HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 10/08/2004S
October 8, 2004 C,egten,, .eti� 33t �e�r�e y
City of Atascadero
Mayor and City Council Members
6905 El Camino Real, Suite 6
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: West Front Village — Supplemental Information
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
0
OCT - S 2004
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
At the Planning Commission meeting on September 21, 2004, the Commission recommended approval
with the following motion. This letter and supplemental information (enclosed) responds to the concerns
raised at the Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Commission Motion - September 21, 2004 (5-I Vote)
• The applicant shall work with staff to improve the architecture;
• The applicant shall provide additional courtyard residential landscape area and provide a
landscape planter at the end of the courtyard;
• An eight foot tall heavy wood fence shall be provided between the proposed residential and the
adjacent landowner (Wilson property), and shall accommodate drainage;
• Provide a pedestrian connection/crosswalk between the pocket park to the sidewalk area on West
Front to accommodate children walking to and from school);
• The developer work with staff regarding identification of the second units as affordable units.
Second units shall have house and plumbing facilities and include a full bathroom and kitchen
with stove and refrigerator); and
• The intersection of Coromar and Portola shall have a stop sign installed.
Applicant Response
1. Improve Architecture: This refers to condition #8 that requires resubmittal of a CUP for the
residential architecture. The applicant has previously addressed architectural concerns raised by
staff. At the Planning Commission, RRM also presented revised architectural plans that included
additional masonry details on the front elevations (see color 11 x 17 elevations in packet). The
applicant requests that the condition be modified to allow the applicant to "work with staff' as
requested by the Planning Commission and remove the requirement for a separate CUP submittal
for the residential architecture.
2. Courtyard Residential Landscaping: The Commission requested additional landscaping in the
Courtyard area. The attached plans shows how the units can be shifted to provide additional
landscaping at the end of the Courtyard. The plan labeled "Courtyard Lot & Setbacks" shows the
provision of a minimum of 4' at the end of the Courtyard. A perspective of how this will be
planted is included and labeled "Courtyard Homes — Masonry Wall". A colored graphic labeled
"Courtyard Homes — Landscape Plan" shows how this will look in Plan View. The additional
space was provided by inserting a slightly thinner, but similar, Courtyard Home, labeled
"Courtyard Home — B Elevations".
Sar Lu,., _ b., , . 'laic,lahe Los 1r S c5 - "an j r in Capb r p
iuuM?- ,ir,.ui3�'r-ti �,..0=r rc_ San Luis t=b pc,Car.io,-ijt W,,+07. th0ne:305/543-1194 eax�S;, ,G:4{)oy•www-e nde_-gn.coln
.�Ca t- 7., , .,. or ,owe, J, 4,,-',; f, .. o...1 r g,lliureei ] ,S 'i, ,, , F,rber,1.t 2, IP
r
City of Atascadero
October 8, 2004
Page 2
3. Wilson Fence: The applicant will be providing a heavy wood fence and will be working closely
with Mrs. Wilson regarding the installation of the fence and making sure drainage is
accommodated.
4. Pedestrian Connection: The attached slide labeled "Pedestrian Connections" shows the path of
travel and site plan modifications to allow better pedestrian connections through the site.
5. Affordable Housing: The Planning Commission wanted a better understanding of how the
Duplex Units would be used as affordable housing. The enclosed "Duplex Unit Floor Plans"
shows how the units would be provided with "plumbing facilities and include a full bathroom and
kitchen with stove and refrigerator" as requested by the Planning Commission. Five of the
duplex units will be deed restricted to provide affordable housing. The other two units are
proposed to be for sale units and will be provided in the Cluster Courtyard product.
6. Stop Signs at Intersection: The Commission was concerned about the additional traffic on
Portola Road and added a condition requiring a stop sign at Coromar and Portola. In discussions
with the City Engineer, he has suggested that a stop sign may be more appropriate at the
intersection of West Front and Portola instead. This is shown in the slide labeled "Stop Sign
Options". Either of these options is acceptable to the applicant. One other possibility for slowing
traffic on Portola would be to reduce the proposed road widening and save one of the existing oak
trees previously proposed for removal. This is shown in the slide labeled "Tree Saving
Measures".
7. Wetlands: Although not mentioned in the motion, the issue of potential wetlands was discussed
in detail at the Planning Commission meeting. The City's environmental consultant, Padre and
Associates, mentioned in their environmental study that a potential wetland might exist on the
site. Padre mitigation measures require a more detailed analysis of the site in the spring to
dismiss the possibility of a wetland on the site. However, the applicant did not want to wait till
spring and hired a separate environmental consultant, David Wolff Environmental, to perform a
more detailed study. This study is included and determines, "that the on-site drainage feature
does not constitute a federal or state jurisdictional wetland."
Please contact me at 543-1794 if you have additional questions or comments
Sincerely,
RRN 5 GN GROUP
JQ Knight
Project Manager
cc: Wade McKinney, City Manager
Warren Frace, Community Development Director
Steve McHarris, Planning Manager
Steve Kahn, City Engineer
z/Onsite/1403018/Product/Word/Council Supplement 10-08-04
October 8, 2004
David Wolff environmental
P.O. 6552, Los Osos, CA 93412
(805)235-5223
(805) 528-3504 FAX
Sol
+q_ .N
John Knight, Principal Planner OCT - 8 2004
RRM Design Group
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: West Front Village Wetland Determination, 8870 West Front Road, 8760, 8840
Portola Road (APN 056-131-015, 17, 018, and 019), City of Atascadero (San Luis
Obispo County), California
Dear John:
David Wolff Environmental (DWE) is pleased to submit this wetland determination for the West
Front Village project site in the City of Atascadero. This wetland determination follows my July 22,
2004 wetland evaluation memorandum and provides additional data to further substantiate my
determination that the on-site drainage feature does not constitute a federal or state jurisdictional
wetland.
111�� mre"0 0'1
David Wolff, DWE Principal Ecologist and Society of Wetland Scientist Certified Professional
Wetland Scientist, conducted the study. The site was surveyed on foot on July 20 and October 6,
2004 to identify areas of potential wetlands and to establish the approach to completing the wetland
determination. In accordance with the currently accepted three parameter 1987 U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers methodology (1987 methodology), data on vegetation, soils, and hydrology were gathered
at observation points representing both potential wetlands and uplands to determine if wetlands are
present within the drainage pattern on site. The selection of the potential wetland data observation
points was at locations that showed the highest likelihood of supporting wetlands within the drainage
pattern.
The routine and problem areas methodology detailed in the 1987 methodology was used to determine
if waters of the U.S. and or wetlands were present on the site. As described in more detail below, the
problem area methods were used because of naturally occurring low chroma soils that limited the use
of soil color (a field indicator of hydric soils) as a definitive factor in determining the hydric soils
parameter.
VEGETATION — The determination for hydrophytic (wetland) vegetation can be made if greater than
50 percent of the dominant species were Facultative (FAC), Facultative Wetland (FACW), or
Obligate Wetland (OBL) as defined and determined by Reed 1988 as amended by the Corps in 1996.
When needed, scientific name synonymy was cross referenced in Reed 1988 and the Jepson Manual
including Appendix III Name Changes in the Jepson Manual. Site-specific circumstances dictated the
use of the FAC Neutral test for the appropriate determination of whether hydrophytic vegetation was
present or not. Based on the FAC Neutral Test, a determination of hydrophytic vegetation can be
Biological Resources Analysis, Planning & Monitoring David@DKWEnvironmental.com
Regulatory Compliance Specialist www.dkwenvironmental.com
West rront Villa,e Wetland Determination — Page 2 of David Wolff E-nvironmenta
made if greater than 50 percent of all species considered where wetter than FAC along with positive
indicators of wetland hydrology and hydric soil indicators if observable. The hydrophytic vegetation
determination was made by evaluating the assemblage of plant species exerting a controlling
influence over the character of the plant community.
HYDROLOGY — The determination of wetland hydrology can be made if positive indicators of wetland
hydrology are observed at the data observation points. Absent strong positive evidence of wetland
hydrology, a non -wetland or upland determination was made. Earth Systems Pacific provided 15
years of groundwater monitoring data from three wells on the corner parcel monitoring for the
former gas station were used to evaluate the wet season on-site hydrology.
SOILS — The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS; formerly Soils Conservation Service) Soil
Survey of San Luis Obispo County, California, Paso Robles Area was reviewed to determine the soils
mapping units recorded on the site. Soils descriptions were reviewed for profile characteristics to
evaluate the consistency between the soils mapped by the NRCS and field observations. The
determination of hydric soils was made on a limited basis using field indicators such as soil color and
texture. Given that field indicators where generally inconclusive and the determination was
conducted in the dry season when direct observations of soil saturation was not feasible, the analysis
of soils used the problem areas methodology as described in the 1987 methodology.
RESULTS
Clearly, there is a drainage pattern through the site that emanates from the adjacent property and
lands to the west and exits the site through a culvert under West Front Road and Highway 101.
Based on the topography and observable features and vegetation at the time of the field data
collection, this area appears to not have the physical characteristics to be considered a waters of the
U.S and does not satisfy the three parameter criteria for determination as a jurisdictional wetland.
The following discussion and attachments substantiates this non -wetland determination.
WATERS OF THE U.S. — In order to be considered a waters of the U.S. there needs to be a clearly
defined ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Evidence of an OHWM can include among other
things an incised channel, drift lines of debris, sediment deposits, water marks, or deposition of
organic material. While this is clearly the drainage pattern through the area, I did not see any of the
above evidence of an OHWM and determine that this does not represent a waters of the U.S. under
Corps jurisdiction. The drainage through the "upstream" property is a broad swale also lacking a clear
OHWM. I also could not identify any tributary drainage above the adjacent property which is the
grassy school playfield and residential development that are elevated more than five feet above the
adjacent property. Given that this site is at the top of the watershed, it does not appear there is
frequent enough drainage to create an incised channel or other physical evidence of an OHWM.
WETLANDS — A determination of jurisdictional wetlands requires meeting the three parameter criteria
for vegetation, hydrology, and soils. The following determination of the three parameters is based on
the attached six wetland delineation data forms and Earth Systems Pacific groundwater monitoring
well data.
Vegetation: Dominant species observed at the data observation points were all FAC species
(Hordeum and Lolium) that provides for the application of the FAC Neutral Test. In doing so, you
consider other species present to determine what percentage are wetter and drier than FAC. While
Biological Resources Analysis, Planning &Monitoring David@DKWEnvironmental.com
Regulatory Compliance Specialist www.dkwenvironmental.com
West rront Villa�e Wetland Determination — Page 3 of+ David Wolf Environmental
there is the FACW Rumex and juncus, there is also an abundance of FACU and upland species such
as Bromus diandms, A hordeaceous, Avena, Erodium, Amsinkia, Vicia, and Carduus. In this light
considering all species present under the FAC Neutral Test, the data points do not support
hydrophytic vegetation.
Hydrology: At this time of year it is not feasible to observe inundation or saturation in an ephemeral
situation. As is the case in most of California, delineating a potential seasonal wetland in the dry
season should be considered (per the 1987 Corp Methodology) an atypical situation and the problem
area methodology applied. While this could be considered a drainage pattern in a wetland, the
OHWM indicators discussed above are essentially the same for determining wetland hydrology. No
clear evidence is present. In the six test pits I excavated I did not observe any oxidized root channels
to a depth of up to 20 inches. I scraped the surface to a depth of four inches in other areas to see if
there were shallow oxidized root channels and did not find any.
Earth Systems Pacific provided 15 years of groundwater monitoring data from three wells on the
corner parcel monitoring for the former gas station. Based on these data, depth to water on average
during the growing season is 8.0 to 8.3 feet with a range of 5.5 to 12.0 feet below the surface. I
included data from February through June with most of the data coming from March and April. I
excluded March 1995 in the average because there was an abnormally large storm event at that time.
The ground elevation at the monitoring wells was approximately three to six feet above the bottom of
the swale at various locations. Therefore, assuming a level gradient of the depth to water, depth to
groundwater during the growing season would be 2.0 to 5.3 feet below the surface. I would suggest
this is a conservative calculation and that based on the coarse texture and well drained characteristic
of the soils, under normal circumstances you would not have free standing water or saturation in a
12 -inch to 18 -inch test pit during the growing season.
Soils: Test pits confirmed that the site is in the Botella series. Test pits in both the drainage and
adjacent uplands soils had a low chroma soil (2.5YR 2.5/1). In reviewing the NRCS description for
the Botella series, this is naturally a low chroma soil to a depth of 21 inches (10YR 3/1 and IOYR 4/1).
Furthermore, this is a very deep, well drained, nonsticky, nonplastic, very hard, but friable coarse and
very coarse sandy loam soil. These are generally not characteristic textures of a hydric soil or hydric
soil conditions. While low chroma soil colors are commonly used as a hydric soil indicator, they are
also acknowledged to be the least reliable ranking sixth of eight indicators ordered by reliability in
the 1987 methodology. Being on a hydric soils list is seventh. As such, true field conditions were
evaluated in determining if hydric soils were present because the soil color indicator is not reliable in
low chroma soils with no other indicators present. Based on my observations of field conditions as
described above, I did not observe any hydric soil field indicators.
The NRCS lists the hydric inclusion for the Botella sandy loam as unnamed wet spots in landforms
that include depressions and drainageways. The hydric soil criteria assigned by the NRCS for this map
unit are soils that are poorly drained or very poorly drained with a water table at a depth of 1.0 foot
or less during the growing season if permeability is less than 6.0 in/hr in any layer within a depth of
20 inches. While the area in question is a drainageway landform and meets the permeability criteria
(0.6-2.0 in/hr @ 0-21 in.), it is described as a well drained soil (not poorly or very poorly drained).
Based on observable vegetation (dominated by FAC and upland annual grasses and forbs with widely
scattered FACW species), topography, and soil texture, and based on the groundwater data discussed
Biological Resources Analysis, Planning & Monitoring David@DKWEnvironmental.com
Regulatory Compliance Specialist www.dkwenvironmental.com
West rront Village Wetland [)etermination - Page 4 of+ David Wolff Environmental
above it is safe to assume on average the water table is not 1.0 foot or less during the growing season.
Typically a hydric soil inclusion is a different soil type or texture, or circumstance that would be
present to develop hydric soils. I did not observe any substantive difference between the soils in the
drainage and in the uplands to suggest a hydric soil inclusion.
WATERS OF THE STATE — Under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, the California
Department of Fish and Game (DFG) regulates the alteration of the bed, bank, or channel of rivers,
lakes or streams. None of these features are present on the site so compliance with this regulation
would not be required. The DFG does not have regulatory authority over wetlands outside of the
Section 1602 provision for Streambed Alteration Agreements. The broader general definition of
waters of the state typically includes those areas that would meet any one of the three wetland
parameters (vegetation, hydrology, and/or soils) as defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987
methodology. Where to meet the federal jurisdiction requires meeting all three parameters, in
practice meeting one parameter would qualify an area as waters of the state. The drainage was
determined to be a non -wetland and did not meet any of the criteria for hydrophytic vegetation,
wetland hydrology, or hydric soils. Therefore, the site would be considered to support any waters of
the state.
REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Weiland Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hickman, James C., Ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of
California Press.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands, California (Region 0)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(26.10).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1996. On-line updated list of wetland indicator plants.
U.S.D.A Soil Conservation Service (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 1977. Soil Survey of
San Luis Obispo County, Coastal Part.
fffff
Thank you for the opportunity to provide wetland consulting services for this important project in
the City of Atascadero. Please call me if you have any questions or need any additional information.
Very truly yours,
David K. Wolff
Principal Ecologist
Society of Wetland Scientists Certified Professional Wetland Scientist
Attachments
Site Aerial Photograph Showing Data Point Locations
Wetland Delineation Data Forms
Earth Systems Pacific Ground Water Data
Biological Resources Analysis, Planning & Monitoring David@DKWEnvironmental.com
Regulatory Compliance Specialist www.dkwenvironmental.com
West Front Village
Wetland Determination
David Wolff environmental
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA OBSERVATION POINTS
Biological Resources Analysis, Planning & Monitoring
Regulatory Compliance Specialist
David@DKWEnvironmental.com
www.dkwenvironmental.com
Project Site: We5A"cboV
Applicant/Owner: R%CiA4tL
L
0A - LU.101JRiiillCounty:.Sq
ate: 7 ZO 0
K k4S Oil%/5 Transect:
Location: 70 We -.4 �C
R k Aasd&lero
State: C A Data Point:
Normal Circumstances?
Aa--> No
Explain:-pri SMSCA QC'�cv�ttHa�w�
NCLAM(Upy pCcKtrw%5 11-aw 0Ari,4A^ So►�S
Atypical Situation? es No
Problem Area? No
Plant Species (*Dominant)
Strata Ind.. status
Plant Species *Dominant) Strata Ind. status
1. i of %u wl retiH e
k EbCt
9.
2. aekvvL . mattylum4w.45.r
10.
3• e i h t
erA -
11.
4.
12.
5. chanjru!f
13.
6.. G o u
er GN
14.
7. La r, 4
e G
15.
g •
16.
Percent of Dominant Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding FAC-): 142?%o �CqL
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes No
Remarks: 0,1 U - Y 7O Su d
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Drainage C lash/! dwt�,n�
llb /�
Taxonomy (Subgroup): hMfflW- M iG 4 rj i)(Mll i Confirm Mapped Unit: Yes No
Depth Horizon Matrix Mottle Mottle Abund, Texture
c�- R 2�o
Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: Remarks:,, 64ro, /01'ArIG1US1uP
wets dcaino 5�"JY %uwi
Hydric Soil: Yes No
Waters of the U.S.: Yes � /t \ No Extent of Jurisdiction &Remarks:
Width Elevation it) A44 doiliap
Wetland: Yes X-1" No
INVESTIGATOR: W
SIGNATURE: bAl I
David Wolf E_nvironmental
f
Project Site:
Field Observations
Date: 20 r7
Applicant/Owner: r nncH . w. F
Location: 0 UJf- F'cb4
�hS
County:s►y, Lxzls Obis Po Transect:
State: C IQ Data Point:
Normal Circumstances?
No
Explain: pry e;eagswt wtlNco�>Av�
,mac rally 064utrin5 Lata-Ch(VOAa 6Vdj
Atypical Situation? e No
Problem Area? a No
�EGETA'1•ION ">
Plant /Species (*Dominant) Strata Ind. status Plant Species *Dominant) Strata- Ind. Status
1. a N 4cy1
'-i K
9.
2. lbrWuj, LAaruc►tiS
r G ti
10.
3. AQevAA 5P
lit L
11.
4. AA 61 m WGI
u L
12.
5. VtZ,-,%
Drain a a Pattern
Remarks: %Rt(A"�
13.
6. Ctir�uk Ldac l
vt L
14.
7
15.
g•
16.
Percent of Dominant Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding FAC-):
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes _X No
Remarks:
Recorded Data
Field Observations
Primary Indicators Secunda Indicators
stream, Lake, Tide Gauge
Surface Water Depth
Inundated
Oxidized Rhizospheres
Aerial Photograph
Free Water in Pit
Saturated Above 12"
Water Stained Leaves
Topographic Ma
Saturation Depth
Water Marks
Local Soil Survey
Other:
Other:
Drift Lines
FAC Neutral Test
No Data Available
Sediment Deposits
Other (Explain)
p
Wetland Hydrology:
Yes No
Drain a a Pattern
Remarks: %Rt(A"�
06WVC- 4VrA1Ag5Q 1?0+40k1
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):-t6�e�\q Sava kpuN-- (Ilk) ;i-j�� 51,00e5 Drainage Class:
well pr4m.-V
Taxonomy (Subgroup):-qQrvt x- Ai 4 I eeadl Confirm Mapped Unit: Yes No
Depth Horizon Matrix Motile Mottfe Abund, Texture
0_9 N Roc 2�oKe-
't_12,tA .s, zs ! 54 ou
Hydric Soil Indicators: Remarks:/0,4) G%1/'aN�i �hCoNL(I/SIvP
Hydric Soil: Yes X. No
Waters of the U.S.: Yes A No
Width Elevation
Wetland: Yes No
Extent of Jurisdiction & Remarks:
4woI
ProjectI Site: V Nayc-Date:
10L410
Applicant/Owner: Al(,kAf� ShaVAyj&4
kJL3
county:$Wm Niltov�i— Transect:
Location: %e<-70 vjeWe4IF
4 F
state: C 14 Data Point:
Normal Circumstances?
C,
Atypical Situation?
Problem Area?
No Explain: C)fj 56Q,,OtA Qt4!(VA%A4iV%
No OULA(Vil Low 1b*w SODS
No
Plant Sppcies (*Dominant)
Strata
Ind. Status
Plant Species (*Dominant) Strata Ind. Status
9.
2. Vjl NilOcces(Al-
law 1*-
10.
3. G Luereri,oij
)VA Z
11.
4. a C i4te Pf q J
FA4
-12.
5. j4t4k4Q� c-rj-,oAs
13.
6.
1V_
14.
7. ft[IAAJCW$
JIA
xA P
15.
8 :7V
r-.44 Li
16.
Percent of
bornihain't Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding FAC-): I e!oj r
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes
No
Remarks: F-jv-
I tim— vi e4-lc4o�
Wetland: Yes
INVEMGATOR::ekO
SIGNAI
No
David Wolff Environmental
WETLAND{ELINFATION DATA FORM :' ROt�TINE DEfEiMIaVATON . =' y
Project Site: Fro t6 a 'eDate.
Applicant/Owner: a,c hA rd Sbiari floc • Lu • F'ror,
I<
County: fqh L415 Transect:
Location: 4x,770 w,4 41�ASGjerb
State: C k Data Point:
Normal Circumstances?
No
Explain: 0r cea5o&& De4(-VV�0.4 %4
�S
Atypical Situation? e
No
i�U ra1►y ua4,rr'*wj Lou.) ChPaws�t
Problem Area?
No
IN y
Plant Species (*Dominant) Strata
status Plant Species (*Dominant Strata Ind. status
1. �orK hu h
jIn�d.
-
I-
&- 2. A
L_
L 10.
3. /uf 101M
N, L 11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
g,
16.
Percent of Dominant Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding FAC-): D
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes __�CNo
Remarks:
H�rortoLo�r. - =
Recorded Daia Field Observations Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators
Stream, Lake, Tide Gauge Surface Water Depth
Inundated Oxidized Rhizospheres
Aerial Photograph - Free Water in Pit
Saturated Above 12" Water Stained Leaves
Topographic Map Saturation Depth
Water Marks Local Soil Survey
Other: Other:
Drift Lines FAC Neutral Test
---No-Data-Available
Sediment Deposits Other Explain
Z
Drainage Pattern
Y 9Y� Yes No
Wetland Hydrology:
Remarks:
W,Q�uy�a. 0.b� �&C0.:tY\eiy 6&�4d�
So�Is -
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):'V-,c4ellti 5urAj Loam i 16 Z -`f 51 oetS
Drainage Clasp:
ww rl l ogrr w eA
Taxonomy (Subgroup): jlfrNliG tG 4re1 Xc(C0# Confirm Mapped Unit: Yes No
Dep[% Horizon Matrix Motile
Motf%Abund, I Texture
b-6"
0ayr arc
6. y Z.S`� �---
�— COar•5e dtsH-i
z5
&—
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Remarks:tow cAroolo IhGAyG6ufla�
Hydric Soil: Yes No
111fEi1:JC(!��1� �iERMiNA I0",
Waters of the U.S.: Yes No
Extent of Jurisdiction & Remarks:
Width Elevation
(,4�%,�//�
Wetland: Yes No
INVESTIGATOR: V� QI
David Wolf Environmental
SIGNATURE:
-
Date: t0/1116
�1
Project Site: We-,� -Fro v' li
Applicant/Owner: A icharlAso , ero&� County: A uj p hii V Transect:
Location: I r�-j D �e o4 ej, 44aro State: c+ Data Point: (� -
Normal Circumstances? No Explain:ry cw4sorl o4tywt1Na ►oti
Atypical Situation? No hVpMwrc 11 occ Krr%w' I MAJ CNrowtk SV I
Problem Area? No
EG
V STATION
Plant Species *Dominant Strata Ind. Status Plant Sp ecies *Dominant Strata Ind. status
1. Lo I j4w ir4nne rr --Rc 9•
2. rjf wm 144ar ta Stem. {- 10.
3. G 40 5{rrtoly G 11.
4. l i P 12.
5. rV.4t4Kt 1P. 13.
6. 41G4 5 - GVl 14.
7. Z"t-44 ba iu5 =ly, VJ 15.
g, 16.
Percent of Dominant Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding FAC-):
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes __,KNo Remarks: Fd,G NeN4wl4e5� s`y%mss
`vorl-we�lla�
Recorded Data Field Observations Pffmaryrndicators Sewndary Indicafors
Stream, Lake, Tide Gauge Surface Water Depth
Inundated Oxidized Rhizospheres
Aerial Photograph Free Water in Pit
Saturated Above 12" Water Stained Leaves
Topographic Map Saturation Depth
Other: Other:
Water Marks Local Soil Survey
Drift Lines FAC Neutral Test ►N u tit
-No Data Available
-Sediment Deposits Other Ex Iain)
c
Drainage Pattern
Wetland Hydrology: Yes No
Remarks: u in �%out q h
�ru�nA 5 v r5 0� W-luv>d
(/�56�we I✓IdiG�l�
1A j A )Q0 a f4w wl
sons ` -
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):�elkk e; .
j LaavA 116 Z -y% Slo S
Drainage Class:
wf/ e/ the
Taxonomy (Subgroup): tt-M4 c4ckic -Artrrercid
Confirm Mapped Unit: ,\,Z::�i'es No
Depth Horizon Matrix Mottle
Mottle Abund, Texture
" r� Z- 5� 3
Oc�.rSc n4 Oa A
Ii It i1, -i c-- 1 6—
�_ /fin fSo �n�v /"w
Hydric Soil Indicators: Remarks: toW ClA rowtri kX(,006114QW1
Hydric Soil: Yes _ 1 �- No Wei( drajo-ph (m ute x+✓jy 100 "1
Waters of the U.S.: Yes No Extent of Jurisdiction & Remarks:
Width levation "4-L t`� �rlw ola��Q y�
Wetland: Yes _ A No
INVESTIGATOR: O �F
SIGNATURE:
David Wolff E_nvironmenta)
Project Site:
field Observations
Primary Indicators
Date: 10 o
Applicant/owner: 4A
Location: f5t7v
d
o tf � , S
fM
County: j h� Transect:
State: Data Point: - 6
Normal Circumstances?
Atypical Situation?
Problem Areas
Plant Species (*Dominant)
No Explain: pry 5pgx 6vl p24,ttIM%V`w tOv4
OSD No r�a�+nrub�y 0(-CuffiN� LdW Chro"4`01
es No
r
Strata Ind status Plant Species (*Dominant) Strata Ind. Status
1. 13 cwtn 1u ru
er�7
L4 L
9.
2.
Local Soil Survey
U
10.
3.
FAC Neutral Test
No Data Available
11
4.
Other (Explain)
�yuw�
12.
5.
Wetland Hydrology:
13.
6.
1,YaM4r, baAou.,
14.
7.
15.
116.
g,
Percent of Dominant Species FAC, FACW, OBL (Excluding
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Yes
—X—No
Remarks:
Recorded Data
field Observations
Primary Indicators
Secondary Indicators
Stream, Lake, Tide Gauge
Surface Water Depth
Inundated
Oxidized Rhizospheres
Aerial Photograph
Free Water in Pit
Saturated Above 12"
Water Stained Leaves
Topographic Map
Saturation Depth
Water Marks
Local Soil Survey
Other:
Other:
Drift Lines
FAC Neutral Test
No Data Available
Sediment Deposits
Other (Explain)
�yuw�
Draina a Pattern
Wetland Hydrology:
Yes 7"— No
Remarks: kA91Ay�k al30ue
1,YaM4r, baAou.,
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):-3o�t�'c� c�Nat �Qu�(i16) Z -y% SIoP,S Drainage Cla s:
wtl of InE
Taxonomy (Subgroup): I ee4I� uGbtiG r i trot Confirm Mapped Unit: Yes No
Deptfi Horizon Matrix Motile Mottle Alband. Texture
NA 1 RW4 -a6t4e
A-,e"I 73 -&Sq t•s q — 4)-- vt1 oc.vvi
Hydric Soil Indicators: Remarks: �w ,Amov bN�NGr'uf w�
Hydric Soil: Yes �C No
Waters of the U.S.: Yes -ex— No
Width Elevation
Wetland: Yes __&_ No
Extent of Jurisdiction & Remarks:
L4 e lard
INVESTIGATOR: U wal David Wolf+ Lnvironmental
SIGNATURE:
WELL LOCATION MAP
Portola and West Frontage Roads
Atascadero, California
3
tT�
n
-^-' MW -3
�r f
p7' r..
LEGEND
MW -1 40 Well Location
j2% Earth Systems Pacific
Ma 2004
Project No. SL -09110 -EJ Y
Source: Earth Systems Pacific
CUMULATIVE ANALYTICAL DATA, 1989-2004
Monitoring Well MW -3
Date
GW
Elevation
DTW
TPHg
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl
Benzene
Xylenes
MTBE
3/3/89
92.30
7.70
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
1/19/91
87.66
12.34
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
NA
4/15/91
92.53
7.47
<50
3.2
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
NA
9/9/91
90.16
8.84
<50
3.4
0.6
<0.5
<2.0
NA
3/16/92
93.31
6.69
<50
19
<0.5
1.4
<0.5
NA
10/12/92
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/93
--
--
870
170
8.4
46
180
NA
10/5/93
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/94
91.53
8.47
66
14
<0.5
1.3
6.4
NA
3/15/95
94.66
5.34
570
70
4.5
28
75
NA
3/15/97
--
--
<50
8.1
<0.5
<0.5
0.6
NA
12/9/97
90.46
9.54
<500
15
<1
<1
<3
<1
3/26/98
94.00
6.00
1,400
270
8.0
78
39
<1
3/28/99
91.83
8.17
<500
6.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
3/21/00
93.63
6.37
240
91
1.0
<0.5
3.6
NA
6/1/01
92.25
7.75
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
5/31/02
89.02
10.98
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
6/10/03
90.75
9.25
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
4/26/04
90.58
9.42
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
5/21/04
9.87
90.13
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Notes:
All results expressed in micrograms per liter (µg/L)
NA - Not analyzed
CUMULATIVE GRADIENT DATA, 1989-2004
Date
Direction
Slope
3/3/89
N10°E
0.016
1/19/91
N520E
0.011
4/15/91
N700E
0.020
9/9/91
N51 °E
0.012
3/16/92
N530E
0.024
4/12/94
N420E
0.016
3/15/95
N620E
0.034
12/9/97
N420E
0.012
3/26/98
N380E
0.028
3/28/99
N360E
0.015
3/21/00
N640E
0.025
6/1/01
N350E
0.028
5/31/02
N300E
0.019
6/10/03
N25 °E
0.011
4/26/04
N 16°E
0.010
5/21/04
N200E
0.011
Source: Earth Systems Pacific
CUMULATIVE ANALYTICAL DATA, 1989-2004
Mnnitnrino Wd%H MW -1
Date
GW
Elevation
DTW
` TPHg
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl
Benzene
Xylenes
MTBE
2/13/89
88.78
12.00
8,100
4,900
816
15970
3,300
NA
3/03/89
93.11
7.67
1,660
73
6.04
<0.50
<1.5
NA
10/9/89
--
--
875
153
42
<0.5
153
NA
1/22/90
--
--
5,700
1,300
200
300
300
NA
9/26/90
--
--
894
302
7.7
105
35
NA
1/19/91
88.28
12.50
500
350
<0.5
<0.5
<10
NA
4/15/91
93.33
7.45
<50
6.6
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
9/9/91
90.84
9.94
1 <50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
3/16/92
94.63
6.15
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
10/12/93
--
--
<50
1.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/93
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
10/5/93
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/94
92.45
8.33
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
3/15/95
96.30
4.48
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/15/97
--
--
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12/9/97
91.16
9.62
<500
<0.6
<1
<1
<3
<1
3/26/98
95.28
5.50
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/28/99
92.53
8.25
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/21/00
94.70
6.08
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6/1/01
93.24
7.54
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5/31/02
90.00
10.78
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6/10/03
91.38
9.40
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
4/26/04
91.16
9.62
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5/21/04
90.72
10.06
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
lUnnitnrino W. -H MW -7
Date,
GW
Elevation
DTW
TPRg
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl
Benzene
Xylenes
MTBE
3/3/89
94.28
7.92
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
1/19/91
88.97
13.23
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
NA
4/15/91
94.89
7.31
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
NA
9/9/91
91.60
10.60
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
NA
3/16/92
96.20
6.00
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<1.5
NA
10/12/92
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/93
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
10/5/93
--
--
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
4/12/94
93.50
8.70
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
3/15/95
98.83
3.37
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/15/97
--
--
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12/9/97
91.76
10.44
<500
<0.6
<1
<1
<3
<1
3/26/98
97.23
4.97
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/28/99
93.44
8.76
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/21/00
96.59
5.61
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6/1/01
94.48
7.72
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5/31/02
91.24
10.96
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6/17/03
92.16
10.04
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
4/26/04
91.75
10.45
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5/21/04
91.29
10.91
<50
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NA
BASE
COLORS
tB
U
�O
N
M
U
z
Gieakiuy �iwv�eiu„enls F�copl� ��t!°$
r r0irAWANWmac4MMikiP:'.
a
t17
!it
C
v
1 "=30'-0"
COURTYARD LOT LAYOUT & SETBACKS
R RSM �D E 3�I G N GROUP West Front Villaae
5765 H,/®a 8°5/54) Street, Suit, 102 San 09 °"'w,a, d°`in`° 9"°' October 7, 2004 1403018 c
Phms —1794 • Fm: 805/51} "k • www.rtm lifm.can
�ey.gs..r nwnn a nao.i.n w.wl �a aWuun•�a r.e., eaR.xanen.•e•....a...e...........n.....................n......s..........s.........................................;
+j
r
p�.
f
"IRTYARD HOMES - MASONRY WALL.
R R M DESIGN GROUP Test Front Village.
--+ger 7 2004 1404018:
Rime E06/6�S-f79P fac E06/5.3 -M09 • nvrmaab�cem :.............. ......
. ....• o........... •.•. ....•. • ou u. ...... u. •....
rr..-. w.runw•�waa•u w•r rw.�.... w... r•� ............. .......�
�\� ��, �: � w4�=• S J / a?Q,". {lye ,
„a,,t„ .}�gip;,� s�V, _ 3Lyi",•.s��TLS�tl`Pr�� , o- �aoW
a ���@����:�^ � �Cpr ��� � ^.�'•.; �'r � aLC�S7 C,"' qvy �;G�{ - �, _
FN A
J�� 1 1 t4rtr rt C3L w G
.fria t
got
i Y` •�1 �, a ww�.p�a'a. .fin.,
".�;
�\� ��, �: � w4�=• S J / a?Q,". {lye ,
„a,,t„ .}�gip;,� s�V, _ 3Lyi",•.s��TLS�tl`Pr�� , o- �aoW
a ���@����:�^ � �Cpr ��� � ^.�'•.; �'r � aLC�S7 C,"' qvy �;G�{ - �, _
FN A
J�� 1 1 t4rtr rt C3L w G
.fria t
got
1 BEDROOM UNIT
437 SF
III
RRM DESIGN GROUP
STUDIO UNIT
437 SF
1 /8"=`r --C
DUPLEX UNIT FLOOR PLAIG
est Front Vi
3M S th ��"° � --t �"02' S W��' p., Wif�b a'°° October 7, 2004 1
Phan. 805/513-7794• Por. 805/515-1609 • www.mmd.&gn.wm
'.. .+wnwe w iwe•+m'.a.a � aM u w•+w r.w• u.+.+�.................................. a °. ° ...... °...................................................
Qoho 0
O Q�N+= OVA
4-1 �4-5
O
0u)U)
u
00
CY)L
C%
4--+
4-
a
ch
CU
�
c
�
-
i6
M
0
�
CLDwF-
0.E S
L
cu
i
n
N
O
0
0
L
._
0
L
N
L
Q
'x
w
u
00
CY)L
C%
4--+
4-
.0
cn
c
�
a)
M
-0
x
CLDwF-
0.E S
L
cu
u
00
cn
c
�
a)
L
-0
cm
0
0.E S
L
cu
i
n
N
a)
�
0
'x
w
a—
w
�