6,229.11 6,540.56 41 5,512.18 5,787.79 6,077.18 6,381.04 6,700.09 42 5,649.99 5,932.49 6,229.11 6,540.56 6,867.59 Assistant to the City Manager Deputy Administrative Services Director Deputy Community Development Director Deputy Community Services Director Deputy Executive Director of Redevelopment Agency Deputy Public Works Director 43 5,787.79 6,077.18 6,381.04 6,700.09 7,035.10 44 5,932.49 6,229.11 6,540.56 6,867.59 7,210.97 Police Lieutenant 45 6,077.18 6,381.04 6,700.09 7,035.10 7,386.85 46 6,229.11 6,540.56 6,867.59 7,210.97 7,571.52 70 47 6,381.04 6,700.09 7,035.10 7,386.85 7,756.19 CITY OF ATASCADERC SALARY SCHEDULE July 1,2005 MONTHLY i Q� FP O 48 6,540.56 6,867.59 7,210.97 7,571.52 7,950.10 49 6,700.09 7,035.10 7,386.85 7,756.19 8,144.00 50 6,867.59 7,210.97 7,571.52 7,950.10 8,347.60 51 7,035.10 7,386.85 7,756.19 8,144.00 8,551.20 Administrative Services Director Community Development Director Community Services Director Information Technology Director Public Works Director 52 7,210.97 7,571.52 7,950.10 8,347.60 8,764.98 53 7,386.85 7,756.19 8,144.00 8,551.20 8,978.76 Assistant City Manager Fire Chief Police Chief 54 7,571.52 7,950.10 8,347.60 8,764.98 9,203.23 55 7,756.19 8,144.00 8,551.20 8,978.76 9,427.70 56 7,950.10 8,347.60 8,764.98 9,203.23 9,663.39 57 8,144.00 8,551.20 8,978.76 9,427.70 9,899.09 58 8,347.60 8,764.98 9,203.23 9,663.39 10,146.56 59 8,551.20 8,978.76 9,427.70 9,899.09 10,394.04 60 8,764.98 9,203.23 9,663.39 10,146.56 10,653.89 61 8,978.76 9,427.70 9,899.09 10,394.04 10,913.74 62 9,203.23 9,663.39 1 10,146.56 10,653.89 11,186.59 City Manager 63 9,427.70 9,899.09 10,394.04 10,913.741 11,459.43 0 71 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 10/25/05 1918 A 1979 Atascadero City Council Staff Report- Public Works Department Oak Ridge Estates (3-F Meadows) - Intersection State Route 41 and Los Altos Road Improvements RECOMMENDATION: Council find that the proposed improvements for the intersection of State Route 41 (Morro Road) and Los Altos Road meet the requirements of the Atascadero Municipal Code. DISCUSSION: Oak Ridge Estates (also known as 3-FMeadows) is a 111 lot planned development on the west side of Atascadero. The public improvements and homes for Phase 1 are under construction. The developer, Castlerock Development, has also begun the work on construction documents for Phases 2 thru 4. The conditions for development for this project are listed in the Atascadero Municipal Code section 9-3.656 "Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 11: (PD 11)". One of the conditions requires the construction of improvements at the intersection of State Route 41 and Los Altos Road. The improvements consist of a left turn lane, a right turn lane, a vehicle refuge lane, signage and sight distance requirements. The conditions are listed in section 9-3.656 (c) (3) (v) thru (ix). These improvements were required based on comments, by Caltrans to the 3-F Meadows Environmental Impact Report (See Attachment "A"). The project Civil Engineer, R. Thompson Consulting, has begun the 'design of the improvements to this intersection. Padre Associates has produced a Natural Environmental Study (NES) for the area affected by the construction. The NES has found that the construction of a right turn lane will have environmental impacts to the south east corner of the intersection The impacts are caused by the relocation of a creek, removal of vegetation and loss of wetlands. (See Attachment B) The specific impacts, according the NES, are: 73 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 10/25/05 • Loss of mixed willow series, a community of special concern • Removal of 3 coast live oak trees and substantial encroachment on 4 coast live oak trees • Possible take of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as a result of construction activities • Temporary fill and permanent fill in waters of the U.S. • Temporary fill and permanent fill in jurisdictional wetlands • Impacts to CDFG defined wetlands The project Civil Engineer and environmental consultant looked for ways to reduce the environmental impacts of the improvements, while complying with the conditions of development listed in PD-11. They found that if they reduced the right turn lane into a widened shoulder for right hand turns that the impacts were substantially reduced, as follows (See Attachment C): • Avoid the loss of.mixed willow series, a community of special concern • Reduce possible take of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as a result of construction activities • Reduce temporary fill and permanent fill in waters of the U.S. • Avoid impacts to jurisdictional wetlands The project Civil Engineer forwarded the two plans to Caltrans for their review and comment. Caltrans responded as follows: "Although we initially indicated that a right a turn channelization was desired, upon further evaluation we have determined that reconstructing the intersection to conform to the standard public road approach intersection, as shown in figure 405.2 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, will serve the traffic needs of this intersection while minimizing impacts to the creek." (See Attachment D). The developer of Oak Ridge Estates, Castlerock Development, Has requested that the improvement be constructed with a widened shoulder for right hand turns. Staff is looking for Council determination that the widened shoulder for right hand turns will meet the intent of PD-11. Following is the text from the Atascadero Municipal Code concerning the right hand turn requirement. (ix) Designated right-turn lanes shall be constructed on State Highway 41 for westbound traffic entering both Los Altos Road and the driveway serving Lots 109-112. Improvement plans for the right-turn lanes shall be submitted for review and approval by Caltrans and the City Engineer prior to approval of the Master Development Plan. The right-turn lane'for Los Altos Road shall'be constructed when the ADT on Los Altos Road reaches five hundred (500) vehicles per day, with the development of the twenty- seventh lot in Phase 1, or within three (3) years of the issuance of building permits for Phase 1, whichever is earlier. 74 ITEM NUMBER: B 1 DATE: 10/25/05 Staff has visited the site, discussed the issue with Caltrans and recommends the project be built with a widened shoulder for right hand turns. The original Caltrans recommendation was made without the benefit of a field review, detailed site design or Natural Environmental Study (See Attachment E). ALTERNATIVES: 1. Do not find proposed improvements for the intersection of State Route 41 (Morro Road) and Los Altos Road meet the intent of the requirements of the Atascadero Municipal Code. The developer would be required to construct the improvements with a right hand turn pocket. This would have increased environmental impacts. 2. Continue the item for more information or revised project design. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A— Caltrans response letter to Project EIR dated October 26, 1994 Attachment B — Plan of impacts of right turn lane Attachment C — Plan of impacts of widened shoulder for right turns Attachment D — Caltrans response letter to plan submittal dated June 15, 2005 Attachment E — Project Natural Environmental Study 75 10 �S 94 __:53 =S115 519 JUTT CALrxA'S Zoo= PETE WILSON,o....`►' STATE OF CAUFORNIA—SUSINESS.TRANSPORTATION AND MOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O.BOX,n4 _ letter 35 "NLUISO@9SPO.CA Ow"I'd T69P4ONG'W I`f W Jt:� TDD IWSI 644-2750 October 26, 1994 3F Meadows Ranch SLO-41-11.45 State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street,Room 121 Sacramento,CA 95814 3F Meadows Ranch Draft Environmental impact Report SCH #94061014 Caltrans District 5 staff has reviewed the above referenced document, The following comments were generated as a result of the review: Propxjsed road Cuawections to the State Highway shall have left turn channelizations at the exponsc 3� ! of the developer. wlllCla will have to meet Current Caltrans Standards. A Held review with the developer will be necessat);• Biological and archeological Surveys must be completedgrid cover and proposed work within the State highv:•a.:right-of-way. Any impacts found within the State right-uf-way must be included in the.environmental documents,with mitiotion measures identified. Pare IV -D i. The 1991 traffic volumes are too a in 1993 t Dateue s AD re ulting increase r Route 41 as 6450 on this segment. Our records show an ADT of 9_S in right turn movements,a designated right tum lane will be required. ent. If have any questions,please contact me at(805) Thant:you for the opportunity to comm 549-3683. Sincerely, Larry Newland Intergovernmental Review Coordinator SS:ss MO Gula>W.-- 76 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS TRANSPORTATION AND HOU ING AGENCy DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ARNOI D scIlwARz G R Govern PERMITS DEPARTMENT - 50 HIGUERA STREET ' SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 93401-5415 PHONE(805)549-3152 FAX (805)549-3062 e TDD(805)549-3259 http://www dot ca g1ov/diSt05 RECEIVED June 15, 2005 JUL 0 8 2005 Be Flexenergy efficveffIciver! ient! 05-SLO-41-11.45 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Permit No.: Not assigned Mr. Russ Thompson, PE R. Thompson Consulting 7600 Morro Road Atascadero CA 93422 Dear Mr. Thompson: Subject: Preliminary Encroachment Permit Application Review—Castl Meadows erock Development- 3F Thank you.for submitting your Encroachment Permit. Applie off-site roadway improvements to State Highway 41 at the intersect onI on of LosfortAlt s Road City of Atascadero. With your application you included two improvement l °ad in the previously requested. One set of plans included right turn channelizati pans as we to Los Altos Road, and the other set showed Improvements without a right urn lane improvements g turn lane. In comparing and evaluating the two plan sets, as well as reviewing the environmental impacts inventory you provided, we have concluded that cons ere tructin the right channelization would require extensive reali g ght turn the vegetation within the creek area. Furthermore,e,lwe recognize the d technical infeasibility of realigninem lffi�ul 1 of most of g the creek to the north due to environmental e and right of way constraints. Impacts Although we initially indicated that right turn channelization at this upon further evaluation we have determined that reconstructing the intense tion to tion was desired, conform to the standard public road approach intersection, as shown in Figure the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, will serve the traffic needs at this intersection g 405.2 of while minimizing impacts to the creek. Please proceed with the reduced ch n design. annelization f you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter please feel free to c '05) 549-3497. all me at "Caltrans improves mobility across California" ..77 Mr. Thompson June 15, 2005 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely, i Steve Senet, District Encroachment Permit Engineer cc James Kilmer Paul McClintic 78 CN UJ LL 0 Cif w .U31 M0138 33S U) Z Li- 0 w e mnew 33s 0 \' (L 0 0 'c 8— C'4 W F- 0 A w J, _ ` 1, 1 ''1 I/ !.� �I� `1i11'�!Ii ' � I 'il � j (..�, � I�� ,I � � I �\ � ! I � II f > Ww-jWW 0OW co p z T 0>1 wwv 'L-j 11p 0 D 0 0 Of W CL(0) CL 0 'W' o -J ZI it 09 - CL�Z 0 _j CL w w 0 CLW� fit 0- co OD C14 I-- \ 1 11 V : ! � � IIk0 '4' � I fill < cow avold so Lu W C) 0 z CL - --- ----- 009 0_j 0 W IIIAll a. 4 W F- 0 U.J 0 w < LO 04 0 ? if Owlr I I � II�, I' 1 /• 1 1 y 1\1 �1�/ r � � 11 i j� j I I I I �'I I I D, -77 0 LO � � I L I I �� 1�� r , � III :;,. ,, 'IIi 1 q r Z E F- LU 0 0 (w!) w< WK F- E 0 F- z w C/i a. w < 2 =i 0 z m w w w Z10 CML w (L z a C') N (U) < LL CL WC, 0 0 w (D CO co LO Oz cwn cc; E Lf) c W C10 C) -) w 0 0 F- 0 oL a. uJ 7' 0 F. 0 (U,)w —U) 0 0 0 > C) ,m C14 + X w x x x 0 U, z >-( W Of a. a- a- wo> 0) moo .00 0.4) w 0 00 U 2- w we 0- 0 w ,: 9 0 w OM 40 A C) t I i 1331 MOTTO 33S s Z D CD W ,� i' I l 1 j I I Ilk— ray ��,I1 �►� illi i! ." �; �l�� 11 / 1 �l'I �� W s O V lol I� �� 2 �!( li,r i 1 ,• 1 W i l W of�Z�� f I f \ l EL� V ! I I /I '!I ! ' aEL ' 41 1 i � I LCL z LuI a a Q J \ I/ /�d % 1 l� ; ' 1 00 it al E�t �/ I r; I / / � w ( I '' III .Gzz I 111 ' Il f 1 s,I , — - LLI IW- aoz � 00 IL W Of it_j 116VOa SO-L11V Sol / Z'X Oto •� 'i I\ ! 1 I � " -I-`_- � $ ' A� •/. / ZOO j 1 U 2 1 I I t , �' 1\ / I/ i f i /! / ► goo ' I Ico 0 ZoaItw I\ QWNC Y / J / I <—W cn tl I I0 LL i / / I �'/ / ----�I 0 W z Z z �I f� �IIII / ' o '¢0�z 11,01, z al II 1• / w y w I 4 cfl I' rail / z E l!I''1 I'/ > 0 1 o W O w < Q V J W fn _E Z W a 2 2 V I i lti/ �• d Q !– (n 2 W s I / W a — a l I o cn r I (= I N � 1 I I \ I I I ��I tll !I �l tp 0 LL 1 N �I ' I I 91 \ \\I�. I - I 7 ((//f( // -1 U' H W W N gym N O I I y , I 1 ' ;'' z Q V z CO (n U) (� '- E tn � ' ' I, s \ �_ ri ;/i(II ,if 11 I O ' a a w �— O I I I �)1 1 i! 1 X W w W w w' a CO �N N N 0 �\ II I 'I II 1 / I Ili' Ilii' I W X iL d 0- E 1; 0W r III I 1 ! W 0 6/^0 1H91H 3AOSV 339 00- w00 W W O ® U ITEM NUMBER: B -2 DATE: 10/25/05 m 1918 ® 19 9 Atascadero City Council Staff Report Public Works Department Atascadero Short Range Transit Plan RECOMMENDATION: Council receive an update on the Atascadero Short Range Transit Plan, adopt public transportation service goals, review concepts for public outreach and direct staff to move forward with public input as outlined. DISCUSSION: The Changing Environment of Public Transportation In early 2004, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) retained LSC Transportation Consultants to prepare two planning documents. The first, a five-year Short Range Transit Plan for the City of Atascadero; and second, the North County Transit Study, a 10-year plan identifying service alternatives in the north county in light of the additional funding now available as an urban area. An adopted Short Range Transit Plan is a requirement of SLOCOG to receive state and federal funding. On January 11,2005, the consultants presented the North County Transit Study and the Atascadero Short Range Transit Plan to the Atascadero City Council. Many concerns were expressed by the Council, staff and members of the public regarding several aspects of the reports. Among the concerns was the lack of opportunity for public input, the additional costs for expanded regional service and the loss of local control. The plans offered that evening did not reflect the values or priorities of the City. At that meeting the City Council directed staff to review the concerns raised and bring the item back at a future meeting. 79 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 10/25/05 The major challenge facing the City of Atascadero, is to maintain the Dial-A-Ride service in light of the increase in the farebox requirement from 10% to 20% that accompanies the area's designation as an "Urban Area". The current farebox ratio is at 13%, well below the new mandate. Staff has been studying the system with the primary purpose of determining what modifications could be made to the system to meet the new farebox requirements, while still maintaining services that the riders depend upon. Several changes should be considered including changes to fares for certain riders, modifying existing fixed routes, reviewing _hours of operation, adjusting services to compliment the services of other transit providers and working with the SLOCOG board to alter existingtransit policies. Creating a plan that maintains service levels, while meeting the.new farebox recovery ratio, is achievable but not easy. To be successful, the City will need to be flexible with service delivery options and members of the public. Transit riders,will need to be involved in crafting the solution and the City will need to be more aggressive in revisiting certain policies of the SLOCOG. The provision of and funding for public transportation can be complex and a "frequently asked questions" sheet has been developed (Attachment A.) Public Transportation System Goal Before moving forward with any changes to the existing transportation system, it is important to establish guidelines that will serve as guiding principles throughout the modification process. Adopting such guidelines assists in discussions with the public and in evaluating different service models. After a review of comments from the Council and members of the public during the January 11, 2005 Council meeting, staff is suggesting the following goals: o Meet the federally required 20%farebox recovery ratio. o Implement changes that least impact seniors and disabled riders (transit dependent passengers) o Maintain routes that serve necessary destinations such as medical centers, educational facilities, and shopping areas. o Add Saturday service if it can be cost-effective. o Adjust fares to recognize dial-a-ride as a more costly, premium, and more customized service relative to other public transportation options(this is known as setting a fare policy). o Reduce regional Route 9 stops along ECR to make it an"express" service therefore reducing service redundancy. o Obtain recognition from SLOCOG for our annual contribution to the regional Route 9 service, thereby increasing our farebox recovery ratio. If these:goals are adopted by the City Council, staff will be able to evaluate the fare revenue and costs of several public transportation options. Once these options'are developed they will be shared throughout a public outreach process. Each option will be reviewed against the established goals. 80 ITEM NUMBER: B -2 DATE: 10/25/05 Suggested Public Outreach Process One of the major criticisms of the previous Short Range Transit Plan planning effort was that there was little public involvement.- As mentioned previously, for system changes to be effective, the public must have a role in developing the changes and they must understand the fiscal constraints challenging the system, particularly the farebox recovery ratio. Staff is recommending the following public participation process: November-December Staff would conduct three structured workshops at Structured Workshops different times and locations along the transit route. Participants at each workshop would listen to a brief presentation on the current system, the fiscal constraints facing the system and possible service options that fall within the established guidelines. Each of the service options would be discussed with participants, feedback would be received on each option, and preferences would be discussed. Transportation would be available to and from the meetings. December This program will seek to reach out to those that may not "Get on the Bus" choose to attend one of the public meetings. Staff will ride on the fixed route and dial-a-ride buses and will chat with riders about some of the options being discussed. Riders will be informally polled on the issues that are important to them and their preferences on the options being discussed. January 2006 At a regularly scheduled Council meeting, staff will present a summary of public input to the Council and a list of recommended service changes. February 2006 The City Council is asked to adopt service changes and the revised Short Range Transit Plan. April 1, 2006 Changes to service go into effect. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs for operating Atascadero Transit are estimated to be $435,330 this fiscal year. Fare revenue is anticipated to be $57,540 for a farebox recovery ratio of 13.22%. If the ratio is not over 20% within the next two years, state and federal funding will be in jeopardy. ATTACHMENT: Atascadero Transit "Frequently Asked Questions" 81 ITEM NUMBER: B -2 DATE: 10/25/05 Atascadero Transit Frequently Asked Questions What types of service are provided by Atascadero Transit? Atascadero Transit provides two types of service, a fixed route service and a demand- response service more commonly known as "dial-a-ride Fixed Route, Atascadero Transit provides hourly fixed route transit service on the EI Camino Shuttle Monday-Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The service starts at Paloma Park and travels to Twin Cities Hospital where passengers can connect with the Paso Robles or regional Route 9 services, and returns to Paloma Park. Demand Response Door-to-Door service is provided Monday-Friday from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Service is provided anywhere within the city limits. Rides may be scheduled the previous day or schedule the day of. Passengers may typically need to wait up to 45 minutes for the bus to come pick them up. How much does it cost to ride the service? For the fixed route transportation, fares are $.75 for the general public and $.50 for Seniors and the disabled. For the demand-response "Dial-a-Ride" service, fares are $1.25 for the general public and $1.00 for Seniors and the disabled. How many vehicles make up the transit fleet? There is one vehicle servicing the fixed route and three vehicles servicing "dial-a-ride". How much does if cost to run the transit program? It costs approximately $435,000 annually to run the services. Where does funding for the program come from? The fares paid by passengers account for only 13% of revenue, or approximately $57,000. The remaining funds come from two other sources, Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds ($167,000) and federal section 5307 funds ($211,000). TDA funds are comprised of both Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transportation Assistance (STA). LTF is collected as 1/4 cent of the general sales tax statewide and distributed to each county according to the amount of tax collected in that county. The funds are then allocated to the local agencies on the basis of population. 82 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 10/25/05 STA is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuels and distributed according to a formula based on population and operator revenues the prior fiscal year. Federal 5307 Funds are apportioned to urbanized areas utilizing a formula based on population, population density, and other factors associated with transit service and ridership. Are These Funding Sources Reliable? The funding sources are reliable as long as we can recover 20% of the costs of transit from passenger fares. This is known as the farebox recovery ratio. What happens if we don't recover enough money from passenger fares? Should an agency fail to meet the minimum farebox requirement for three years, the local transportation planning agency can suspend distribution of state and federal funding. How can the City make sure the farebox recovery ratio is met? This can only be done by making service changes that passengers respond to. For this reason, transit users must be consulted as changes are being made. Farebox revenues can increase by raising fares, improving routes/destinations to draw more passengers, reducing operating costs, or partner with other services when it make sense. What other public transportation services are there? The residents of North San Luis Obispo County are served by the following public transit services: o Atascadero Transit— Mon-Fri 1 Fixed Route 3 Demand Response o Paso Robles Transit Mon-Sat 3 Fixed Routes 1 Demand Response o San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Authority Route 9 Mon-Sat o Runabout— Mon-Sat Door to Door ADA paratransit service 83 1 10/25/05 City Council Meeting Attachment 1 1 Route 41 Improvements at Les Altos Road 1 1 1 1 s� � 4 1 Natural Environment Study i State Route 41 1 San Luis Obispo County 1 05-SLO-41 -P M 11 .5 1 October 200 1 1 1 1 1 ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Page 1.0 SUMMARY............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Proposed Project....................................................................................... 1 ' 1.3 Alternatives................................................................................................ 2 2.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Purpose of the Proposed Project............................................................... 3 ' 2.2 Existing Configuration................................................................................ 3 2.3 Proposed Project....................................................................................... 3 ' 2.4 Alternatives............................................................................................... 4 3.0 STUDY METHODS............................................................................................... 11 ' 3.1 Studies Required....................................................................0.................. 11 3.2 Personnel and Survey Dates..................................................................... 11 3.3 Agency Coordination ................................................................................. 12 ' 3.4 Limitations ................................................................................................. 12 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING............................................................................... 13 4.1 Existing Biological and Physical Conditions............................................... 13 4.2 Regional Species and Habitats of Concern . 21 5.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS AND MITIGATION .................................. 28 5.1 Species of Concern Potentially in Project Impact Area.............................. 28 5.2 Natural Communities of Special Concern ...............................0.................. 29 5.3 Plant Species of Concern .......................................................................... 29 ' 5.4 Wildlife Species of Concern........ ............................................................ 31 5.5 Migratory Birds and Other Protected Birds ................................................ 33 ' 6.0 WETLANDS AND WATERS OF THE U.S. ........................................................... 35 6.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 35 6.2 Methodology.............................................................................................. 35 6.3 Survey Results .......................................................................................... 36 6.4 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts........................................................... 37 6.5 Project Impacts..............................................................................0........... 37 6.6 Alternatives. ......................................................................................... 38 ...... 6.7 Compensatory Mitigation........................................................................... 38 7.0 PERMITS AND TECHNICAL STUDIES FOR SPECIAL LAWS OR CONDITIONS 39 7.1 Regulatory Requirements.......................................................................... 39 7.2 Federal Endangered Species Act Consultation.......................................... 39 ' 7.3 California Endangered Species Act Consultation....................................... 39 7.4 Wetlands and Other Waters Coordination Summary................................. 39 8.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 40 ' Page i Castlerock Development , State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) TABLES ' Table Page 1. Summary of Field Surveys .................................................................................... 11 , 2. Definitions of Plant Species of Concern ................................................................ 21 3. Regional Plant Species of Concern....................................................................... 22 4. Definitions of Wildlife Species of Concern............................................................. 24 ' 5. Regional Wildlife Species of Concern ................................................................... 24 6. Project Impact Area Species of Concern............................................................... 28 7. Native Tree Impacts.............................................................................................. 30 ' 8. Summary of Wetlands Delineation........................................................................ 37 9. Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Impacts. ........................................................... 37 FIGURES , Figure Page ' 1. Site Location Map ................................................................................................. 5 2. Improvement Plan (1 of 2)........................................................ .. 7 3. Improvement Plan (2 of 2)..................................................................................... 9 4. Vegetation and Biological Study Area Map............................................................ 15 5. Site Photographs............................................................................... ' 6. Alternative Improvement Plan ............................................................................... 19 APPENDICES ' A Vascular Plants Observed within Route 41 BSA San Luis Obispo County, California B Wetland Data Forms , Page ii ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 1.0 SUMMARY t1.1 INTRODUCTION This Report contains the results of a Natural Environment Study (NES) for proposed ' improvements to State Route 41 needed to support the Oak Ridge Estates project. The Report was prepared by the developer (Castlerock Development), in compliance with the Biological Resources portion of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Environmental Handbook (revised 2003). The results of this study may be used in preparation of environmental documents and future project permitting through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed improvements to SR 41 would be located entirely within the State ' right-of-way, in the City of Atascadero, California. The proposed Project provides for the construction of operational improvements to the SR 41/Los Altos Road intersection including: • Extension of the eastbound left turn pocket to 112 m (367 feet); • A new 26.7 m (88 feet) westbound acceleration lane; ' • A new 51 m (167 feet) westbound right turn lane; • A new 51 m eastbound refuge/acceleration lane; and ' • Complete pavement overlay of affected portions of SR 41. The following adverse effects may occur as a result of project implementation: ' • Loss of 0.093 ha (0.23 acres) of mixed willow series, a, community of special concern; ' • Removal of three coast live oak trees, and substantial encroachment on four additional coast live oak trees; • Possible take of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as a ' result of construction activities; • Temporary fill of 0.065 ha (0.161 acres), and permanent fill of 0.007 ha ' (0.016 acres) of waters of the U.S.; • Temporary fill of 0.043 ha (0.106 acres), and permanent fill of 0.006 ha ' (0.015 acres) of jurisdictional wetlands (included with waters of the U.S. impacts listed above); and • Impacts to 0.142 ha (0.35 acres) of CDFG-defined wetlands. ' Mitigation measures have been provided to offset construction-related impacts to these resources through oak tree replacement and restoration of the affected drainages. ' Take under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act would be avoided by pre-construction breeding bird surveys and avoidance of active nests. Page 1 Castlerock Development ' State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study The project would require permits from the Corps of Engineers (Section 404 permit), California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement) and Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401 Water Quality Certification). ' 1.3 ALTERNATIVES A Project Alternative was developed in coordination with Caltrans to reduce the , scale of the roadway widening. The fundamental difference between the proposed project and Project Alternative is that the westbound right turn lane would be replaced with a widened shoulder, and the eastbound refuge/acceleration lane would be shortened from 51 m to 25 m. ' Implementation of the Project Alternative would: • Avoid loss of mixed willow series; ' • Reduce the potential for take of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as a result of construction activities; , • Reduce temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. from 0.065 ha (0.161 acres) to 0.010 ha (0.025 acres), and • Avoid permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. Page 2 ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 2.0 INTRODUCTION The Oak Ridge Estates project consists of 111 developable lots within an approximate 298 ha (735.5 acre) site in western Atascadero, California. The site is located immediately north of State Route (SR) 41, and would be primarily accessed from SR 41 via Los ' Altos Road. The first phase of Oak Ridge Estates is under construction, with Phases II, III and IV to be implemented over the next few years. Castlerock Development has been required as a condition of project approval to construct improvements to SR 41 to improve traffic safety. ' 2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The purpose of the project is to improve the operational design of the SR 41/Los Altos Road intersection to improve safety for future increased traffic volumes associated with the Oak Ridge Estates development. Since SR 41 is a State-owned facility, the improvement plans would be reviewed and approved by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), but funded by the developer. ' 2.2 EXISTING CONFIGURATION SR 41 extends 142 miles, beginning at SR 1 near Morro Bay and ending at SR 140 in Yosemite Park. The subject segment of SR 41 is 15.9 miles long and links SR 1 near Morro Bay to U.S. 101 in Atascadero (see Figure 1). This segment is considered by Caltrans to be eligible for designation as a scenic highway. In the vicinity of Los Altos Road, SR 41 is a two lane facility with 4 foot-wide paved shoulders, with a short turn pocket for eastbound traffic to ' make left turns onto Los Altos Road. 2.3 PROPOSED PROJECT ' The proposed improvements to SR 41 would be located entirely within the State right-of-way, in the City of Atascadero, California. The proposed Project provides for the ' construction of operational improvements to the SR 41/Los Altos Road intersection including: • Extension of the eastbound left turn pocket to 112 m (367 feet); ' • A new 26.7 m (88 feet) westbound acceleration lane; • A new 51 m (167 feet)westbound right turn lane; ' • A new 51 m eastbound refuge/acceleration lane; and • Complete pavement overlay of affected portions of SR 41. ' These improvements would require widening the existing pavement; however, all improvements would be located within the existing State right-of-way. An intermittent stream is located parallel and adjacent to the affected segment of SR 41. Therefore, the stream must be relocated to provide sufficient space to widen the roadway. Retaining walls would be used at two locations (Stations 11+20 to 11+70 and 12+85 to 13+15) as a substitute for a fill slope to reduce the area required for the roadway widening. Figures 2 and 3 provide an overview of proposed improvements. 1 ' Page 3 Castlerock Development ' State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study The project would also include drainage improvements: ' • A roadside inlet and rock rip-rap energy dissipater outlet would be added to ' an existing pipe culvert that passes under SR 41 (see Figure 2, Station 11+35); • A roadside inlet, pipe extension and rock rip-rap energy dissipater outlet ' would be added to an existing pipe culvert that passes under SR 41 (see Figure 2, Station 13+10); • A pipe extension (1.7 meters [66 inches] in diameter by 22 meters long) and , rock rip-rap inlet would be added to the existing culvert which carries the adjacent intermittent stream under a residential access road heading north of ' SR 41 (see Figure 3, Station 13+60). 2.4 ALTERNATIVES A Project Alternative was developed in coordination with Caltrans to reduce the scale of the roadway widening (see Figure 6). The fundamental differences between the proposed project and Project Alternative is that the westbound right turn lane would be replaced with shoulder widening, and the eastbound refuge/acceleration lane would be shortened from 51 mto25m. The Project Alternative is composed of the following operational improvements to ' the SR 41/Los Altos Road intersection: • Extension of the eastbound left turn pocket to 112 m (same as proposed project); • A new 56 m westbound shoulder widening on SR 41 to facilitate right turns , onto Los Altos Road; • A new 25 m eastbound refuge/acceleration lane (proposed project is 51 m); • Complete pavement overlay of affected portions of SR 41; , • Retaining wall (47 m long) west of Los Altos Road (same as proposed , project); and • Retaining wall (25 m long) east of Los Altos Road (proposed project wall is 34 m long). ' Page 4 June 2005 Project No 0502-0211 � 4 h 3 f 4 �t r" t4 PROJECT Atascad ro f SITE r' t s h, FRI � a MOmo Sa x f { l b? Ips j. a b #E NORTH gpprox l"=4.0 Mile F ; dre associates, Inco ' ® SITE LOCATION MAP SR41 Improvements-oak Ridge Estates FIGURE °I nl O N O LO LO O O O O N Z � U 0 0 V L 00- M CN \ t 1331 M0139 33S Q M N , N 0 r- 0 0 J iia co Ovoll SO r Kej 4 CO w AV I \ X0 H p 0 O £ AunD13 33S ui I I I �. ,j " I I 9� • � I > i j dt i�' I ' ' I I I � _ I � j I �j o i,: CO � I I I l;. I I i I I�lllil „ ISI I I Ilii III � I � I ;lilllill�l�il� I � I'I I - � ,Illllllllli� il; � I II \y Ty I Q) I J W W �< w Q O F- w Q Q U W rri S o Z U z a> W W < LL F<, W0 W W U t Z N F- Z C/) 1 HU � J CL w U) _j O W O O Q L.4 w a a of a C%4 IIS �Cb \ II LL / �l all \I N 0 1 Kej 4 CO w AV I \ X0 H p 0 O £ AunD13 33S ui I I I �. ,j " I I 9� • � I > i j dt i�' I ' ' I I I � _ I � j I �j o i,: CO � I I I l;. I I i I I�lllil „ ISI I I Ilii III � I � I ;lilllill�l�il� I � I'I I - � ,Illllllllli� il; � I II \y Ty I Q) I J W W �< w Q O F- w Q Q U W rri S o Z U z a> W W < LL F<, W0 W W U t Z N F- Z C/) 1 HU � J CL w U) _j O W O O Q L.4 w a a of a C%4 IIS II LL z aa• c 0 cx. E U U) N agN ®% Q O o 0) t 41 o, 0 qtlq Wg V o WO O C7> 45WW U) p ® U 0) Z Mimi WOi -A O 4� _Z J w w w w ¢ O w 0¢ W U w vi Q z F twn = w zi W_ w ®a Q a (!) o cw, o o LL S p w w 0 v 3 � a a w O W O O Q w w a 5 a s r f , , , , , , , I , , , , I I , , , I 1 , , I , , I Z Mimi WOi -A O 4� _Z J w w w w ¢ O w 0¢ W U w vi Q z F twn = w zi W_ w ®a Q a (!) o cw, o o LL S p w w 0 v 3 � a a w O W O O Q w w a 5 a s r f 1 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 3.0 STUDY METHODS A Biological Study Area (BSA) was identified based on review of the Improvement Plans prepared by R. Thompson Consulting, Inc., which generally encompasses the existing State right-of-way along SR 41. Biological surveys and habitat mapping was conducted within the BSA. The Project Impact Area encompasses the area that may be directly affected by construction and maintenance of proposed improvements. ' 3.1 STUDIES REQUIRED Biological resources of the Biological Study Area were assessed based upon literature research and field surveys. Botanical surveys were conducted and an inventory of all plant species encountered was prepared (Appendix A). Botanical surveys were conducted during appropriate seasons to adequately identify special -status species known from the region. Field surveys for wildlife were conducted by walking transects of opportunity through habitat types and recording species observed based on visual observation using 7 X 35 binoculars, auditory cues (calls and songs), and indirect signs (tracks, scat, skeletal remains, ' burrows, etc.). Fieldwork was conducted on June 6, 16 and 21, 2005. California red -legged frog surveys were conducted, and included two daytime surveys and two nighttime surveys (using a headlamp). Native trees within the BSA were identified and mapped when in close proximity to the Project Impact Area. Due to dense vegetation, not all native trees within the BSA were surveyed. 3.2 PERSONNEL AND SURVEY DATES Field surveys were conducted by Mr. Matt Ingamells with assistance by Mr. Brian ' Dugas. Mr. Ingamells has earned a B.S. and M.A. in Biology and has over 15 years experience as a professional biologist. Mr. Dugas has earned a B.S. in Natural Resources Planning and has nine years experience conducting biological field surveys. The dates of each field survey are provided in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of Field Surveys Survey Type Personnel Dates Botanical, wildlife, California red -legged frog, Ingamells June 6, 2005 wetlands, trees 1330-1800 June 6, 2005 California red -legged frog, wildlife Ingamells 2030-2200 June 15, 2005 California red -legged frog, botanical, wildlife Ingamells 1630-1800 June 21, 2005 California red -legged frog Dugas 2000-2200 Page 11 Castlerock Development I State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 3.3 AGENCY COORDINATION , No agency coordination has occurred to date. No listed species would be adversely ' affected. Therefore, agency coordination will be focused on those with permit authority, including the Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board. , 3.4 LIMITATIONS Field surveys were conducted within the Project Impact Area and BSA. However, ' focused breeding bird surveys were not conducted, such that potential impacts to migratory birds are not fully known. Such surveys are recommended to be completed as part of permitting required to relocate the drainages (see Section 4.5.1.2). Page 12 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4.1 EXISTING BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 4.1.1 Study Area The Biological Study Area (BSA) for the proposed improvements was selected to represent the entire area that would be directly affected by any of the alternative engineering 1 designs under review. As a minimum, the BSA includes the entire SR 41 right-of-way in the vicinity of the proposed improvements. In addition, the BSA included areas upstream and downstream of the intermittent stream adjacent to SR 41 that may be affected by roadway improvements. An aerial photograph of the BSA and surrounding area is provided as Figure 4. Site photographs are provided as Figure 5. The SR 41/Los Altos Road intersection is located at approximately Milepost 11.5. The BSA extended approximately 100 meters beyond the limits of proposed improvements, or MP 11.4 to 11.7. This area encompasses approximately 1.8 hectares (4.4 acres). ' 4.1.2 Physical Conditions The BSA lies within the Santa Lucia Mountains, which are a component of the coastal ranges of California, separating the coastal plain from the Central Valley. The affected portion of SR 41 is an incline in the westbound direction, at elevations from 421 to 439 meters (1,380 to 1,440 feet). SR 41 reaches a summit of approximately 1,440 feet within the BSA, and 1 then descends to the west towards the ocean at Morro Bay. The BSA is underlain by the Franciscan Complex, composed of Cretaceous and Jurassic-age sandstones. An intermittent stream is located adjacent to SR 41 east of Los Altos ' Road, and flows into Atascadero Creek approximately 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) east of the BSA. A smaller roadside drainage begins near the SR 41 summit and enlarges as it extends to the east, and flows through a pipe culvert under Los Altos Road to its confluence with the tributary ' of Atascadero Creek. 4.1.3 Biological Conditions of the Study Area ' Vegetation. The BSA is comprised of roadside areas and adjacent drainages. Roadside areas appear to be periodically mowed and support disturbance-adapted species (weeds) such as Italian rye-grass (Lolium multiflorum), vetch (Vicia sativa), wild oats (Avena ' fatua), bur-clover (Medicago polymorpha) and Spanish clover (Lotus purshianaus). The roadside drainage west of Los Altos Road supports a linear strip of toad rush (Juncus ' bufonius), Italian ryegrass and Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum), grading into Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), then transitioning into coast live oak series (Central Coast live oak riparian forest) as the drainage area and channel expands. Coast live oak series within the BSA is dominated by coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), but also includes scattered arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and California bay (Umbellularia californica). ' Page 13 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud East of Los Altos Road, the roadside drainage joins with the tributary of Atascadero Creek, which supports mixed willow series dominated by arroyo willow, red willow (Salix laevigata) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa). The understory of the mixed willow series within the BSA is dominated by Harding grass and willow dock (Rumex salicifolius). Vegetation of the BSA is mapped on Figure 4. Botanical surveys identified 72 plant species within the BSA, including 29 native species. The balance (43 species, 60 percent) were non-native, naturalized or cultivated. Wildlife. Noise generated by vehicles and wind limited reduced the effectiveness of wildlife surveys of the BSA. Species observed during the field surveys were limited to Pacific tree frog, fence lizard, gopher snake, scrub jay, starling, Anna's hummingbird, titmouse, turkey vulture, Nuttall's woodpecker, acorn woodpecker, wrentit, California towhee, mourning dove, lesser goldfinch, pocket gopher, opposum and coyote. Scrub jays were the most apparent species, foraging in the riparian forest. Wildlife Corridors. Highly mobile species such as larger mammals and birds are expected to move between inland areas (Templeton, Santa Margarita, Creston) and coastal areas, and SR 41 provides a means to traverse dense vegetation and steep slopes. Wildlife use of SR 41 may be facilitated by habitat corridors associated with drainages that parallel SR 41 between Atascadero and Morro Bay (Morro Creek, Atascadero Creek). However, the drainage within the BSA is narrow and entrenched, and overgrown with dense undergrowth, making it difficult for larger mammals to traverse. In addition, few mammal tracks were observed along the drainages within the BSA, indicating this is not a well used wildlife movement corridor. Therefore, SR 41 is unlikely to be a critical movement corridor in the area. Invasive Species and Level of Disturbance. The California Exotic Plant Pest Council maintains two lists of exotic pest plants of greatest ecological concern in California. The lists include List A (most invasive) and List B (lesser invasiveness). List A plants found within the BSA during field surveys are red brome, yellow star thistle, pampas grass and sweet fennel. List B plants within the BSA are black mustard, Italian thistle, bull thistle, poison hemlock and Harding grass. Yellow star thistle and Harding grass are the only invasive species present in substantial numbers within the BSA. However, the distribution of these species appears limited to previously disturbed areas and invasion of native habitats is not apparent. Approximately 50 percent of the BSA is disturbed as a result of existing pavement and roadway maintenance including mowing along the shoulders, paving repairs and infrequent clean-up of mudflows. In addition, weed abatement (mowing and weed whipping) is conducted within the right-of-way north of the drainage. Page 14 U') O O Z N U � O 3 L IL i m 3 w c .v m 0 E 0 o CL o E d � W o co J o+ c �L Ask a= E Ox a i�:o9 cr- Mv� > co 0 U ®0�1 o o 3 . ®g � Of a � ® U I iJAI M0139 33S jj ' > L C) z J LIJ 0-- LIJ 0 z < CL 0 F - w w 61 V, c CC) '(11108 S011,v Sol / II --�� /, % �F z Z L . .. . .. . .. . .. o t I<° L Lu L < I 43 aj� LU '0 F- 0 D F Z > LU co 9 LU > 0 w < 0 Z < w < < — ) (L uz z — < CO C, a. 1 0 < Z W Z I :5 0 ;P-111 w 0/1 U) 0 0 1 0 j 57< w w w W X LU CL iHOW 3A0EIV 33S ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 4.2 REGIONAL SPECIES AND HABITATS OF CONCERN 1 4.2.1 Regional Biological Importance Generally, the SR 41 corridor supports vegetation and wildlife habitats common in ' the region and characteristic of the Santa Lucia Mountains. Residential development is accelerating in the Atascadero area, and large ranches along the SR 41 corridor are ripe for rural residential development. Therefore, these wildlife habitats may become less common in 1 the future. Botanical surveys conducted for the Oak Ridge Estates project identified four special -status plant species in the project area, including San Luis Obispo mariposa lily and Cambria morning glory, both considered rare and endangered by the California Native Plant ' Society. 4.2.2 Plant Species of Concern ' Plant species of concern are either listed as endangered or threatened under the Federal or California Endangered Species Acts, or rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act, or considered to be rare or of scientific interest (but not formally listed) by resource agencies, professional organizations (e.g., Audubon Society, California Native Plant Society [CNPS], The Wildlife Society), and the scientific community. ' For the purposes of this project, plant species of concern are defined in Table 2. The literature search conducted for this impact analysis indicates 24 plant species of concern have the potential to occur in the region (e.g., Atascadero, Creston, Templeton, Santa ' Margarita quadrangles). Table 3 lists these species, their current status, and the nearest known location relative to the project area. The presence -absence column in Table 3 refers to suitable habitat within the BSA, and does not necessarily indicate the presence of the species. i � I � I � I � I Table 2. Definitions of Plant Species of Concern ➢ Plants listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.12 for listed plants and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species). ➢ Plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, May 4, 2004). ➢ Plants that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under the CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380). ➢ Plants considered by the CNPS to be "rare, threatened, or endangered" in California (Lists 1 B and 2 in Skinner and Pavlik, 1994). ➢ Plants listed by CNPS as plants about which we need more information and plants of limited distribution (Lists 3 and 4 in Skinner and Pavlik, 1994). ➢ Plants listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (14 CCR 670.5). ➢ Plants listed under the California Native Plant Protection Act (California Fish and Game Code 1900 et seq.). ➢ Plants considered sensitive by other Federal agencies (i.e., U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management), State and local agencies or jurisdictions. ➢ Plants considered sensitive or unique by the scientific community or occurring at the limits of its natural range (State CEQA Guidelines). ➢ Native trees protected under the City of Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. Page 21 Castlerock Development I State Route 41 Imorovements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study Table 3. Regional Plant Species of Concern Page 22 Nearest Known Habitat Common Scientific Name Habitat Status Location Relative to Present Rationale Name the BSA -Absent Santa Arctostaphylos Coniferous Paloma Creek Road, 3.3 No suitable habitat Margarita Pilosu/a forest, chaparral, List 1 B miles to the east- A within BSA manzanita woodland southeast (NDDB, 2005) Wells Arctostaphylos Coniferous forest, chaparral Eagle Ranch, 3.0 miles No suitable habitat manzanita we/lsii on sandstone- List 1 B to the southeast (NDDB, A within BSA derived soils 2005) Miles' Astragalus Coastal scrub on Atascadero, 5.4 miles to No suitable .habitat milkvetch didymocarpus clay soils List 1 B the northeast (NDDB, A within BSA var. milesianus 2005) Grassland within San Luis Calochortus Chaparral, Cuesta Ridge, 6.8 miles BSA highly mariposa lily obispoensis coastal scrub, List 1B to the south-southeast A disturbed, not grassland (NDDB, 2005) considered suitable Chaparral, Grassland within San Luis Calochonus coastal scrub, Oak Ridge Estates, 1.4 BSA highly Obispo simula mulans grassland, List 1 B miles to the northwest A disturbed, not mariposa lily woodland (Holland et al., 2001) considered suitable Grassland within Dwarf Calycadenia Chaparral, Near Creston, 12.5 BSA highly calycadenia villosa woodland, List 1 B miles to the northeast A disturbed, not grassland (NDDB, 2005) considered suitable Grassland within Cambria Calystegia Chaparral, Oak Ridge Estates, 0.5 BSA highly morning glory subacaulis ssp. woodland, List 1 B miles to the northwest A disturbed, not episcopalism grassland (Holland et al., 2001) considered suitable Hardham's Camissonia Chaparral, Near Iron Spring, 10.3 No suitable habitat evening hardhamiae woodland List 1B miles to the east A within BSA primrose (NDDB, 2005) San Luis Carex Seeps and Cerro Alto, 3.0 miles to Obispo sedge obispoensis streams, often List 1 B the south-southwest P on serpentinite (NDDB, 2005) Grassland within Lemmon's Caulanthus Pinyon/juniper Paso Robles, 15 miles BSA highly jewelflower coulted var. woodland, List 1 B to the north (NDDB, A disturbed, not lemmonii grassland 2005) considered suitable Chaparral, Grassland within Brewer's Chorizanthe coastal scrub, Cerro Alto, 2.8 miles to BSA highly spineflower brewed woodland, List 1B the south (NDDB, 2005) A disturbed, not grasslands on considered serpentinite suitable Straight- Chorizanthe Chaparral, Rocky Canyon, 6.2 No suitable habitat awned rectispina woodland, List 1 B miles to the east- A within BSA spineflower coastal scrub northeast (NDDB, 2005) Page 22 ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud � I � I � I Table 3. Continued Status Codes: List 16 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere (CNPS) List 2 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere (CNPS) List 4 Plants of limited distribution, a watch list (CNPS) SR Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act Page 23 Nearest Known Habitat Common Scientific Name Habitat Status Location Relative to Present Rationale Name the BSA -Absent San Bernardo Creek, Chorro Creek Cirsium fontinale Seeps, streams List 1B 4.1 miles to the south- P bog thistle var. obispoense southwest (NDDB, 2005) Yellow- Broad -leaf Atascadero, 3 miles toA No suitable habitat flowered Eriastrum luteum forest, chaparral, List 1 B the east (NDDB, 2005) within BSA eriastrum woodland Grassland within Clay soils in Atascadero, 4.8 miles to BSA highly Round -leaved Erodium woodland, List 2 the northeast (NDDB, A disturbed, not filaree macrophyllum grassland 2005) considered suitable Horkelia cueata Sandy openings Atascadero, 3.4 miles to No suitable habitat Mesa horkelia ssp. puberia in chaparral, List 1 B the northeast (NDDB, A within BSA coastal scrub 2005) Cerro Alto campground, Carmel Valley Malacothamnus Chaparral, 2.6 miles to the south- A No suitable habitat bush mallow palmeri var. woodland, List 1B southwest (NDDB, within BSA involucratus coastal scrub 2005) Santa Lucia Malacothamnus Route 41, 2.8 miles to No suitable habitat bush mallow palmeri var. Rocky chaparral List 1 B the southwest (NDDB, A within BSA palmeri 2005) Palmer's Monardella Chaparral, Cerro Alto, 3.0 miles to No suitable habitat monardella palmeri woodland on List 1 B the south-southwest A within BSA serpentinite (NDDB, 2005) Paso Robles Woodland, grassland on Oak Ridge Estates, 0.9 A No suitable habitat navarretia Navarretia jaredii clay or List 4 miles the northwest within BSA n (Holland et al., 2001) serpentinite Grassland within Navarretia Woodland, Near Creston, 11.8 BSA highly Shining nigelliformis ssp. grassland, vernal List 1 B miles to the northeast A disturbed, not navarretia radians pools (NDDB, 2005) considered suitable Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia Woodland, grassland, scrub City Ordinance On-site P Santa Lucia Ribes sericeum Broadleaf forest, List 4 Oak Ridge Estates, 1.0 miles to the northwest A No suitable habitat gooseberry coniferous forest (Holland et al., 2001) within BSA Cuesta Pass Sidalcea Cuesta Ridge, 6.3 miles BSA is outside checkerbloom hickmanii ssp. Coniferous forest SR, List 1B to the south-southeast A known range anomala (NDDB, 2005) San Bernardino Symiatum chum phy Seeps and List 1 B Near Creston, 11.8 miles to the northeast P aster defoliatum streams (NDDB, 2005) California bay Umbellularia Canyon bottoms I City On-site P F laurel califomica Ordinance Status Codes: List 16 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere (CNPS) List 2 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere (CNPS) List 4 Plants of limited distribution, a watch list (CNPS) SR Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act Page 23 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 4.2.3 Wildlife Species of Concern Wildlife species of concern are defined in Table 4. The potential for these species to occur in the vicinity of the project site was determined by review of sight records from other environmental documents and range maps including Zeiner et al. (1988, 1990a, 1990b), and survey route summary data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. The presence - absence column in Table 5 refers to suitable habitat within the BSA, and does not necessarily indicate the presence of the species. Table 4. Definitions of Wildlife Species of Concern Species of Concern Animal Species ➢ Animals listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11 for listed animals and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species). ➢ Animals that are candidates for possibler future listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, May 4, 2004). ➢ Animals that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under the CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380). ➢ Animals listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened and endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (14 CCR 670.5). ➢ Animal species of special concern to the CDFG (Remsen, 1978 for birds; Williams, 1986 for mammals; Moyle et al., 1989 for fish; and Jennings and Hayes; 1994 for amphibians and reptiles). ➢ Animal species that are fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code, Section 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians]). Table 5. Regional Wildlife Species of Concern Page 24 Habitat Common Scientific Name Habitat Status Nearest Known Location Present- Rationale Name Absent Near Creston, 12.5 miles No suitable Vernal pool Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pools FT to the northeast (NDDB, A habitat within fairy shrimp 2005) BSA California Linderiella Oak Road, 7.0 miles to the No suitable linderiella occidentalis Vernal pools SA east-southeast (NDDB, A habitat within 2005) BSA Atascadero Atascadero, 4.6 miles to No suitable june beetle Polyphylla nubi/a Sand dunes SA the south-southwest A habitat within (NDDB, 2005) BSA Western spade- Santa Margarita, 7.3 miles No suitable foot toad Spea hammondii Vernal pools CSC to the southeast (NDDB, A habitat within 2005) BSA California red- Rana aurora Instream FT, Paloma Creek, 4.3 miles to legged frog draytonii pools CSC the east (Althouse and P Meade, 2003) Page 24 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Table 5. Continued Natural Environment Stu Status Codes: CSC California Species of Special Concern (CDFG) SA Special Animal (CDFG) FE Federal Endangered (USFWS) SE State Endangered (CDFG) FT Federal Threatened (USFWS) ST State Threatened (CDFG) Page 25 Habitat Common Scientific Name Habitat Status Nearest Known Location Present- Rationale Name Absent Southwestern Clemmys marmorata Vegetated CSC Atascadero Creek (NDDB, P pond turtle pallida ponds 2005) Paloma Creek, 4.3 miles to Northern harrier Circus cyaneus Grasslands, marshes CSC (nest) the east ( Althouse and P Meade, 2003) Cerro Alto campground, No suitable California Strix occidentalis Coniferous CSC 2.6 miles to the south- A habitat within spotted owl occidentalis forests southwest (Holland and BSA Hanson,1992) Santa Margarita, 7.8 miles White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus Grasslands, scrub, marsh SA (nest) to the southeast (NDDB, P 2005) Paloma Creek, 4.3 miles to Loggerhead Lanius ludovicianus Grasslands CSC the east (Althouse and P shrike (nest) Meade, 2003) Grassland Creston, 12 miles to the habitat within California Eremophila alpestris Grasslands CSC northeast (BBS survey A BSA is too horned lark ssp. actia route summary) small and fragmented Paloma Creek, 4.3 miles to Grasslands, CSC the east (Jordan Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperi scrub, (nest) Environmental Services, P woodland 2003) Riparian Dendroica petechia forest, CSC eLake, 2.5 P Yellow warbler ssp. brewsteri riparian (nest) miles to east (Holland the miles to th and Hanson, 1992) scrub Grassland Creston, 12 miles to the habitat within Lark sparrow Chondestes Grassland SA northeast (BBS survey A BSA is too grammacus route summary) small and fragmented Caves, Corynorhinus mines, Santa Margarita Ranch, No suitable Pale big -eared townsendii ssp. abandoned CSC 7.1 miles to the southeast, A habitat within bat pallescens buildings NDDB, 2005) BSA (roosting) Caves, Santa Margarita Creek No suitable Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus crevices and CSC bridge, 6.8 miles to the A habitat within mines southeast (NDDB, 2005) BSA (roosting) Grasslands, Santa Margarita Ranch, American Taxidea taxus scrub, open CSC 7.4 miles to the southeast, P badger woodlands NDDB, 2005) San Joaquin kit Vulpes vulpes Scrub, FE, ST Shandon, 25 miles to the A BSA is outside fox mutica grassland northeast known range Status Codes: CSC California Species of Special Concern (CDFG) SA Special Animal (CDFG) FE Federal Endangered (USFWS) SE State Endangered (CDFG) FT Federal Threatened (USFWS) ST State Threatened (CDFG) Page 25 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 4.2.4 Discussion of Listed Species 4.2.4.1 Cuesta Pass checkerbloom (Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. anoma/a) This species is a perennial herb in the mallow family (Malvaceae), distinguished by its covering of grayish, star-shaped hairs, rounded basal leaves and deeply lobed stem leaves and pinkish -lavender flowers above broad bracts. It grows in open sites on serpentine rock and soils at in the vicinity of Sargent cypress forest. It is restricted to a small area of San Luis Obispo County on West Cuesta Ridge. The Highway 41 wildfire of August 1994 burned tens of thousands of acres in Los Padres National Forest including the known population of the checkerbloom on West Cuesta Ridge. Prior to the fire, this population consisted of fewer than 50 individuals. Surveys in 1995 and 1996 revealed that the checkerbloom extends throughout the Cuesta Ridge Botanical Area and beyond, including most of the serpentine soils on west Cuesta Ridge. The population boomed to tens of thousands of individuals after the 1994 wildfire. The BSA is located over 6 miles from any known population, suitable habitat does not occur in the vicinity of the BSA, and Cuesta Pass checkerbloom was not found during field surveys of the BSA. Therefore, Cuesta Pass checkerbloom is not expected to occur within the BSA. 4.2.4.2 Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) This species is a Federally -listed threatened species. Vernal pool fairy shrimp was only recently described (1990), and is limited to vernal pools from Jackson County, Oregon to Riverside County, California. There are no vernal pools within the BSA, and the nearest known population of vernal pool fairy shrimp is located 12.5 miles to the northeast. Therefore, vernal pool fairy shrimp is not expected to occur within the BSA. 4.2.4.3 California red -legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) The California red -legged frog is a Federally listed threatened species and a California species of special concern. A proposed rule designating critical habitat for this species was published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on April 13, 2004, but has not been finalized to date. The BSA is not located within proposed critical habitat. This species does not appear to occur within the Atascadero Creek watershed, and was not found during protocol surveys of the BSA. Therefore, California red -legged frog is not expected to occur within the BSA. 4.2.4.4 San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes vulpes mutica) This species is Federally -listed as endangered and State -listed as threatened. San Joaquin kit fox occurs within the San Joaquin Valley and surrounding foothills of the coastal ranges, Sierra Nevada and Tehachapi mountains, from southern Kern County north to Contra Costa County. Critical habitat has not been designated for this species, but three core populations have been identified (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998): • Carrizo Plain Natural Area (eastern San Luis Obispo County); • West Kern County; and Page 26 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study ' • Ciervo-Panoche Natural Area (Fresno and San Benito counties). In San Luis Obispo County, this species generally occurs east of the Santa Lucia Mountains and U.S. 101. Based on mapping of San Joaquin kit fox sightings maintained by San Luis Obispo County, the nearest sighting to the BSA is near Shandon, 25 miles to the 1 northeast. Based on the lack of sighting in the region and lack of suitable habitat, San Joaquin kit fox is not expected to occur within the BSA. 4.2.5 Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 The focus of the Act was the "Establishment of a Federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at ' any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention for the protection of migratory birds, or any part, nest or egg of any such bird" (16 USC 703). ' A list of migratory birds protected under the Act is contained in 50 CFR 10.13, and includes hundreds of game and non -game species. Dozens of these species nest within the region, and many could nest within or in close proximity to proposed improvement locations. Federal agencies are required to avoid or minimize adverse effects of their actions on migratory birds, and should take active steps to protect migratory birds and their habitat. ' The Act clearly prevents the removal of active nests of migratory bird species, which may result in the loss of eggs or nestlings. Migratory bird activity is expected within oak woodland and riparian forest within and adjacent to the BSA. i] 'II Page 27 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 5.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 5.1 SPECIES OF CONCERN POTENTIALLY IN PROJECT IMPACT AREA The Project Impact Area is defined as the potential area of ground disturbance associated with roadway widening and drainage improvements as indicated on Figures 2 and 3. Table 6 represents a subset of species of concern reported from the region (see Tables 3 and 5) that have been observed or may occur in the Project Impact Area. Species were included in Table 6 if suitable habitat occurs within the Project Impact Area, as documented in Tables 3 and 5. Field survey results, avoidance and minimization efforts, potential project impacts, compensatory mitigation and cumulative impacts are discussed below for each species listed in Table 6. Table 6. Project Impact Area Species of Concern Page 28 Habitat within Species Common Name Scientific Name Status Impact Area Present- Rationale Present -Absent Absent Plants San Luis Obispo Carex obispoensis CNPS List P (stream wetlands) A Not found during surveys sedge 113 of Impact Area Chorro Creek bog Cirsium fontinale var. CNPS List p (stream wetlands) A Not found during surveys thistle obispoense 1113 of Impact Area Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia City Ordinance P P San Bernardino aster Symphyotrichum CNPS List P (stream wetlands) A Not found during surveys defoliatum 113 of Impact Area California bay laurel Umbellularia californica city Ordinance P A Found within BSA, but outside Impact Area Wildlife California red -legged Rana aurora draytonii FT, CSC P (stream pools) A Not found during protocol frog surveys of Impact Area Southwestern pond Clemmys marmorata CSC P (stream pools) A Not found during surveys turtle pallida of Impact Area Does not nest in the region, habitat quality poor Northern harrier Circus cyaneus CSC (nest) P (riparian forest) A due to disturbance and fragmentation by adjacent development Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus CSC (nest) P (grasslands) P Habitat quality poor due to White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus SA (nest) P (grasslands) A disturbance and fragmentation by adjacent development Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia ssp. CSC (nest) P (riparian forest) P brewsteri American badger Taxidea taxus CSC P (grassland) A Not found during surveys of Impact Area Page 28 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road 5.2 NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN 5.2.1 Mixed Willow Series Natural Environment Study The CDFG Natural Diversity Data Base considers mixed willow series as rare and worthy of tracking as a community of special concern. 5.2.1.1 Survey Results Mixed willow series occurs within the BSA, east of Los Altos Road. 5.2.1.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts A retaining wall has been included in the project design to reduce loss of this community associated with roadway widening. 5.2.1.3 Project Impacts Approximately 0.13 ha (0.32 acres) of mixed willow series occurs within the Project Impact Area. This community would be removed to provide space for placement of fill for roadway widening. However, the drainage would be re-established, allowing for colonization by willows and other riparian plant species. 5.2.1.4 Alternatives The Project Alternative would avoid loss of this community by reducing the westbound right turn lane and the associated roadway widening. However, trimming of major willow tree limbs would be required to accommodate retaining wall construction. 5.2.1.5 Compensatory Mitigation If the Project Alternative is not implemented, the mixed willow series would be restored along the re -located drainage. Willow cuttings and seeds of native plants would be used to establish at least 0.16 ha (0.4 acres) of mixed willow series within the State right-of- way. 5.2.1.6 Cumulative Impacts The Oak Ridge Estates project would result in the loss of a small area of mixed willow series, in the area north of the BSA. 5.3 PLANT SPECIES OF CONCERN Based on literature research conducted for this Study, no State or Federally -listed plant has been reported from the project area. Cuesta Pass checkerbloom is State -listed as rare, but is restricted to a Cuesta Pass and does not occur in the project area. Plant species with the potential to occur within the Project Impact Area are listed in Table 6, and are limited to those considered sensitive by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and City of Atascadero. Botanical surveys were conducted during appropriate season (June) to adequately identify special -status species known from the region. Based on botanical surveys, only coast live oak occurs within the Project Impact Area. Page 29 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road 5.3.1 Coast Live Oak Natural Environment Stud The City of Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 11 of the Municipal Code) applies to coast live oak trees with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 4 inches or greater. The Native Tree Ordinance requires a permit for removal of oak trees which generally includes tree replacement requirements. The City's Native Tree Guidelines indicate two coast live oak trees should be planted for each 6 -inch dbh removed. 5.3.1.1 Survey Results Seven coast live oak trees were found within the Project Impact Area, and were measured and mapped relative to the existing edge of pavement (shoulder), using a tape measure. These trees occur adjacent to the proposed retaining wall (see Figure 2). Construction of the proposed retaining wall west of Los Altos Road would require the removal of three coast live oak trees and substantially encroach upon four additional trees (see Table 7). Table 7. Native Tree Impacts Tree no. Species Diameter (inches @ breast height) Distance from Trunk to Existing Edge of Pavement Impact 1 Coast live oak 5 15 Encroachment 2 Coast live oak 14 15.5 Encroachment 3 Coast live oak 10,9 10.5 Removal 4 Coast live oak 11 9.5 Removal 5 Coast live oak 15 15.5 Encroachment 6 Coast live oak 8 14.5 Encroachment 7 Coast live oak 11 9 Removal 5.3.1.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts A retaining wall has been included in the project design to reduce loss of oak trees associated with roadway widening. 5.3.1.3 Project Impacts Table 7 identifies trees to be removed and those which would adversely affected by substantial ground disturbance within the canopy dripline (encroachment). Overall, three coast live oaks would be removed, and encroachment would occur at four coast live oaks. 5.3.1.4 Alternatives The Project Alternative design is the same as the proposed project in the vicinity of the oak trees. Therefore, the Project Alternative would have the same oak tree impacts. Page 30 ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road ' 5.3.1.5 Compensatory Mitigation P rY 9 Natural Environment Study Consistent with the City's Native Tree Ordinance, two coast live oak trees would be planted for each 6 -inch dbh removed. Based on impacts identified in Table 7, eleven oak trees would be planted to replace those lost to construction. These trees would be planted in 5 or 15 gallon containers, along the relocated drainage. 5.3.1.6 Cumulative Impacts The Oak Ridge Estates project would result in the loss of coast live oak trees, in the area north of the BSA. 5.4 WILDLIFE SPECIES OF CONCERN 5.4.1 Loggerhead Shrike ' 5.4.1.1 Survey Results This species was not observed in the vicinity of the proposed improvements during field surveys conducted by Padre Associates. However, loggerhead shrike occurs in the ' Atascadero area (Althouse and Meade, 2003) and may forage in grassland within the Project Impact Area. 5.4.1.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts A retaining wall has been included in the project design to reduce loss of habitat associated with roadway widening. 5.4.1.3 Project Impacts The proposed project would result in the loss of less than 0.05 ha (0.1 acres) of grassland foraging habitat for this species. It is expected that grasses planted for erosion control and natural recruitment of annual grasses would result in the replacement of grassland on the fill slopes following construction. Loggerhead shrike is not expected to breed within the Project Impact Area due to disturbance associated with vehicle traffic and roadway maintenance. Based on an average 7.6 ha (18.7 acre) territory (Miller, 1931), project related ' habitat loss would be equivalent to less than one percent of a single breeding territory. No loss of nesting habitat would occur. Due to the low quality habitat affected (weedy roadside areas) and the presence of thousands of acres of suitable nesting and foraging habitat in the Atascadero area and Santa Margarita Valley, the loss of less than one percent of a potential nesting territory is unlikely to adversely affect loggerhead shrike. 5.4.1.4 Alternatives ' The Project Alternative would result in a smaller loss of habitat, as less roadway widening would occur. 5.4.1.5 Compensatory Mitigation No adverse effect, none required. 5.4.1.6 Cumulative Impacts Loggerhead shrike may occur within the Oak Ridge Estates project site, and may be impacted by loss of habitat associated with implementation of additional phases. Page 31 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 5.4.2 Coopers Hawk 5.4.2.1 Survey Results This species was not observed in the vicinity of the proposed improvements during field surveys conducted by Padre Associates. However, Cooper's hawk was reported from the Atascadero area (Jordan Environmental Services, 2003) and may forage within the riparian habitats of the BSA. 5.4.2.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts Two retaining walls have been included in the project design to reduce loss of riparian habitat. 5.4.2.3 Project Impacts The proposed project would result in the loss of 0.16 ha (0.39 acres) of suitable habitat, including 0.13 ha (0.32 acres) of mixed willow series and 0.03 ha (0.07 acres) of coast live oak series. However, Cooper's hawk is not expected to breed within the Project Impact Area due to disturbance associated with vehicle traffic and roadway maintenance. Therefore, no loss of nesting habitat would occur. Due to the low quality foraging habitat affected (roadside areas) and the presence of many hundreds of acres of suitable nesting and foraging habitat along Atascadero Creek, Paloma Creek and adjacent woodland areas, the loss of 0.16 ha (0.39 acres) of foraging habitat is unlikely to adversely affect Cooper's hawk. 5.4.2.4 Alternatives The Project Alternative would result in a smaller loss of habitat, as less roadway widening would occur. 5.4.2.5 Compensatory Mitigation No adverse effect, none required. 5.4.2.6 Cumulative Impacts Cooper's hawk may occur within the Oak Ridge Estates project site, and may be impacted by loss of habitat associated with implementation of additional phases. 5.4.3 Yellow Warbler 5.4.3.1 Survey Results This species was not observed in the vicinity of the proposed improvements during field surveys conducted by Padre Associates. However, yellow warbler is known to breed in riparian habitats in the area and may forage in mixed willow series and coast live oak series within the Project Impact Area. 5.4.3.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts Two retaining walls have been included in the project design to reduce loss of riparian habitat. Page 32 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study ' 5.4.3.3 Project Impacts ' The proposed project would result in the loss of 0.16 ha (0.39 acres) of suitable habitat, including 0.13 ha (0.32 acres) of mixed willow series and 0.03 ha (0.07 acres) of coast live oak series. However, yellow warbler is not expected to breed within the Project Impact Area due to disturbance associated with vehicle traffic and roadway maintenance. Therefore, no loss of nesting habitat would occur. Due to the low quality foraging habitat affected (roadside areas) and the presence of many hundreds of acres of suitable nesting and foraging ' habitat along Atascadero Creek and Paloma Creek, the loss of 0.16 ha (0.39 acres) of foraging habitat is unlikely to adversely affect yellow warbler. 5.4.3.4 Alternatives ' The Project Alternative would result in a smaller loss of habitat, as less roadway widening would occur. ' 5.4.3.5 Compensatory Mitigation No adverse effect, none required. ' 5.4.3.6 Cumulative Impacts Yellow warbler may occur within the Oak Ridge Estates project site, and may be impacted by loss of habitat associated with implementation of additional phases. 5.5 MIGRATORY BIRDS AND OTHER PROTECTED BIRDS ' This Section addresses both relatively common species and special -status species protected as: • Migratory birds under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Sections 3513 and 3700 of the California Fish and Game Code; • Birds of prey under Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code (includes white-tailed kite, Cooper's hawk, kestrel, red-tailed hawk, red - shouldered hawk known from the region); and • Fully protected birds under Section 3511 of the California Fish and Game Code (includes white-tailed kite). W 5.5.1.1 Survey Results � I 11 Migratory birds are common in the project area, and may nest within the Project Impact Area. No focused breeding bird surveys have been completed to date. 5.5.1.2 Avoidance and Minimization Efforts Two retaining walls have been included in the project design to reduce loss of bird habitat. The following minimization measures are recommended to prevent take of migratory and other protected bird species: 1. Minimize removal of vegetation by locating staging areas and access routes in previously disturbed areas; Page 33 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 2. Removal of vegetation shall be conducted in the fall and winter after fledging and before the initiation of breeding activities; 3. Pre -construction bird surveys shall be performed in spring to determine the location of bird nesting sites. If active nests are detected during the breeding season, nests should be avoided during construction. 4. A 60 m (200 ft) buffer should be maintained between active nests of birds of prey and fully protected species, and construction activities; and, 5. Project impacts and mitigation measures shall be coordinated with USFWS and CDFG in early planning stages to avoid project delays during construction. 5.5.1.3 Project Impacts Removal of trees and other vegetation during the breeding season may result in disruption of breeding and/or loss of eggs or nestlings. However, avoidance and minimization measures provided in Section 4.5.1.2 would prevent take. 5.5.1.4 Compensatory Mitigation Avoidance measures would prevent take; therefore, additional mitigation is not needed. 5.5.1.5 Cumulative Impacts Migratory birds are expected to breed within the Oak Ridge Estates project site, and may be impacted by loss of habitat associated with implementation of additional phases. Page 34 ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 6.0 WETLANDS AND WATERS OF THE U.S. ' 6.1 INTRODUCTION The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has jurisdiction over waters of the United States (U.S.). The limit of jurisdiction in non -tidal waters extends to the ordinary high water mark and include all adjacent wetlands. Waters of the U.S. are defined as: "All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; including all interstate waters including interstate wetlands, all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce." The Corps and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency define wetlands as: "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." 6.2 METHODOLOGY A preliminary wetland delineation was conducted to determine the area of jurisdiction of the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The delineation was performed in accordance with the routine procedures for areas greater than 5 acres detailed in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Jurisdictional wetlands were determined to be present if evidence of all three Federal criteria were observed (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology). However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) wetland definition requires that only one of the wetland criteria be present to define a wetland. 6.2.1 Federal Jurisdiction Determination The limit of Corps jurisdiction in non -tidal waters extends to the ordinary high water mark and includes all adjacent wetlands. The ordinary high water (OHW) mark was established along the banks of the drainage along SR 41 within the Project Impact Area, using drift lines and bank shelving patterns. Drift lines (organic materials deposited along the banks) are direct evidence of the highest water elevation of the most recent rain year. Bank shelving patterns (eroded benches) indicate long-term patterns in high water elevation. The width of waters of the U.S. (distance between OHW marks) was measured and wetlands data (vegetation, hydrology and soils) collected at 11 transect locations within the BSA. Page 35 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 6.2.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation The predominance of hydrophytic (water -loving) vegetation was established by identifying dominant species within a 5 -foot radius circle (sample plot) at each of the transects and determining the hydrophytic class (i.e., facultative, facultative -wetland or obligate wetland species) listed in Reed (1988). 6.2.3 Hydric Soils Soil pits were excavated at each of the 11 transect locations within the BSA. Additional soil pits were excavated as needed to estimate the width of hydric soils at each transect. Soils of the BSA have been mapped as Los Osos-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes (Lindsey, 1983). This complex is composed of Los Osos clay loam, rock outcrops and similar soils. Los Osos-Rock outcrop complex is not considered hydric by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (1992). However, soils of the BSA have been highly modified as a result of highway construction and flooding, and may not represent regional soil designations. 6.2.4 Wetland Hydrology Observations were conducted at each transect and sample plot to identify evidence of inundation or soil saturation, such as drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns and oxidized roots. 6.2.5 Wetland Determination Based on flow records and field observations, the drainages within the BSA east of Station 11+50 are inundated with sufficient frequency to meet the wetland hydrology criterion of the Wetland Delineation Manual. Therefore, areas between OHW marks were assumed to meet the wetland hydrology criterion and the determination of wetlands was based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils. 6.3 SURVEY RESULTS 6.3.1 Federal Jurisdictional Determination A summary of the wetlands delineation is provided in Table 8. Approximately 0.065 ha (0.16 acres) of waters of the U.S. occur within the Project Impact Area. Wetland data forms are provided as Appendix B. 6.3.2 Federal Wetland Determination Jurisdictional wetlands were found in the tributary to Atascadero Creek (east of Los Altos Road, Transects 8 through 11), but not in the roadside drainage to the west (Transects 1 through 7). 6.3.3 CDFG Wetland Determination The extent of CDFG-defined wetlands within the Project Impact Area is based on the area that encompasses any of the three wetland criteria (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, wetland hydrology). For the proposed project, this area is composed of the area exhibiting wetland hydrology west of Los Altos Road, and the area of hydrophytic vegetation east of Los Altos Road. This area is 0.35 acres. Page 36 11 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Table 8. Summary of Wetlands Delineation Natural Environment Stud Transect no. Jurisdictional Width (ft) HydrophyticHydric Vegetation (yes/no) Soil Width (ft) Wetlands Present (yes/no) 1 1.5 Yes 0 No, no hydric soil 2 1.5 Yes 0 No, no hydric soil 3 5 Yes 0 No, no hydric soil 4 5 No 0 No, no wetland plants or hydric soil 5 5 No 0 No, no wetland plants or hydric soil 6 6 No 0 No, no wetland plants or hydric soil 7 5 Yes 0 No, no hydric soil 8 17 Yes 15 Yes 9 24 Yes 18 Yes 10 13 Yes 10 Yes 11 9 Yes 6 Yes 6.4 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION EFFORTS Two retaining walls have been included in the project design to reduce impacts to waters of the U.S. and wetlands. 6.5 PROJECT IMPACTS Table 9 identifies the permanent and temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. and wetlands. Temporary loss is associated with re -location of drainages and earthwork associated with construction of retaining walls and placement of fill. Permanent loss is associated with rock rip -rap culvert outlets and inlets, and culvert extensions that would replace the streambed. Table 9. Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Impacts (ha/ac) Page 37 Temporary Temporary Permanent Permanent Project Component Impacts to Impacts to Impacts to Impacts to Waters Wetlands Waters Wetlands Channel realignment and retaining wall west of 0.010/0.025 0.000/0.000 0.0004/0.001 0.000/0.000 Los Altos Road Channel realignment and pipe culvert extension 0.055/0.136 0.043/0.106 0.006/0.015 0.006/0.015 east of Los Altos Road Total 0.065/0.161 0.043/0.106 0.007/0.016 0.006/0.015 Page 37 Castlerock Development I State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Study 6.6 ALTERNATIVES The Project Alternative would reduce temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. from ' 0.065 ha (0.161 acres) to 0.010 ha (0.025 acres), and avoid permanent impacts to wetlands. 6.7 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION , Re -located streambeds temporarily affected would be restored to improve habitat value over existing conditions, which would offset permanent loss of waters of the U.S. Restoration would include shaping the channel to handle storm flows and minimize erosion, and ' planting native plant species such as willows and oaks. A Restoration Plan would be prepared for review by Caltrans, Corps and CDFG. I Page 38 11 11 11 u ' Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 7.0 PERMITS AND TECHNICAL STUDIES FOR SPECIAL LAWS OR ' CONDITIONS 7.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Proposed construction activity (drainage re -location, culvert outlets, culvert extension and related fill) would occur within waters of the U.S., a Section 404 permit would need to be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). It is expected the project would be ' authorized under Nationwide Permit 14 (linear transportation projects), as loss of waters of the U.S. would be less than 0.5 acres. As part of the Corps permitting process, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification would be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Construction work within drainages would also require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFG. 7.2 FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CONSULTATION SUMMARY Based on the results of this NES, no listed species would be adversely affected. Therefore, endangered species consultation is not expected to be required. However, as part of Section 404 permitting, the Corps is expected to initiate informal consultation with USFWS to verify this finding. 7.3 CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CONSULTATION SUMMARY No State listed species would be affected; therefore, consultation is not required. 7.4 WETLANDS AND OTHER WATERS COORDINATION SUMMARY No consultation with the Corps has been conducted to date. Section 6.1 discusses regulatory requirements with respect to waters of the U.S. Page 39 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud 8.0 REFERENCES Althouse and Meade, Inc. 2003. Biological Assessment for a 64 acre property "Dove Creek': Prepared for Bermant Development Company and Summit Investments. California Native Plant Society. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. California Native Plant Society Special Publication No. 1, Sixth Edition. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. (Technical Report Y-87-1). Vicksburg, LA. Fitch, H.S. 1958. Home Ranges, Territories, and Seasonal Movements of Vertebrates of the Natural History Reservation. Univ. Kans., Lawrence Pub[. Mus. Nat. His. 11:63. Grinnell, J., J.S. Dixon and J.M. Linsdale. 1937. Fur -bearing Mammals of California. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley, CA. Hickman, James C. 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA. Holland, V.L. and M. Hanson. 1992. Biological Study of the 3F Meadows Project Site, Western Atascadero Colony, San Luis Obispo County, CA. Prepared for Thomas Pankey. Holland, V.L., D. Keil and M. Curto. 2001. Rare Plant Survey of 3F Meadows, Western Atascadero Colony, Atascadero, California. Prepared for Castlerock Development. Jennings, M. and M. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division. Sacramento, California. Jordan Environmental Services. 2003. Letter to Bermant Development Company concerning results of a biological survey of the Dove Creek property. Lindsey, W.C. 1983. Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County, California, Paso Robles Area. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Miller, A.H. 1931. Systematic Revision and Natural History of the American Shrikes (Lanius). Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 38:11. Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB). 2005. RAREFIND3 Query for Atascadero, Templeton, Creston and Santa Margarita 7.5 minute quadrangles. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1992. Field Office Official List of Hydric Soil Map Units for San Luis Obispo County, California, Paso Robles Area. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: California (Region 0). (U.S. Fish and Wild]. Serv. Biol. Rep. 88(26.10)). St. Petersburg, FL. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California. Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslayer, Jr. and K. Mayer. 1988. California's Wildlife, Volume 1, Amphibians and Reptiles. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. Page 40 11 11 Castlerock Development State Route 41 Improvements at Los Altos Road Natural Environment Stud Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White. 1990a. California's Wildlife, Volume //, Birds. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White. 1990b. California's Wildlife, Volume 1//, Mammals. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. Page 41 APPENDIX A VASCULAR PLANT FLORA OBSERVED WITHIN THE ROUTE 41 BSA SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Appendix A Vascular Plant Flora Observed at the Route 41 Widening Site at Los Altos Road San Luis Obispo County, California Scientific Name Common Name Habit Wetland Indicator Status Family Agoseris grandiflora Mountain dandelion AH Asteraceae Agrostis viridis* Bent grass PH OBL Poaceae Amaranthus a/bus* Tumble weed AH FACU Amaranthaceae Anagallis arvensis* Scarlet pimpernel AH FAC Primulaceae Asclepias fascicularis Narrow -leaf milkweed PH Asclepiadaceae Avena barbata* Slender wild oat AG Poaceae Avena fatua* Wild oat AG Poaceae Baccharis pilularis (B.p. var. consanguinea] Coyote brush S Asteraceae Brassica nigra* Black mustard AH Brassicaceae Brodiaea terrestris ssp. kemensis Brodiaea PH Liliaceae Bromus diandrus* Ripgut grass AG Poaceae Bromus hordeaceus* Soft chess AG FACU- Poaceae Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens * Red brome AG NI Poaceae Carduus pycnocephalus* Italian thistle AH Asteraceae Centaurea solstitialis* Yellow star thistle AH Asteraceae Chlorogalum pomeridianum Soap plant PH Liliaceae Cirsium vulgare * Bull thistle BH FACU Asteraceae Conium maculatum* Poison hemlock PH Apiaceae Convolvulus arvensis* Bindweed PV Convolvulaceae Conyza canadensis [var. canadensis] Horseweed AH FAC Asteraceae Cortaderia se/loana* Pampas grass PG Poaceae Cynodon dactylon * Bermuda grass PG FAC Poaceae Cyperus eragrostis Nut sedge PH FACW Cyperaceae Elymus g/aucus ssp. glaucus Blue wildrye PG Poaceae Epilobium densiflorum Epilobium AH Onagraceae Epilobium ciliatum ssp. ciliatum Epilobium AH FACW Onagraceae Erodium botrys* Storks bill AH Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium * Redstem filaree AH Geraniaceae Euphorbia /athyris* Gopher plant BH Euphorbiaceae Foeniculum vulgare * Sweet fennel PH FACU Apiaceae Geranium mole* Geranium AH Geraniaceae Gnaphalium /uteo-album * Cudweed everlasting AH FACW- Asteraceae Heteromeles arbutifolia (var. macrocarpa) Toyon S Rosaceae Hirschfe/dia incana* Summer mustard BH Brassicaceae Hordeum marinum* Mediteranean barley AG FAC Poaceae Hordeum murinum* Wild barley AG Poaceae Juncus bufonius Toad rush AH FACW+ Juncaceae Juncus effusus Soft rush PH OBL Juncaceae Juncus patens Spreading rush PH FAC Juncaceae Juncus xiphioides Iris -leaved rush PH OBL Juncaceae Lactuca serriola * Prickly wild lettuce AH FAC Asteraceae Lessingia filaginifolia var. filaginifolia [Corethrogyne f. vars] Cudweed-aster PH Asteraceae Lolium muldflorum* Italian ryegrass AG FAC Poaceae Lotus purshianus Spanish clover AH Fabaceae Lythrum hyssopifolium* Loosestrife AH Lythraceae Malva parviflora* Cheeseweed AH Malvaceae Medicago po/ymorpha* Bur clover AH Fabaceae Melilotus indica* Yellow sweet -clover AH FAC Fabaceae Phalaris aquatica* Harding grass PG FAC+ Poaceae Picris echioides* Prickly ox tongue AH FAC* Asteraceae Plantago lanceolata * Narrowleaf or English plantain PH FAC- Plantaginaceae Polygonum arenastrum* Knot -weed AH Polygonaceae Po/ypogon monspelienesis* Rabbits -foot grass AG FACW+ Poaceae Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Black cottonwood T FACW Salicaceae Quercus agrifolia var. agrifolia Coast live oak T Fagaceae Rhamnus californica Coffee berry S Anacardiaceae Ronppa nasturtium-aquadcum Watercress PH OBL Brassicaceae Rumex crispus * Curly dock PH FACW- Polygonaceae Rumex salicifolius Willow dock PH OBL Polygonaceae Salix laevigata Red willow T FACW Salicaceae Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow T FACW Salicaceae Silybum marianum* Milk thistle AH Asteraceae Sisyrinchium bellum Blue-eyed grass PH Iridaceae Sonchus aspen* Prickly sow thistle AH FAC Asteraceae Stephanomeria virgata ssp. virgata [var. tomentosa] Twiggy wreath plant AH Asteraceae Torilis arvensis* Torilis AH Apiaceae Toxicodendron diverilobum (Rhus diversiloba) Poison oak S/V Anacardiaceae PlantList Jun05, last revised June 14, 2005 Page 1 Appendix A Vascular Plant Flora Observed at the Route 41 Widening Site at Los Altos Road San Luis Obispo County, California Wetland Indicator Scientific Name Common Name Habit Status Family 11 11 Tntblium hirtum* Rose clover AH Fabaceae Umbellularia califomica California bay T FAC Lauraceae Vicia benghalensis* Purple vetch AV Fabaceae Vicia sativa ssp. nigra* Common vetch AV Fabaceae Vulpia microstachys Rat tail fescue AG Poaceae Notes: Scientific nomenclature follows Hickman and California Native Plant Society Wetland indicator status (Reed 1988): OBL = obligate wetland species, occurs almost always in wetlands (>99% probability) indicates non-native species which have become naturalized or persist without cultivation. FAC = facultative species, equally likely to occur in wetlands or nonwetlands (3467% probability). * indicates the species was planted at the site. FACU = facultative upland species, usually occur in nonwetlands (67-99% probability). + or - symbols are modifiers that indicate greater or lesser affinity for wetland habitats. Habit Definitions: AF = annual fern or fern ally. AG = annual grass. AH = annual herb. BH = biennial herb. PF = perennial fern or fern ally. PG = perennial grass. PH = perennial herb. PV = perennial vine. S = shrub. T = tree. Wetland indicator status (Reed 1988): OBL = obligate wetland species, occurs almost always in wetlands (>99% probability) FACW = facultative wetland species, usually found in wetlands (67-99% probability). FAC = facultative species, equally likely to occur in wetlands or nonwetlands (3467% probability). FACU = facultative upland species, usually occur in nonwetlands (67-99% probability). + or - symbols are modifiers that indicate greater or lesser affinity for wetland habitats. NI = no indicator has been assigned due to a lack of information to determine indicator status. * = a tentative assignment to that indicator status by Reed (1988). A period "." indicates that no wetland indicator status has been given in Reed (1988). n 11 11 PlantList Jun05, last revised June 14, 2005 Page 2 1 APPENDIX B WETLAND DATA FORMS padres ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS t ® ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/20ub I Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? Yes No Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? o Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes- Plot: VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator l« ' -T// No Primary Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) too 0 Remarks: is Pit Channel Sediment deposits Drainage patterns Secondary Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remark Page 1 of 2 J' ".— Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Pit Channel Sediment deposits Drainage patterns Secondary Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) J' ".— ;nll S Series and Phase: ,Loo Drainage Class: la-d(r"FA-e Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Profile Description Mottle Texture, Depth (") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color Abundance Structure, etc. n — --> R ,A— to N" 7/3 ,L,0" _ 1,A� t g 14 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OB'L (one must be OBL) Ren:]a is l� (Ce -t�' �C�'� A-9 . WETLAND DETERMINATION Ca Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Wetland Hydrology Present? s N Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Remarks: Page 2 of 2 padre associates, inc. ENOINEEPS, GEO10013T3 i ® ENVIPONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 1 Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? No Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes o Transect: Site considered Problem Area? rNo Plot: VEGETATION DorAinant Plant Spgcies Stratum ltau Indicator (� S' , �&� Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: W4—'--L4'P-Dwe Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Pit Channel HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remarks: SO -I/ , Page 1 of 2 0 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Pit Channel Sediment deposits Drainage patterns Secondary Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves 7 P C Local soil survey data �Tb FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) 0 SOILS Series and Phase: to f O.P/--- `OC Taxonomy (Subgroup): yoi'e '-o ((J' Drainage Class: " tf Field Data Confirm Series?: YesNo Profile Description Mottle Texture, Depth (") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color o— >5— A Loy tz 3A Abundance Structure, etc. ►tib_ S)' L Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic epipedon High organic content (sandy soil) Sulfidic odor Organic streaking (sandy soil) Aquic moisture regime Local hydric soil list Reducing conditions National hydric soil list Gleyed or low chroma Other (explain in remarks) All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Ye No Wetland Hydrology Present? es Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes Remarks: Page 2 of 2 psadre ENGINEEfl3, GEOLOGISTS 6 ® ENVI"ONMENTAL SdENi78TS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 nate: b/b/zuub Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County: San Luis Obiso Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? Ye No Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? es Po Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes Plot: VEGETATION -Dominant plant Species Stratum Indicator Sk P!a �e '�' T�pe- CGU Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: 14 I& HYDROLOGY Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Field Observations: Pit 0 Channel Sediment deposits Depth of surface water (inches) Drainage patterns Depth to free water in pit (inches) Secondary Depth to saturated soil (inches) Oxidized roots in upper 12" fky-(- Water-stained leaves arks- 7 r oti � nC (4'tde'f' — ko c`�� (�rep Local soil survey data FAC-Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) Page 1 of 2 SOILS Series and Phase: tvj 0-v— C 0"" 've Taxonomy (Subgroup): `' Pic , tR,X6'1(f' Profile Description Depth") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color � I,,'-7 14- t_ v ('k 3 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION _ Drainage Class: t Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Mottle . Texture, Abundance Structure, etc. U-e.i Ll Z Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is Plot a Wetland? Yes C No Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Remarks: Page 2 of 2 psadre ENGINEESS, GEOLOGISTS 6 ® ENVIgONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 1 Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County: San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? Ye Ng Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? es No Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes No Plot: VEGETATION Dominant Plant §pecies j Stratum Indicator 0, 6` 9,� i C o lei fir. S'-l�yk� UOPL 0 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Field Observations: Pit Channel Sediment deposits Depth of surface water (inches) Drainage patterns Depth to free water in pit (inches) Secondary Depth to saturated soil (inches) Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Remarks: Local soil survey data A.0 K4 1" (.114�cd; C.c.-(� / -- FAC -Neutral test 1J u,r-c " 0 Other (explain in remarks) Page 1 of 2 SOILS Series and Phase: Co f Ofof— IE446L arh,, Taxonomy (Subgroup): ',C�.0 �(1 Profile Description Depth (") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color 0--x,1 A- f©We- 313 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Drainage Class: L, -- Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Mottle Texture, Abundance Structure, etc. none._ Ln -'v Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Y No Wetland Hydrology Present? Ye o Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? esC Remarks: Page 2 of 2 psadre ENGINEENS, GEOLOGISTS i ® ENVI"ONNENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 I Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? Yess N Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? s Noo Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes ,1 0J Plot: VEGETATION Dc Mina t Pla t Species ratum Indicator Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) (0 Remarks: HYDROLOGY Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Field Observations: Pit Channel Sediment deposits Depth of surface water (inches) (7 Drainage patterns - Depth to free water in pit (inches) Secondary Depth to saturated soil (inches) / Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Remarks: t `� �� Local soil survey data ( FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) Page 1 of 2 SOILS Series and Phase: CJvf Q — zCG ck vv�o Drainage Class: (/tae Taxonomy (Subgroup): ,or`E_-p�� Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Profile Description Mottle Texture, Depth(") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color Abundance Structure, etc. to --714- U 't r- S Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NN 'Wetland Hydrology Present? o Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes /Z/ Remarks: Page 2 of 2 padres ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 8 ® ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: b/b/YUUb I Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County: San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? Yes) No Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? (es o Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes 0 Plot: lel*e1zw�'%imzI D. min nt P ant Species Stratum Indicator 0 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) (v Remarks: HYDROLOGY Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Field Observations: Pit Channel Sediment deposits Depth of surface water (inches) Q Drainage patterns Depth to free water in pit (inches) Secondary Depth to saturated soil (inches) Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Remarks: I�►YI Local soil survey data FAC-Neutral test 1 Other (explain in remarks) Page 1 of 2 Series and Phase: C07 0701-- 10,&7ZOvc Taxonomy (Subgroup): 72k9jr ku'✓nl!/' Profile Description Depth ") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color 0--4 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Drainage Class: Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes CNDo Mottle Texture, Abundance Structure, etc. Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Ye N Wetland Hydrology Present? e N Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes Remarks: Page 2 of 2 padre ENOINEER9, GEOLOG19T3 6 ® ENVUIONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 1 Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County: San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State:_ CA Normal circumstances present? Yes N Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? es Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes N Plot: VEGETATION Domin t Pyla t Species Stratum Indicator Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remarks: Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Y Yes No Inundated /� Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Channel Sediment deposits Pit Drainage patterns Secondary _ 0 Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) SOILS Series and Phase: 0,fb_ Taxonomy (Subgroup): --`--= Profile Description Depth (") Horizon Matrix itoy .oP Drainage Class: Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes 6 Mottle Texture, Color Abundance Structure, etc. "01-e MI -I n 0/"�- C c. fJ 4 4-5 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? Ye No Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes �1 Remarks: Page 2 of 2 psadre ENGINEEPS, GEOLOGISTS a ® ENVNIONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 I Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State:_ CA Normal circumstances present? Ye Nq Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes CNd Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes / No Plot: VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species J✓tCu R-ai'me.J hA f cf Stratum Indicator O B b �7,J Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) v/ l� Remarks: Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks �— HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remarks: Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks �— Drift lines Pit Channel Sediment deposits —� Drainage patterns 3 Secondary Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) SOILS Series and Phase: Cad' OJ -1 _ teeK o-6, -e , Drainage Class: Taxonomy (Subgroup): +;L o;kp�„( P Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes Profile Description Mottle Texture, Depth ") Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color Abundance Structure, etc. ce)-- r-ve-, I -t to �" loan 7 4.-? foylz 41f to a, Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic epipedon High organic content (sandy soil) Sulfidic odor Organic streaking (sandy soil) Aquic moisture regime Local hydric soil list Reducing conditions National hydric soil list Gleyed or low chroma Other (explain in remarks) All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: b WETLAND DETERMINATION _ Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Ye No Wetland Hydrology Present? a No Is Plot a Wetland? es No Hydric Soils Present? es No Remarks: Page 2 of 2 padre VIflONMENfAL SOIENTL4T3 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obiso Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? QYe Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes No Plot: VEGETATION ominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator -�'�ck l Zee�� 0(46,j — Z j " a(�' C i40 G UX J Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) l? Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? HYDROLOGY Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Yes No Primary Stream, lake, tide gauge? Yes No Inundated Aerial photographs? Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Field Observations: Pit Channel Sediment deposits Depth of surface water (inches) Q Drainage patterns Depth to free water in pit (inches) �— Secondary Depth to saturated soil (inches) Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Remarks: Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) Page 1 of 2 SOILS Series and Phase: %of pf of me cx,.-�� Drainage Class: Taxonomy (Subgroup): 'c. `,rp lt✓ Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Profile Description Mottle Texture, Depth (") t, Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color Abundance Structure etc. d o V 3 A-E. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) (=xc1ULel-5- J0"( A/ 14 c6r-1 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No Wetland Hydrology Present? a No Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? a No Remarks: Page 2 of 2 psadre ENGINEENS, GEOLOGISTS 8 ® ENVINONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: 6/6/2005 1 Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present? ee N - Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Transect: 16)Site considered Problem Area? PNo Plot: VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator .(`R (%k a a Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) �0 ( J Remarks: HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remarks: Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Yes No Inundated �C Yes No Saturated in upper 12" ,}c Water marks_ Drift lines Pit Channel Sediment deposits j Drainage patterns 2 Secondary _ Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) SOILS Series and Phase: p ' 1',3J-1VC" ©L4 Taxonomy (Subgroup): C- Profile Description Depth (") Horizon Matrix Color Mqtt 0-3 (© %z 3 13 F, Drainage Class: G & Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes tD Mottle Texture, e Color Abundance Structure, etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks:/, �d o JoGt Ye No Yes No Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No No / C� G� 4 � 1'C' � c �,�... U "- C -q. Page 2 of 2 pssocadre tax, Inc. ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6 ® ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project Site: Oak Ridge Estates SR 41 Date: ti/ti/2uub I Applicant/Owner: Castlerock Development County:San Luis Obispo Investigator: Ingamells State: CA Normal circumstances present?es No Community: Site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? es "o Transect: Site considered Problem Area? Yes No_) Plot: VEGETATION omina t P ant S ecies Stratum Indicator PO slur �a 14 .A �t FA 4� 0 (461 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY Recorded Data? (explain in Remarks) Stream, lake, tide gauge? Aerial photographs? Field Observations: Depth of surface water (inches) Depth to free water in pit (inches) Depth to saturated soil (inches) Remarks: Page 1 of 2 Wetland Hydrology Indicators Yes No Primary Yes No Inundated Yes No Saturated in upper 12" Water marks Drift lines Pit Channel Sediment deposits �C �]— Drainage patterns Secondary Oxidized roots in upper 12" Water -stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Other (explain in remarks) SOILS Series and Phase: JvjL�"d„P Taxonomy (Subgroup): l c �— , , X Profile Description Depth (" Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Color C/ 10 te- 3 l� 2-510 cDy2 di r Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions Gleyed or low chroma All dominant plants FACW or OBL (one must be OBL) Remarks: / WETLAND DETERMINATION Drainage Class: Field Data Confirm Series?: Yes No Mottle Texture, Abundance Structure, etc. Concretions High organic content (sandy soil) Organic streaking (sandy soil) Local hydric soil list National hydric soil list Other (explain in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? a No Wetland Hydrology Present? Ye No Is Plot a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Remarks: Page 2 of 2