HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2026-08-18_AgendaPacket CITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
MEETING INFORMATION:
The Planning Commission meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers and in-person attendance will be
available at that location.
HOW TO OBSERVE THE MEETING REMOTELY:
To observe remotely, residents can livestream the meeting on Zoom. The video recording of the meeting will be
available through the City’s website and on the City’s YouTube Channel. To observe remotely using the Zoom platform
please visit:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83250238111
HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public comment may be provided in-person.
Written public comments are accepted at pc-comments@atascadero.org. Comments should identify the Agenda Item
Number in the subject line of the email. Such comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and made a part
of the administrative record. To ensure distribution to the Planning Commission before consideration of an item,
please submit comments not later than 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. All correspondence will be distributed to the
Planning Commission, posted on the City’s website, and be made part of the official public record of the meeting. Please
note, comments will not be read into the record. Please be aware that communications sent to the Planning Commission
are public records and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and Brown Act unless exempt
from disclosure under applicable law. Communications will not be edited for redactions and will be printed/posted as
submitted.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ACCOMMODATIONS:
Any member of the public who needs accommodations should contact the City Clerk’s Office at
cityclerk@atascadero.org or by calling 805-470-3400 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when
services are needed. The City will use their best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to afford as
much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for
resolving reasonable accommodation requests.
DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS:
California Government Code section 84308 (“Levine Act”) requires a party to or participant in a proceeding
involving a license, permit, or other entitlement, including all contracts other than competitively bid, labor, or
personal employment contracts, to disclose any contribution of more than $500 that the party or participant (or
their agent) has made to a member of the Planning Commission within the prior 12 months. The Planning
Commission Member(s) who receive such a contribution are disqualified and not able to participate in the
proceedings and are also required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subject
proceedings. Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution and identify the recipient
Planning Commission Member and may be made either in writing to the City Clerk before the agenda item or
by verbal disclosure during consideration. The Levine Act also prohibits, during the proceeding and for 12
months following a final decision, a party to or participant in (or their agent) a proceeding involving a license,
permit, or other entitlement, including all contracts other than competitively bid, labor, or personal employment
contracts, from making a contribution of more than $500 to any member of the Planning Commission or anyone
running for City Council.
Planning Commission agendas and minutes may be viewed on the City's website:
www.atascadero.org/agendas
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda
are on file in the office of the Community Development Department and are available for public inspection on
our website, www.atascadero.org. Resolutions will be allocated a number once they are approved by the
Planning Commission. The Minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by
the public during Commission meetings that are made a part of the record or referred to in their statement will
be noted in the Minutes and available for review by contacting the Community Development Department. All
documents will be available for public inspection by appointment during City Hall business hours.
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Tuesday, August 18, 2026, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, Fourth Floor
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
Pages
A.CALL TO ORDER
1.Pledge of Allegiance
B.ROLL CALL
Chairperson Anderson
Vice Chairperson Pennachio
Commissioner Ferrell
Commissioner Heath
Commissioner Jones
Commissioner Keen
Commissioner O'Malley
C.PUBLIC COMMENT
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the
Commission on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Commission
has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state your name
for the record before making your presentation. The Commission may take
action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.)
D.CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and non-
controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of
the Commission or public wishes to comment or ask questions.)
1.Draft Minutes Planning Commission 5/19/26 3
Recommendation: Planning Commission approve the May 19, 2026
Minutes.
E.PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
None
F.PUBLIC HEARINGS
(For each of the following items, the public will be given an opportunity to speak.
After a staff report, the Chair will open the public hearing and invite the applicant
or applicant’s representative to make any comments. Members of the public will
be invited to provide testimony to the Commission following the applicant.
Speakers should state their name for the record and can address the
Commission for three minutes. After all public comments have been received,
the public hearing will be closed, and the Commission will discuss the item and
take appropriate action(s).
1.6375-6385 Santa Ynez Small Lot Subdivision (SBDV26-0030)6
Master Plan of Development and Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011 for a
small lot subdivision of 0.56-acres developed with four single-family units
in the Residential Multiple-Family zoning district located at 6375, 6377,
6383, and 6385 Santa Ynez Avenue (APNs 030-281-024 and 030-281-
025). The properties will be subdivided into four lots. No additional
residential units are proposed. The proposed project qualifies for a Class
15 exemption from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and
CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et
seq.) Section 15315, Minor Land Divisions.
Recommendation: Planning Commission adopt Draft PC Resolution
approving a Master Plan of Development and Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map AT26-0011 (SBDV26-0030), based on findings and subject to
conditions of approval.
2.2045 Atascadero General Plan and final EIR – Recommendation for
Adoption (GPA21-0067)
20
Review and recommendation of the final draft of the Atascadero 2045
General Plan and it's Environmental Document (Final EIR). The Plan
culminates a 5-year process and establishes a vision for the next 20
years rooted in community, economic prosperity, quality public service,
responsible growth, and consideration of our natural environment It was
developed in collaboration with members of the community, interested
parties, partner agencies, staff, and decision makers. An Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the 2045 General Plan and
corresponding Zoning Code Update in accordance with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act.
Recommendation: Adopt Draft PC Resolution A recommending that the
City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopt
findings of fact pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a),
adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the 2045 General Plan and
Zoning Code Update; and adopt the City of Atascadero 2045 General
Plan consisting of the following elements: Land Use and Community
Form, Economic Development, Mobility, Recreation and Open Space,
Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency
Preparedness.
G.MANAGEMENT REPORTS
None
H.COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
On their own initiative, Commissioners may make a brief announcement or a
brief report on their own activities.
I.DIRECTOR'S REPORT
J.ADJOURNMENT
Page 2 of 143
08/18/26 | Item D1
Atascadero Planning Commission
May 19, 2026
Page 3 of 3
1
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES
May 19, 2026, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, Fourth Floor
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
_____________________________________________________________________
A. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Commissioner Heath led the Pledge of Allegiance.
B. ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Anderson, Vice Chairperson Pennachio, Commissioner
Ferrell, Commissioner Heath, Commissioner Keen
Absent: Commissioner Jones, Commissioner O’Malley
Staff Present: Community Development Director Phil Dunsmore, Planning
Manager Kelly Gleason, Recording Secretary Crystal Horn
C. PUBLIC COMMENT
Chairperson Anderson opened the Public Comment period.
The following person spoke on this item: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the Public Comment period.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Draft Minutes Planning Commission 5-5-26
Recommendation: Planning Commission approve the May 5, 2026
Minutes
Chairperson Anderson opened the Public Comment period.
The following person spoke on this item: None
Page 3 of 143
08/18/26 | Item D1
Atascadero Planning Commission
May 19, 2026
Page 3 of 3
2
Chairperson Anderson closed the Public Comment period.
Recording Secretary Horn noted that there was an administrative error for Item
D1, and the draft minutes should include “Motion Passed 4-1” for item G1.
MOTION BY: Commissioner Ferrell
SECOND BY: Commissioner Keen
1. Approve Consent Calendar as corrected
AYES (5): Commissioner Keen, Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner
Heath, Vice Chairperson Pennachio, and Commissioner Ferrell
ABSENT (2): Commissioner O'Malley and Commissioner Jones
Motion Passed (5 to 0)
E. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
None
F. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
None
G. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. The Barnyard Preschool (USE26-0022)
Recommendation: Planning Commission adopt the Draft Resolution
approving Conditional Use Permit USE26-0022 to allow a preschool with a
parking and a sign design exception at 8935 Amapoa Ave (APN 031-301-
024), based on findings and subject to conditions of approval.
Ex Parte: None
Vice Chairperson Pennachio stated his architecture firm was contacted by the
applicant and recused himself.
Chairperson Anderson opened the Public Comment period.
The following person spoke on this item: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION BY: Commissioner Keen
SECOND BY: Commissioner Ferrell
1. Adopt Resolution 2026-0003 approving Conditional Use Permit
USE26-0022 to allow a preschool with a parking and sign design
exception at 8935 Amapoa Avenue.
Page 4 of 143
08/18/26 | Item D1
Atascadero Planning Commission
May 19, 2026
Page 3 of 3
3
AYES (4): Commissioner Keen, Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner
Heath, and Commissioner Ferrell
ABSTAIN (1): Vice Chairperson Pennachio
ABSENT (2): Commissioner O'Malley, and Commissioner Jones
Motion Passed (4 to 0)
H. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
I. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Planning Manger Gleason provided an update on current projects and events.
J. ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Anderson adjourned the meeting at 6:21 PM
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
____________________________
Crystal Horn, Recording Secretary
Administrative Assistant
APPROVED:
Page 5 of 143
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TO: PHIL DUNSMORE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
FROM: KELLY GLEASON, PLANNING MANAGER
PREPARED BY: SAHANA KOTHA, PLANNING INTERN
ERICK GOMEZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: 6375-6385 Santa Ynez Small Lot Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission adopt Dra PC Resolu on approving a Master Plan of Development and
Ves ng Tenta ve Parcel Map AT26-0011 (SBDV26-0030), based on findings and subject to
condi ons of approval.
DISCUSSION:
Sleepmode Santa Ynez, LLC, the property owner, and Max Zappas, the applicant, are proposing a
Ves ng Tenta ve Parcel Map to subdivide two lots totaling 0.56-acres in the Residen al Mul ple-
Family zoning district located at 6375-6385 Santa Ynez Avenue (APNs 030-281-024 and 030-281-
025) into a total of four (4) lots. Both exis ng lots are developed with two exis ng single-family
residences on each lot, for a total of four residences. The proposed subdivision would result in
each residence being located on its own separate lot. The proposed lots will be approximately
0.10 net acres (4,519 net SF), 0.09 net acres (3,872 net SF), 0.07 net acres (3,026 net SF), and 0.14
net acres (6,231 net SF), respec vely.
Item: F1
Department: Community
Development
Date: 8/18/2026
Lot 1: 6385 Santa Ynez
6860 GR. SF
4,519 NET SF
Lot 2: 6375 Santa Ynez
5,592 GR. SF
3,872 NET SF
Lot 3: 6377 Santa Ynez
3,263 GR. SF
3,026 NET SF
Lot 4: 6383 Santa Ynez
6,578 GR. SF
6,231 NET SF
Page 6 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Staff Report
ANALYSIS:
The subject proper es proposed for subdivision are two lots in the Residen al Mul ple-Family
(RMF-24) zone. The RMF-24 zone has a minimum lot size of 0.5 net acres for new subdivisions.
However, lot sizes can be reduced with the approval of a Master Plan of Development and
tenta ve map in compliance with the Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC) standards for co age
clusters and small lot subdivisions.
SITE DESIGN
The AMC specifically exempts exis ng single-family dwellings from design standards applicable to
new construc on co age clusters. However, the subject proper es as they exist today comply
with many of the applicable design requirements for new build co age cluster developments,
including mee ng the setbacks of the underlying zone, consolida ng access driveways, and
providing at least 200 sq. . of open space per unit.
The subject proper es proposed for subdivision each have two exis ng single-family residences.
The proposed co age cluster subdivision would create four lots with one residence on each lot.
The exis ng units are approximately 970 SF, 768 SF, 886 SF, and 1,352 SF. Access to the units will
con nue to be from a single shared driveway from Santa Ynez, with a second exis ng driveway
proposed to remain for access to an exis ng garage on Lot 2. The exis ng private open spaces
areas range from 503 sq . on Lot 2 to approximately 1,336 SF on Lot 4.
The proper es deviate from two standards for new construc on co age cluster developments:
Unit Footprint Size. The exis ng units that exceed the 800 SF maximum footprint size
Pedestrian Pathways. The exis ng site improvements lack the required dedicated
pedestrian access to both the right of way and guest parking stall (common area
improvement).
Devia ons from the unit size and pedestrian access are a result of the original design and
orienta on of the buildings before current standards were in place and do not create a significant
conflict with the intent of the code. Although the units exceed the 800 SF footprint size, the
exis ng floor area of the units is aligned with the envisioned smaller unit sizes for co age cluster
developments. A condi on of approval has been added to prevent the building footprints are not
increased beyond their exis ng sizes. The exis ng 18-foot-wide driveway provides sufficient width
for vehicles and pedestrians to safely maneuver around each other without the need for physical
improvements to the pavement for a differen ated pedestrian path.
Notably, there is an exis ng 6-foot-tall, wooden panel privacy fence within the proper es’ street
setback area, exceeding the City’s fence height requirement. The fence appears to have been
Page 7 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Staff Report
installed some me a er 2019 near the me of the most recent transfer. A condi on of approval
has been added requiring the reduc on of this fence to maximum height of 42-inches to bring
the site back into compliance with City standards.
PARKING AND ACCESS
The exis ng onsite parking is sufficient to meet the City’s parking ra os. The four exis ng
residences are comprised of three 2-bedroom units and one 3-bedroom unit. A total of 10 onsite
parking spaces, inclusive of one guest parking space, are required for this project pursuant to the
City’s mul family parking ra os. The residences on Lot 2 and Lot 3 each have an exis ng 1-car
garage. The residence on Lot 4 has an exis ng 2-car garage. Addi onally, there is adequate space
for six uncovered parking stalls in the areas between units. A condi on of approval is included to
ensure the parking lot is adequately striped consistent with AMC requirements and that an
easement agreement is recorded to ensure the availability of guest space and access driveway.
The driveway is adequately designed to comply with fire standards and serve the four exis ng
units. However, the proposal for any addi onal units, such as Accessory Dwelling Units, will
require addi onal driveway width, or a waiver from the Fire Marshall, to comply with adopted
fire access standards. A condi on of approval is included limi ng addi onal units added to any
site if Fire Access standards cannot be met.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The proposed project qualifies for a Class 15 categorical exemp on from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”)
and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regula ons §§ 15000, et seq.) pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Sec on 15315, which exempts projects involving the division of property into four or
fewer parcels.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Planning Commission may include modifica ons to the project and/or condi ons of
approval for the project. Any proposed modifica ons, including condi ons of approval,
should be clearly re-stated in any vote on any of the a ached resolu ons.
2. The Planning Commission may determine that more informa on is needed on some
aspect of the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to develop the
addi onal informa on. The Commission should clearly state the type of informa on that
is required. A mo on, and approval of that mo on, is required to con nue the item to a
future date.
3. The Planning Commission may deny the project. The Commission must specify what
findings cannot be made, and provide a brief oral statement, based on the Staff Report,
oral tes mony, site visit, correspondence, or any other ra onale introduced and
deliberated by the Planning Commission.
Page 8 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Staff Report
REVIEWED BY OTHERS:
The Project has been reviewed by Fire, Planning, and Public Works.
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Dra Resolu on
Page 9 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
ATTACHMENT 1: Draft Resolution
SBV26-0030
DRAFT PC RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING A MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP AT 26-0011 (SBDV26-0030) FOR A SMALL LOT SUDIVISION
SLEEPMODE SANTA YNEZ, LLC
6375, 6377, 6383, AND 6385 SANTA YNEZ AVENUE
APNS 030-281-024 AND 030-281-025
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Sleepmode Santa Ynez, LLC, property
owner, and Max Zappas, applicant, to consider a Master Plan of Development and Tentative Parcel
Map AT 26-0011 (SBDV26-0030) for a small lot subdivision at 6375, 6377, 6383, and 6385 Santa
Ynez Avenue (APNs 030-281-024 and 030-281-025); and
WHEREAS, the site has a General Plan Designation of High-Density Residential (HDR);
and
WHEREAS, the site is in the Residential Multiple-Family (RMF-24) zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the application is submitted as a small lot subdivision under the provisions
of the Atascadero Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the state and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Master Plan
of Development and Tentative Parcel Map application was held by the Planning Commission of
the City of Atascadero, at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf
of said application; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, California,
hereby finds, resolves, and determines as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals: The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein as
if set forth in full.
SECTION 2. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the project on August 18, 2026 and considered testimony and reports from
staff, the applicants, and the public.
Page 10 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
SECTION 3. Facts and Findings. The Planning Commission makes the following
findings, determinations and approvals with respect to the project approvals:
A. Subdivision Map Act Findings (Government Code § 66474(a)-(g))
1. FINDING: The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and applicable Specific Plans.
FACT: The subject property is designated High-Density Residential and is zoned
Residential Multiple-Family (RMF-24). The proposed lot will continue to allow the
residential use permitted anticipated by the General Plan and permitted by the zone.
The subject property is not within a specific plan area.
2. FINDING: The site is physically suitable for the type of development.
FACT: Four single-family detached units are already existing on the site. No
additional units or improvements are proposed.
3. FINDING: The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
FACT: The subject property is 19,732 SF and zoned RMF-24. As existing, the site
currently has four units on it and does not have any foreseeable physical constraints
that would prohibit the ability to meet local development standards. No additional
density is proposed.
4. FINDING: The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat.
FACT: The project is a subdivision of fully developed multifamily lots in a developed
residential neighborhood. There is minimal habitat value on the site for any protected
flora or fauna.
5. FINDING: The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not cause
serious health problems.
FACT: The site is developed with four existing single-family units. Standard frontage
improvements for curb, gutter, and sidewalk have already been completed on the site.
The separation of each unit onto its own lot will not result in health concerns.
6. FINDING: The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by
the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision.
FACT: No access easements presently exist on the subject properties. A new access
easement will be established between Lot 1 and Lot 2 and extending back between Lot
2 and Lot 4 to secure safe access through a single driveway for all four properties.
Page 11 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
B. Findings for Approval of a Master Plan of Development (Conditional Use Permit)
1. FINDING: The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
FACT: The Project is consistent with all applicable General Plan goals and policies.
The project site has an HDR land use designation and is zoned RMF-24. The proposed
lot will continue to allow the residential uses permitted anticipated by the General Plan
and permitted by the zone. The subject property is not within a specific plan area.
2. FINDING: The proposed project satisfies all applicable provisions of Title 9 of City of
Atascadero Municipal Code (Zoning Regulations of the City of Atascadero).
FACT: The Project will satisfy all applicable provisions of the Atascadero Municipal
Code Title 9 of City of Atascadero Municipal Code. Per the AMC, existing structures
within a cottage cluster project may remain and be nonconforming with the design
standards for cottage clusters. All four units will be treated as nonconforming uses for
any future improvements and subject to Chapter 9-7 (Nonconforming Uses), as
amended.
3. FINDING: The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not,
because of the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity of the use.
FACT: The Project is not detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general
public or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the use, nor is it
detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the use. Cottage
cluster developments and small lot of subdivisions are allowed in the RMF-24 zone.
4. FINDING: That the proposed project will not be inconsistent with the character or the
immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development.
FACT: The project is consistent character of the immediate neighborhood and aligned
with its orderly development. The residential units are existing on the site and
compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood. The surrounding lots in the
neighborhood are all zoned RMF-24 as well, and the project will not conflict with any
existing residential uses.
5. FINDING: That the proposed project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the
safe capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be
improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the
surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance with
the Land Use Element.
FACT: Additional traffic volume is not anticipated from this project, as the units all
Page 12 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
exist on the site and have been established on the site for many years. The project is
consistent with envisioned development of this neighborhood.
SECTION 4. CEQA. The Planning Commission finds that the project is Categorically Exempt
from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15315 (Minor Land Divisions) exemptions of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 5. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a regular session
assembled on August 18, 2026, resolved to approve the Project consistent with the following:
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT B: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
On motion by Commissioner _____________, and seconded by Commissioner _____________
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
______________________________
Jason Anderson
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
______________________________
Phil Dunsmore
Planning Commission Secretary
Page 13 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
SBV26-0030
Conditions of Approval
SBDV 26-0030: Master Plan of Development & Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
APN 030-281-024 and 030-281-025
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
FM: Final Map
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
PLANNING DIVISION
1. This approval is for a Master Plan of Development and Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011 (SBDV30-0030) for a small lot
subdivision and cottage cluster development to allows a four-lot
subdivision of Assessor Parcel Nos. 030-281-024 and 030-281-025
and resulting in four existing single-family units located on individual
lots, as depicted and described on the attached.
The approval of these entitlements project runs with the land,
regardless of the owner.
Ongoing PS
2. The approval of these entitlements shall become final and effective
for the purposes of issuing building permits the day after the Planning
Commission hearing unless an appeal is made in accordance with
the Atascadero Municipal Code.
Ongoing PS
3. In accordance with the Atascadero Municipal Code section 9-8.105,
any violation of any of the conditions of approval may be cause for
revocation of this entitlement and subject the applicant and/or future
property owners to the penalties set for in the Atascadero Municipal
Code, as well as any other available legal remedies.
Ongoing Ongoing
4. The Community Development Director and/or City Engineer shall
have the authority to make modifications to the final map that remain
in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map.
FM PS, CE
5. Approval of these entitlements shall be valid for twenty-four (24)
months after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval
shall expire and become null and void unless the project has received
a final map, or a time extension has been granted, consistent with the
Atascadero Municipal Code.
FM PS
6. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map, and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein,
shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
FM PS, CE
7. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Atascadero or its agents, officers, and employees against any claim
or action brought to challenge an approval by the City, or any of its
entities, concerning the subdivision.
Ongoing PS
8. All subsequent Tentative Map and construction permits shall be
consistent with the Master Plan of Development approved for the
project, or as further specified by the conditions herein.
BP / FM PS, CE
Page 14 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
Conditions of Approval
SBDV 26-0030: Master Plan of Development & Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
APN 030-281-024 and 030-281-025
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
FM: Final Map
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
9. The subdivision shall be subject to additional fees for park or
recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) as required by City Ordinance.
BP PS
10. Prior to recordation of the final map, all fencing within the 12-foot
street setback of Lots 1 and Lot 2 shall be reduced to maximum
height of 42 inches tall have at least 50% transparency.
11. Prior to recording the final map, all outdoor parking spaces shall be
striped and marked with their respective units. One (1) guest space
shall be identified with signage or pavement markings.
12. Prior to, or concurrent with, the recordation of the Parcel Map, the
applicant shall prepare and record an easement agreement in a form
approved by the City Attorney and Community Development Director
for the minimum 18’ wide shared access utility easement depicted on
the Parcel Map. The easement agreement shall detail and govern
nature of the easement, rights of the users, and maintenance
responsibilities. Additionally, the easement agreement shall
designate and depict the location of one (1) guest parking space to
be shared between all owners in perpetuity.
FM PS, CE
13. The existing single-family residences that compose this cottage will
be considered a legal Non-Conforming in regard to unit size, and
subject to Chapter 9-7 (Nonconforming Uses). No modifications to
increase the footprint of the existing units will be permitted. A deed
covenant shall be recorded concurrent with recordation of the final
map describing the nature of the subdivision and restrictions on
development.
FM PS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Utilities
14. Each lot shall be served with separate services for water, sewer, gas,
power, telephone and cable TV.
FM, BP CE
15. Prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the Parcel Map, the
applicant shall prepare and record a reciprocal easement and
maintenance agreements, in a form approved by the City Attorney,
City Engineer, and Community Development Director, addressing
private underground utility services across Lots 1 through 4. The
recorded agreement shall run with the land and include, at minimum,
the following provisions:
a. Blanket Easement: A non-exclusive blanket easement reserved
over and across all lots for the operation, maintenance, repair,
and replacement of all private utility lines (including water,
sewer, gas, electric, and communications) existing as of the date
of recordation. Owners shall be permitted to execute and record
an amendment to this agreement establishing a precise legal
description for any existing line once surveyed or mapped.
FM PS, CE
Page 15 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
Conditions of Approval
SBDV 26-0030: Master Plan of Development & Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
APN 030-281-024 and 030-281-025
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
FM: Final Map
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
b. Cost Allocation & Shared Lines:
i. Sole-Use Lines: The owner benefiting from a sole-use utility
line crossing an adjacent lot shall be responsible for all
costs associated with its routine maintenance, repair,
mandatory relocation, and surface restoration.
ii. Shared Lines: In the event any utility lateral or line is
shared by two or more lots (such as a shared private
sewer lateral), all benefiting property owners shall
share equally (or pro-rata based on unit count) in the
cost of routine maintenance, clearing, repair, and
replacement of the shared segment.
c. Mandatory Relocation: In the event that maintenance, repair, or
replacement work involves 75% or more of the total linear run of
an existing utility service line located outside the primary access
easement, the line shall not be replaced in its current location.
Instead, the property owner(s) performing the work shall relocate
the line entirely within the designated driveway/access easement
corridor.
d. Surface Restoration: Any owner undertaking utility repair or
relocation work on a neighboring lot shall restore all disturbed
surface areas, driveway paving, and landscaping to original or
better condition immediately upon completion of the work.
Fire Department Conditions
16. The proposed project includes creation of four parcels with one
existing single-family residence per parcel served by a shared
driveway with A 12’ access easement. The construction of any
additional residential units shall comply with all applicable Fire
Access Standards, including increasing the width of the proposed
driveway and modifying the access easement as necessary.
Standard Conditions
17. Documents that the City of Atascadero requires to be recorded
concurrently with the Final Map (e.g.: off-site rights-of-way
dedications, easements not shown on the map, agreements, etc.)
shall be listed on the certificate sheet of the map.
FM CE
18. The City of Atascadero may require an additional map sheet for
information purposes in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.
FM CE
19. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or
alteration of existing utilities.
BP, GP CE
Page 16 of 143
08/18/2026 | Item F1 | Attachment 1
Conditions of Approval
SBDV 26-0030: Master Plan of Development & Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
APN 030-281-024 and 030-281-025
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
FM: Final Map
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
20. All utilities (water, sewer, gas, electric, cable TV and telephone)
shall be placed underground. Utilities shall be designed in a
manner to accommodate future extensions or connection where
feasible or required by the City.
BP, GP CE
21. Prior to recording the parcel map, the applicant shall have the
map reviewed by all applicable public and private utility
companies (cable, telephone, gas, electric, sewer (City), water
(Atascadero Mutual Water Company)). The applicant shall obtain
a letter from each utility company indicating their review of the
map. The letter shall identify any new easements that may be
required by the utility company. A copy of the letters shall be
submitted to the City. New easements shall be shown on the
map.
FM CE
Page 17 of 143
EXHIBIT B: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map AT 26-0011
SBV26-0030
Page 18 of 143
SA
N
T
A
Y
N
E
Z
A
V
E
N
U
E
6' WOOD
FENCE
18"
TREE
40"
TREE
22"
OAK
36"
TREE
20"
TREE
16"
OAK 28"
TREE
9"
TREE
16"
TREE
7"
TREE
18"
OAK
18"
OAK
7"
TREE
22"
OAK
6' WOOD
FENCE
5' WOOD
FENCE
5' WOOD
FENCE
6' WOOD
FENCE
6' WOOD
FENCE
SSMH
UTILITY POLE
PORCH
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
SID
E
W
A
L
K
ASPHALT
DRIVEWAY
ELECTRICAL
METERGAS
METER
SSCO
6' WOOD
FENCE
ELECTRICAL
METER
CRAWL SPACE
ACCESS
ELECTRICAL
METER
CONCRETE CURB,
GUTTER AND
SIDEWALK
CONCRETE CURB
AND GUTTER
WATER METER
UTILITY POLE
AND GUY
WIRE
WATER METER
GAS
METER
87
1
.
9
6
TH
R
E
S
H
O
L
D
870.7
9
THR
E
S
H
O
L
D
870.30
THRE
S
H
O
L
D
871
.
1
6
FF
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
BRICK
FLATWORK
CONCRETE
SLAB
CONCRETE
SLAB
CONCRETE
SLAB
CONCRETE
PORCH
GATE,
TYPICAL
GATE,
TYPICAL
869.19
FL
869.1
0
FL
868.99
FL
86
8
.
7
2
FL
(870)
(870
)
(870)
(870)
(870)
(8
7
0
)
(87
0
)
(870)
(8
7
0
)
(
8
7
0
)
(8
7
1
)
(871)
(870
)
(8
7
0
)
(87
0
)
(8
7
0
)
(8
7
0
)
(
8
7
1
)
(8
6
9
)
(86
9
)
(86
9
)
(870)
(8
6
9
)
(8
6
9
)
N30°22'39"W 211.38'
S4
8
°
2
1
'
1
6
"
W
1
0
2
.
4
0
'
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
N30°12'52"W 233.10'
ASPHALT
DRIVEWAY
R=8183.30'
D=0°16'21"
L=38.92'
R=1123.60'
D=3°06'15"
L=60.88'
R=1098.60'
D=3°05'59"
L=59.44'
R=8158.30'
D=0°16'45"
L=39.73'
PORTION OF LOT 11
PER 47 RS 98
APN: 030-281-025
PORTION OF LOT 11
PER 47 RS 98
APN: 030-281-024
PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
10'
SETBACK
5'
SE
T
B
A
C
K
5'
SE
T
B
A
C
K
15'
SETBACK
FOUND
MONUMENT IN
WELL
FOUND
MONUMENT
ACCEPTED
FOR LINE FOUND 2X2
MONUMENT
ACCEPTED
FOUND
MONUMENT
ACCEPTED
25' RIGHT
OF WAY
FOUND
MONUMENT FOUND
MONUMENT
N
E
W
1
2
'
W
I
D
E
RE
C
I
P
R
I
C
A
L
AC
C
E
S
S
A
N
D
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
EA
S
E
M
E
N
T
PARKING
LOT 3
PARKING
LOT 3
PARKING
LOT 2
PARKING
LOT 4
PARKING
LOT 1
PARKING
LOT 1
LOT 3
3,263 SQ. FT. GROSS
3,026 SQ. FT. NET
LOT 2
5,592 SQ. FT. GROSS
3,872 SQ. FT. NET
LOT 1
6,860 SQ. FT. GROSS
4,519 SQ. FT. NET LOT 4
6,578 SQ. FT. GROSS
6,231 SQ. FT. NET
S5
8
°
5
1
'
0
9
"
W
4
0
.
6
3
'
40
.
2
6
'
77.76'
85.09'
133.62'
110.64'
92.40'
117.56'
115.54'
103.33'
S5
9
°
4
1
'
3
6
"
W
5
9
.
2
3
6
'
N31°08'51"W 195.73'
62
.
1
4
'
EXISTING
DRIVEWAY
CONCRETE
SLAB
(1
8
.
8
'
)
±
PARKING
LOT 4
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
EXISTING
GARAGE
EXISTING
DRIVEWAY
S
SSCO
86
9
.
9
6
F
S
86
9
.
6
8
F
S
86
9
.
4
0
FS
8
6
9
.
2
8
F
S
86
9
.
5
0
F
S
8
6
9
.
7
8
F
S
87
0
.
0
1
F
S
87
0
.
0
2
F
S
87
0
.
2
2
FS
8
6
9
.
4
6
F
S
86
9
.
5
7
F
S
870
.
0
2
FS
87
1
.
5
1
F
S
869
.
1
2
FS
86
9
.
0
0
F
S
869
.
4
5
FS
8
7
0
.
0
2
F
S
87
0
.
1
3
F
S
870
.
1
3
FS
869
.
9
9
FS
870
.
0
4
FS
86
9
.
9
6
FS
8
6
9
.
5
2
F
S
86
9
.
3
7
G
D
8
7
0
.
6
4
G
D
870.2
6
GD
870.02
GD
87
0
.
5
1
G
D
870.
2
3
GD
86
9
.
0
6
G
D
868.51
GD
869.32
GD
868.44
GD
869.20
GD 8
6
9
.
4
1
G
D
870.34
GD
870
.
0
3
GD
87
0
.
0
8
G
D
87
0
.
0
6
G
D
870.
3
8
GD
870
.
0
9
FS
87
0
.
0
6
T
C
86
9
.
4
5
F
L
86
9
.
9
4
T
C
86
9
.
4
6
F
L
86
9
.
7
4
G
D
86
9
.
8
1
G
D
87
0
.
5
5
G
D
87
1
.
0
4
G
D
87
0
.
4
3
G
D
8
7
0
.
5
4
G
D
86
9
.
4
5
G
D
87
0
.
6
3
G
D
87
0
.
7
6
G
D
86
9
.
6
1
G
D
86
9
.
3
6
G
D
869
.
2
5
GD
868.96
GD
869.19
GD
869.14
GD
86
9
.
2
2
FS
86
8
.
9
7
G
D
86
9
.
0
8
G
D
86
9
.
1
9
GD
868.84
GD
86
9
.
0
7
F
S
869.15
FS
869.4
2
FS
869.
3
9
FS
869
.
7
2
FS
86
9
.
7
2
F
S
8
6
9
.
6
5
F
S
8
6
9
.
6
1
F
S
8
6
9
.
1
7
F
S
86
9
.
1
2
F
S
86
9
.
2
0
F
S 869
.
4
0
FS
86
9
.
6
0
F
S
86
9
.
6
3
F
S
86
9
.
5
4
F
S
86
9
.
5
0
F
S
86
9
.
5
5
F
S
86
9
.
7
0
F
S 86
9
.
9
5
F
S
87
0
.
1
2
F
S
87
0
.
4
6
FS
870.
1
3
FS
87
0
.
0
8
F
S
86
9
.
8
6
F
S
86
9
.
6
8
FS
86
9
.
5
4
F
S
86
9
.
6
9
F
S
869.8
3
FS
869
.
8
3
FS
86
9
.
8
3
F
S
87
0
.
0
4
F
S
870.0
6
FS
8
6
9
.
8
5
F
S
869.
7
3
FS
869
.
6
9
FS 869
.
6
9
FS
869.5
2
FS 869
.
6
4
FS
869.2
5
T
C
868.7
6
F
L
87
0
.
0
3
FS
8
7
0
.
1
9
F
S
87
0
.
0
8
FS
87
0
.
4
4
FS
87
0
.
1
8
FS
87
0
.
0
0
GD
8
7
0
.
1
2
G
D
87
0
.
2
6
G
D
87
0
.
4
2
G
D
87
0
.
6
8
G
D
87
0
.
4
6
G
D
870
.
1
7
GD
870.12
FS
870.3
7
FS
87
0
.
1
2
FS
8
7
0
.
0
0
F
S
8
7
0
.
1
4
G
D
870.07
GD
870
.
2
4
GD
87
0
.
1
6
G
D
86
9
.
3
8
G
D
86
9
.
2
2
G
D
86
8
.
9
6
G
D
W W
SS
SD
OH
PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT-OF-WAY, LOT LINE
CENTER LINE
EASEMENT LINE
WATER
FIRE WATER
SANITARY SEWER
SEWER FORCE MAIN
STORM DRAIN
GAS
OVERHEAD LINES
ELECTRICAL LINES
CATV LINES
TELECOMMUNICATIONS LINES
FIRE HYDRANT
UTILITY POLE
STREET LIGHT
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
FENCE LINE
FLOW LINE
SETBACK
EXISTING STRUCTURES
EXISTING CONCRETE
EXISTING BRICK FLATWORK
EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT
SEWER
SEWER MANHOLE
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
S
31
5
FW FW
T T
D
SSCO
G G
SFM SFM
E E
C C
SDCO
LEGEND AND SYMBOLS
VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. PM AT 26-0011
6377-6383 SANTA YNEZ AVENUE
ATASCADERO, CA 93422
PROJECT NUMBER: 2025-175
DATE: May 13, 2026
SHEET TITLE:
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SHEET NUMBER:
1 OF 1
All designs and other information on these drawings are for use
on this specific project and shall not be used otherwise without
the expressed written permission of Omni Design, Inc.
Written dimensions on these drawings shall take precedence
over scaled dimensions. Contractors shall verify and be
responsible for all dimensions and conditions on this job and
this office shall be notified in writing of any variations from the
dimensions or conditions shown in these drawings.
APPLICANT
MAX ZAPPAS
Z VILLAGES REAL ESTATE
6100 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE B
ATASCADERO, CA 93422
PROJECT:
CLIENT:
Z VILLAGES
2025-175
ABBREVIATIONS:
CR =CROWN
EP =EDGE OF PAVEMENT
FL =FLOWLINE
FS =FINISHED SURFACE
GD =ORIGINAL GROUND
SSCO = SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT
SSMH = SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
TC =TOP OF CURB
N
0'
SCALE: 1" =10'
10'10'
285 SOUTH STREET, SUITE P
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
93401
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
1.
BENCHMARK:
TRIMBLE R10 GPS SYSTEM WAS USED TO OBSERVE
ONSITE CONTROL. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE (NAD 83)
ALONG WITH ELEVATIONS (NAVD 88) ARE
REFERENCED TO THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE
SYSTEM, ZONE 5, NAD83(2011), EPOCH 2025.00, ASCALCULATED BY THE CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE
CENTER (CSRC) ON THE DATE OF THE FIELD SURVEY.
DISTANCES AND COORDINATES ARE IN U.S. SURVEY
FEET. ALL DISTANCES ARE GRID.
OWNER
SLEEPMODE SANTA YNEZ, LLC
P.O. BOX 812
BURLINGAME, CA 94011
APPLICANT:
MAX ZAPPAS
Z VILLAGES REAL ESTATE
6100 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE B
ATASCADERO, CA 93422
OWNER:
SLEEPMODE SANTA YNEZ, LLC
P.O. BOX 812
BURLINGAME, CA 94011
Page 19 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
DRAFT PC RESOLUTION A
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPT A MITIGATION AND
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE ATASCADERO 2045 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE
UPDATE (SCH#2024070598); AND ADOPT THE CITY OF ATASCADERO 2045 GENERAL PLAN
CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS: LAND USE AND COMMUNITY FORM,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, MOBILITY, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC
SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65300 requires the City of Atascadero (“City”) to
adopt and maintain a General Plan that contains certain elements, describes the City's long-term goals for growth
and development, and identifies policies and programs to achieve those goals; and
WHEREAS, under State law and the Atascadero Municipal Code, the Atascadero Planning
Commission ("Planning Commission") is charged with reviewing updates and amendments to the City's General
Plan, and making recommendations to the Atascadero City Council ("City Council"); and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero last completed a comprehensive update of its General Plan in 2002
(adopted June 25, 2002) which has been amended in part from time to time; and,
WHEREAS, in July 2021, the City began the process of comprehensively updating the City's General
Plan, and since this time City officials, City staff, and community members have been actively involved in the
preparation of the 2045 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the 2045 General Plan applies to lands within City limits (“City Planning Area”). The
City's Planning Area covers a total of 38 square miles of land; and
WHEREAS, in December 2021, the City selected MIG, Inc. to prepare the 2045 General Plan and a
corresponding Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65351, the City engaged the community to help
formulate the 2045 General Plan by holding 17 community workshops and other public engagement
opportunities, including open houses on October 14, 2023 and October 21, 2025; and
WHEREAS in accordance with Government Code sections 65351 through 65352.5, the City has
provided opportunities for public input and involvement on the 2045 General Plan, and provided opportunities
for consultation to affected public agencies and California Native American tribes on the 2045 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, in conformance with Government Code section 65302 describing the mandatory elements
of a general plan, the 2045 General Plan contains the following chapters, which address the mandatory elements:
Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development, Housing, Mobility, Recreation and Open Space,
Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency Preparedness; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element was adopted by the City Council on November 10, 2020 and was
certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for the 6th Cycle
Housing Element (2020-2028) on January 12, 2021; and
WHEREAS, for the purpose of the Planning Commission’s recommendation contained herein the 2045
General Plan includes the following elements: Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development,
Mobility, Recreation and Open Space, Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency
Preparedness; and does not include the Housing Element. The certified Housing Element will be incorporated
Page 20 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
and made part of the 2045 General Plan by reference; and
WHEREAS, there are no proposed changes to the City's Sphere of Influence accompanying the 2045
General Plan, nor has the City submitted any applications to the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency
Formation Commission in connection with the 2045 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use Plan for the 2045 General Plan institutes “Placetypes” to supplant Land Use
districts and bring more clear direction and character defining elements to each designation. While most of the
Placetypes reflect existing and long-established development types such as Rural Residential, Commercial, and
Industrial, three new Placetypes are established as part of this General Plan: High Density Multi-Family, Mixed
Use, and Innovation; and
WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency for the 2045 General Plan project pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and
WHEREAS, the City has completed the 2045 General Plan and analyzed potential environmental
impacts in compliance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the 2045 General Plan and corresponding environmental review documents are now before
the City's decision making bodies for consideration, certification, and adoption; and
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2024, the City filed a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") with the State Office of
Land Use and Climate Innovation (“LCI") to determine the scope of environmental review for the 2045 General
Plan. The City circulated the NOP to the relevant state and local public agencies, as well as to interested
organizations and members of the public between July 16, 2024 and August 14, 2024. On July 24, 2024, the
City conducted a scoping meeting to receive public comments on the scope and content of the environmental
impact report; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the City prepared a Draft
Environmental Impact Report ("Draft ElR") (SCH No. 2024070598) for the 2045 General Plan and corresponding
Zoning Code Update that implements the 2045 General Plan.
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2026, the City filed a Notice of Completion ("NOC") informing LCI that the
City had completed the Draft EIR, and recommending distribution of the Draft EIR to certain state agencies for
review; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was available for public review, inspection and comment at City Hall, located
at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422, the Atascadero Public Library located at 6555 Capistrano Avenue,
Atascadero, CA 93422, and the City of Atascadero’s website for the 2045 General Plan
(www.Atascadero2045.org) forty-five (45) days, between April 20, 2026 and June 4, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the City received a total of three (3) comments, comment letters, and emails relating to the
2045 General Plan Draft EIR during the public review period; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, the City evaluated and responded to
each of the comments received on the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR") for the 2045
General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which incorporates the Draft ElR, the City's responses to written
comments received on the Draft EIR, and revisions to the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, none of the comments on the Draft EIR or any of the revisions to the Draft EIR presented
any new significant environmental impacts or otherwise constituted significant new information requiring
recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5; and
Page 21 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
WHEREAS, the Final EIR will be made available to the public and to all commenting agencies at least
10 days prior to its certification, in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.5(a); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA
Guidelines"), section 15090, the lead agency shall certify that the Final EIR was prepared in compliance with
CEQA, the lead agency’s decision-making body reviewed and considered the Final EIR prior to approving the
project, and the Final EIR reflects the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091, the City has prepared findings of fact
regarding the significant adverse environmental impacts that may result from approval and implementation of the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update ("CEQA Findings"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15093, the City has prepared a Statement
of Overriding Considerations for environmental impacts that are expected to remain significant and unavoidable;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091 and 15097, the City has prepared a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP") for mitigation measures imposed to avoid or mitigate significant
environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Final EIR , the CEQA Findings of Fact and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the MMRP (collectively incorporated hereto as Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, following notice duly provided as required by law, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing on August 18, 2026 at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to comment on the 2045
General Plan, Final EIR, CEQA Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and MMRP prior to
the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Atascadero City Council; and
WHEREAS, during such duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2026, the Planning Commission
considered the 2045 General Plan, Final EIR, CEQA Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and MMRP, all written and oral reports of City staff, and all comments by interested parties on the matter as
reflected in the record prior to the Planning Commission’s recommendation to the Atascadero City Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18706 of Title 2, Division 6, Chapter 7, Article 1 of the California
Code of Regulations, due to conflicts of interests among one or more Commissioners, the Planning Commission
segmented decisions regarding the Low Density Multifamily Land Use Designation, the High Density
Multifamily Land Use Designation, and the Mixed Use Land Use Designation; and
WHEREAS, Chairperson Anderson, Vice Chairperson Pennachio, and Commissioner Ferrell recused
themselves from consideration of the Low Density Multifamily Land Use Designation and Chairperson Anderson
and Commissioner Jones recused themselves from consideration of the High Density Multifamily and Mixed Use
Land Use Designations; and
WHEREAS, for the remainder of the 2045 General Plan and corresponding CEQA recommendations,
there were no conflicts of interest requiring recusal; all seven Commissioners were permitted to participate in the
remaining recommendations to the Atascadero City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are adopted as findings in support of this
Resolution.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that:
Page 22 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
1. All of the above recitals regarding compliance with CEQA are true and correct, and are hereby
incorporated into this section as though set forth in full.
2. Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to
comment on the Final EIR, which incorporates the Draft EIR and is incorporated hereto as Exhibit
A, and the 2045 General Plan.
3. The 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and the Final EIR, which incorporates the Draft
EIR, was prepared in compliance with CEQA.
4. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Final EIR, which incorporates the Draft
EIR, prior to making its recommendation to City Council consistent with CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15025(c), 15090.
5. The Final EIR, which incorporates the Draft EIR, represents the Planning Commission’s
independent judgement and analysis.
6. Location and Custodian of Documents. The record of the 2045 General Plan project approval and
Final EIR shall be kept at Atascadero City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422.
SECTION 3. The Planning Commission further finds that:
1. The 2045 General Plan and all its elements comprise a comprehensive, long-range, internally
consistent statement of the City's goals, policies, and actions relating to Land Use and Community
Form, Economic Development, Mobility, Recreation and Open Space, Public Services and
Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency Preparedness.
2. The Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development, Mobility, Recreation and Open
Space, Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency Preparedness chapters of the
2045 General Plan, and the previously adopted Housing Element, include the elements required by
Government Code section 65302.
3. The 2045 General Plan will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the City's residents by
establishing goals, policies, and actions to guide the City's future growth and development within
the City's Planning Area.
4. The Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development, Mobility, Recreation and Open
Space, Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency Preparedness Elements of the
2045 General Plan have all been prepared in conformance with applicable State planning and zoning
laws, including but not limited to Government Code Section 65302.
SECTION 4. In accordance with Section 18706 of Title 2, Division 6, Chapter 7, Article 1 of the California
Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission segmented decisions regarding certain land use re-designations
proposed by the 2045 General Plan in which one or more Commissioners had a financial interest pursuant to the
Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.). Based on the aforementioned findings and all the
evidence in the record, the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following votes, hereby recommends that the
City Council of the City of Atascadero adopt the following as part of the 2045 General Plan:
1. Low Density Multifamily Land Use Designation. Due to a conflict of interest, Chairperson Anderson,
Vice Chairperson Pennachio, and Commissioner Ferrell recused themselves from consideration of the
Low Density Multifamily Land Use Designation. The remaining Commissioners voted ________ to
recommend the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopt the Low Density Multifamily Land Use
Designation in accordance with the 2045 General Plan, as shown in Exhibit B.
Page 23 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
2. High Density Multifamily and Mixed Use Land Use Designations. Due to a conflict of interest,
Chairperson Anderson and Commissioner Jones recused themselves from consideration of the High
Density Multifamily and Mixed Use Land Use Designations. The remaining Commissioners voted
______ to recommend the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopt the High Density Multifamily
Land Use Designation and Mixed Use Land Use Designation in accordance with the 2045 General Plan,
as shown in Exhibit B.
3. For the remainder of the 2045 General Plan changes, other than those described in sections (1) through
(2) of Section 4 of this Resolution, there were no conflicts of interest requiring recusal. All seven
Commissioners were permitted to act on the remaining changes and corresponding CEQA
recommendations.
SECTION 5. Based on the aforementioned findings and all the evidence in the record, and in accordance with the
segmented decisions approved in Section 4 of this Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby further
recommends that the City Council of the City of Atascadero:
1. Certify the Final EIR for the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update, Adopt Findings of Fact
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and Adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, in substantial form as
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. Adopt the 2045 Atascadero General Plan, which for the purposes of this recommendation consists
of the following elements: Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development, Mobility,
Recreation and Open Space, Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency
Preparedness, in substantial form as attached hereto as Exhibit B.
SECTION 6. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a
certified copy to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
Page 24 of 143
Draft PC Resolution General Plan and FEIR Recommendation
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 2026.
__________________________________
Jason Anderson
Planning Commission Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
__________________________________ _______________________________________
Dave Fleishman, City Attorney Phil Dunsmore, Planning Commission Secretary
Page 25 of 143
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TO: PHIL DUNSMORE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
FROM: KELLY GLEASON, PLANNING MANAGER
PREPARED BY: KELLY GLEASON, PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: 2045 Atascadero General Plan and final EIR – Recommendation for Adoption
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission:
1. Adopt Draft PC Resolution A recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), adopt findings of fact pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a), adopt a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations
for the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update; and adopt the City of Atascadero 2045 General
Plan consisting of the following elements: Land Use and Community Form, Economic Development,
Mobility, Recreation and Open Space, Public Services and Infrastructure, and Safety and Emergency
Preparedness.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
Adoption of the General Plan and its accompanying EIR culminates a five-year community process to establish
the framework and vision for the City of Atascadero through 2045. The considerations before the Planning
Commission include:
1. Recommendation to the City Council to certify of the final EIR including adoption of:
A statement of overriding considerations,
Specific findings related to environmental impacts, and
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure mitigation measures identified in
the final EIR are implemented.
2. Recommendation to the City Council to adopt the 2045 General Plan including the General Plan land
use map.
The general plan process included 5 phases beginning with extensive scoping and outreach and culminating
in an Environmental Analysis, fiscal impact study and a final draft of the General Plan document. The decision
made tonight is a recommendation to the City Council on the final work products. The City Council hearing is
scheduled for September 22. Further details can be found on the City’s General Plan website at
www.atascadero2045.org.
Item: F2
Department: Community
Development
Date: 8/18/2026
Page 26 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
BACKGROUND:
A city’s general plan is the primary document that establishes the context for how a city will develop and
function into the future. It provides an integrated community vision and the general framework for all land
use and zoning decisions within a community. It contains goals and policies that will shape future housing,
support economic development and job growth, foster healthy and resilient neighborhoods, protect and
manage natural resources, ensure community safety, ensure adequate infrastructure and services are
planned, and promote social and economic vibrancy. The 2045 General Plan frames the community vision for
how Atascadero should grow and change over the coming years and decades. It is important for the
document to reflect community priorities and values while shaping this future.
The City’s current General Plan was adopted in 2002 and provided a blueprint for development and growth
with a horizon year of 2025. In 2021, the City began a five-phased approach to update the 2002 General Plan,
initiating a comprehensive review and update to the plan, and identifying a vision, guiding principles, policies,
and implementation framework with a horizon year of 2045. This updated plan reflects the City’s approach
to evolving demographics, economic factors, and environmental conditions in the context of a strong
community vision.
The five phases of the project, as summarized below, included extensive community outreach and input, with
each phase informing the final plan.
Phase 1, Scoping, included project process refinements and development of a community outreach
strategy
Phase 2, Discovery, included development of the Existing Conditions Report, Vision and Guiding
Principles, and a range of community engagement meetings and activities to hear early feedback on
the City’s assets, challenges, and opportunities
Phase 3, Exploring Alternatives, included the development of growth and policy alternatives for
Atascadero’s future. This phase included the selection of a draft land use map, projected population
and growth estimates, and general policy direction
Phase 4, A Plan for Atascadero 2045, involved development of the draft 2045 General Plan document,
the draft Environmental Impact Report, and Final outreach on the Draft 2045 General Plan
Phase 5, Celebrating our Future, involves preparation of a Final EIR, public hearings with both the
Planning Commission and City Council, and final adoption of the 2045 General Plan with certification
of the EIR by the City Council.
This new General Plan will require the City to subsequently adopt a new zoning code and zoning map. The
City commenced a comprehensive zoning code update in September 2024 to dovetail into the 2045 General
Plan Update and minimize the gap between General Plan adoption and corresponding zoning code updates.
A draft of the Zoning Code will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 6th, with final action
anticipated by the City Council on October 27, with a second reading on November 10th. This would result in
an effective date of the new zoning document on December 10, 2026.
Page 27 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
DISCUSSION:
The updated Draft 2045 General Plan replaces the term we currently use “land use” with the term
“Placetype”. It includes policies that correspond to the goals and vision identified by the Council and
community. The General Plan is divided into chapters that incorporate all required General Plan Elements
per State law. All chapters are consistent to ensure that direction is comprehensive and clear. Guiding
chapters of the plan include:
A. Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Form. This chapter fulfills State requirements for the Land Use
Element. The chapter sets the stage for zoning and describes the purpose and characteristics of each
Placetype (land use district). Policies are identified to preserve and foster community character when
exploring opportunities for growth. This chapter outlines goals and policies for development citywide,
including unique areas within Atascadero.
B. Chapter 4: Economic Development. This chapter provides policies to diversify the economic base and
expand employment opportunities by attracting new businesses and supporting existing businesses. This
chapter was emphasized by community members and City leaders as a key focus for the City with
specifically defined policies and goals.
C. Chapter 5: Housing. This chapter is adopted separately under different State mandated adoption cycles.
The latest Housing Element was adopted in 2020, which will be incorporated into the 2045 General Plan.
The City will begin efforts to update the Housing Element in 2027 and is currently seeking the assistance
of a consultant to assist with that effort.
D. Chapter 6: Mobility. Fulfills State requirements for the Circulation Element and outlines policies to
balance all modes of travel throughout Atascadero with an emphasis on multi-modal transportation along
major corridors, strategies to improve circulation at key intersections and freeway overpasses, and
identifying opportunities for expanded bicycle routes and pedestrian connections and trails.
E. Chapter 7: Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources. Fulfills State requirements for the
Conservation and Open Space Elements, which focus on resource preservation, park space, and
recreation resources.
F. Chapter 8: Public Services and infrastructure. Addresses topics required for the Safety and Circulation
Elements, in addition to other utility related topics, including water supply, storage, and delivery,
wastewater collection and treatment, flood control and stormwater management, solid waste
management, energy, and telecommunications.
G. Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency Preparedness. Fulfills State requirements for the Safety and Noise
Elements. This chapter establishes goals and policies regarding adequate emergency services and
response systems, encompassing both preventative and proactive practices. It also outlines policies to
enhance community protection from wildland fire hazards, noise, hazardous materials, adverse effects
of climate change, and geological events.
Page 28 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK
While Atascadero remains rooted in its foundational policies to maintain public safety and infrastructure,
promote economic development, prioritize fiscal sustainability, and maintain its historic character and
natural resources, the City must also accommodate and guide growth in a way that supports our growing
community, strives to meet State housing goals, and identifies opportunities to enhance fiscal prosperity.
The 2045 General Plan includes policies and action items for each of the chapters listed above. These policies
guide future decisions and serve as a metric to gauge the City’s progress toward implementation of the
General Plan. These policies are what the City uses to report progress to the State every year during our
annual reports.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND PARTICIPATION
Community input was key to the General Plan Update. The City hosted a series of pop-up events, focus group
meetings, and open houses in various locations to provide education opportunities and solicit community
ideas on a preferred land use and growth alternative for the future of Atascadero. The community
participated in an online mapping exercise that reenvisioned land uses throughout the City and provided
guidance for the final land use map, becoming the basis for the General Plan. Multiple Council workshops
were held to discuss specific details on the visions for new Placetypes, such as the mixed-use and
innovation/flex districts. The City partnered with Atascadero High School to engage students in the process
and encourage them to be part of community visioning for the future. Overall, the City hosted over 17
opportunities for in-person input.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the 2045 General Plan and corresponding Zoning
Code Update. The analyses evaluated the physical changes associated with community buildout anticipated
to occur as well as the physical effects that may result from the establishment and implementation of the
goals and policies of the plan.
The environmental analysis resulted in five (5) mitigation measures required to be included in the final
General Plan and identified significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and
transportation. As identified in the EIR, impacts that are significant and unavoidable cannot be resolved
through mitigation. The City’s proposed General Plan self-mitigates and reduces many impacts with its focus
on infill growth and improving the City’s jobs-housing balance while reducing vehicle miles travelled (VMT).
Nonetheless, significant changes in the way air quality and GHG impacts are measured in recent years makes
it infeasible to avoid significant impacts while accommodating growth in the community.
The Draft EIR was posted for public review on April 20, 2026. The review period ran for 45 days, ending on
June 4, 2026. Three public comments were received, all from other agencies. A draft of the final EIR has now
been completed. The final draft includes the responses to comments. Response to comments can be found
in Attachment 1 as part of the Final EIR. Changes to the EIR were made, where appropriate, based on these
comments.
Page 29 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
When a Lead Agency makes findings on significant environmental effects identified in an EIR, CEQA law
requires that the agency must also adopt a “reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project
which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment”. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is implemented to ensure that the
Mitigation Measures and project revisions identified in the EIR are implemented.
The MMRP for the 2045 General Plan and Zoning code Update includes the five identified mitigation
measures. All identified mitigation measures required policies or action items to be added to the General
Plan. The final 2045 General Plan has been edited to incorporate these measures, and all mitigation has been
satisfied. The MMRP is included as Attachment 1, Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires that the Lead Agency, here, the City, balance the economic, legal, social, technological, or
other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a project against its
unavoidable environmental impacts when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific
benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the impacts may be
considered “acceptable.”
For the impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable with implementation of the 2045 General Plan
and Zoning Code Update the City Council will need to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations that
provides the facts and reasoning related to the specific benefits of the project that outweigh the significant
unavoidable impacts.
It is important to note that the 2045 General Plan assumes a level of growth that is likely to exceed the actual
level of growth our City will experience based on current State and regional trends. This assumption resulted
in a conservative evaluation of environmental impacts to provide flexibility in plan implementation and
growth scenarios into the future. In addition, the 2045 General Plan includes numerous policies and land-use
changes that reduce impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and vehicle miles traveled as compared
to the 2002 General Plan.
FINDINGS OF FACT
In order to certify an EIR, the City must make one or more of the following findings for each of the significant
effects accompanied by facts to support the findings.
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to mitigate or avoid
the significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for
the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or alternatives identifies in the environmental impact report
Page 30 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
These findings are in addition to the statement of overriding considerations for any effect that is found to be
significant or unavoidable. The stated findings for approval of the General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR
can be found in Attachment 1, Exhibit A.
CONCLUSION:
The Atascadero 2045 General Plan provides a framework for decision makers and the community for the next
20 years and beyond. The Plan strives to identify policies and actions aimed at achieving the City’s overall
goals and vision. The Plan was developed in collaboration with members of the community, interested
parties, partner agencies, staff, and decision makers. The Plan culminates a 5-year process and establishes a
vision for the next 20 years rooted in community, economic prosperity, quality public service, responsible
growth, and consideration of our natural environment.
NEXT STEPS:
The Planning Commission’s recommended action on the 2045 General Plan and associated EIR and
accompanying CEQA documents will be forwarded to the City Council for final consideration and action at
their September 22 regular hearing. The General Plan will be implemented by the Zoning Code Update, which
is scheduled for Planning Commission action on October 6th and City Council action on October 27th.
Once the General Plan is adopted, the final Plan will be converted to a web-based digital format allowing
goals, policies, and actions to be linked and cross-linked providing for greater searchability and ensuring clear
integration of all elements for future implementation actions. This will enhance staff and the public’s
experience and use of the General Plan and make the living document more accessible to all.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As part of the overall General Plan Update process, the City prepared the Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) to
evaluate the long-term fiscal sustainability of the proposed land use framework and development
assumptions (Attachment 2). The FIA concludes that the General Plan Update is projected to have a positive
fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund at buildout. Specifically, the analysis estimates:
Approximately $9.9 million in new annual General Fund revenues;
Approximately $6.0 million in annual municipal service costs; and
A net positive annual fiscal impact of approximately $3.9 million.
The largest revenue sources are projected to be property tax and sales tax revenues. Combined property tax
revenues, including property tax in-lieu of Vehicle License Fees (VLF), are estimated at approximately $4.8
million annually. Combined sales tax revenues, including Measure D-20 revenues, are estimated at
approximately $3.7 million annually.
Page 31 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | Staff Report
The FIA also found that public safety services account for the majority of projected municipal service costs
associated with future growth. Police and Fire expenditures are estimated to increase by approximately $5.0
million annually and comprise nearly 90 percent of total new service costs.
REVIEWED BY OTHERS:
The Project has been reviewed by Administrative Services, Planning, Public Works, Fire, Police, and
Recreation.
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution A
a. Exhibit A: Final EIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Findings of Fact, and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program
b. Exhibit B: 2045 General Plan
2. 2045 General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis
The Public Hearing Draft of the 2045 General Plan can be found at the following link:
www.atascadero2045.org/docs
The Final EIR and accompanying documents can be found at the following link:
www.atascadero2045.org/CEQA
Page 32 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | A achment 1 | Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Final EIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Findings of Fact, and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 33 of 143
SCH No. 2024070598
July 2026
PREPARED BY
SWCA Environmental Consultants
4111 Broad Street, Suite 210
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
AUTHENTIC
ATASCADERO
2045 GENERAL PLAN
PREPARED FOR
City of Atascadero6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422
Page 34 of 143
Page 35 of 143
AUTHENTIC ATASCADERO
2045 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH NO. 2024070598
Prepared for
City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422
Contact: Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director
Prepared by
Cassidy Bewley, Project Manager
SWCA Environmental Consultants 4111 Broad Street, Suite 210 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 543-7095 www.swca.com
SWCA Project No. 69101
July 2026
Page 36 of 143
Page 37 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Contents
i
CONTENTS
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. ES-1
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ ES-1
2. Project Description ................................................................................................................. ES-1
3. Alternatives to the Proposed Project ....................................................................................... ES-2
4. Comments Received ............................................................................................................... ES-2
A. NOP Comments ......................................................................................................... ES-3
B. Draft EIR Comments ................................................................................................. ES-3
Chapter 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Purpose of the Final Environmental Impact Report .................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Environmental Review Process ................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3 Organization of the Final EIR.................................................................................................... 1-2
Chapter 2. Response to Comments ................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Public Comment Letters and Responses .................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Central Region 4 .................................... 2-3
2.1.2 California Department of Transportation, District 5 .................................................. 2-11
2.1.3 Atascadero Mutual Water Company .......................................................................... 2-18
Chapter 3. Errata ............................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Revisions to the Draft EIR ......................................................................................................... 3-1
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 3-1
Chapter 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3-1
Chapter 2. Project Description ................................................................................................... 3-1
Chapter 3. Environmental Setting .............................................................................................. 3-1
Chapter 4. Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 3-1
Chapter 5. Alternatives Analysis ............................................................................................... 3-5
Chapter 6. Other CEQA Considerations .................................................................................... 3-5
Chapter 7. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ....................................................... 3-5
Chapter 8. References and Report Preparers ............................................................................. 3-5
Chapter 4. References and Report Preparation .............................................................................. 4-1
4.1 References ................................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.2 Report Preparation ..................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2.1 CEQA Lead Agency ..................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2.2 Environmental Consultant Team .................................................................................. 4-1
4.3 Final EIR Preparers ................................................................................................................... 4-2
Page 38 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Contents
ii
Attachments
Attachment 1. Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report
Tables
Table 2-1. Agency Comments ................................................................................................................... 2-1
Page 39 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Contents
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Term
ABGSA Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
AMWC Atascadero Mutual Water Company
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EIR Environmental Impact Report
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
LCI California Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
NOA Notice of Availability
NOP Notice of Preparation
NWP Nacimiento Water Project
PFAS per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances
ROW right-of-way
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SHS State Highway System
SLOCOG San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VMT vehicle miles traveled
Page 40 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Contents
iv
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 41 of 143
ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
The City of Atascadero (City), as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has prepared this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to assess the impacts that may result from the approval of the proposed 2045 General Plan Update and Zoning code Update (project; see Draft EIR Chapter 2, Project Description, for the full description of the project). This EIR will serve as a public information document to be used by the general public, responsible and trustee agencies, and decision-making bodies to review and evaluate the environmental effects associated with the project and potential mitigation measures recommended to address or minimize those effects. The review process gives both agencies and individuals an opportunity to share expertise, discuss agency analyses, check for accuracy,
detect omissions, discover public concerns, and solicit mitigation measures and alternatives capable of avoiding or reducing the significant effects of the project while still attaining most of the basic objectives of the project.
The City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to responsible, trustee, and affected agencies and other interested parties for a 30-day public review period from July 15 to August 14, 2024; posted the NOP at the County of San Luis Obispo (County) Clerk-Recorder’s office for 30 days; and sent the NOP to the CEQAnet
Web Portal at the California Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. The City held a public scoping meeting on July 24, 2024, at the Atascadero City Administration Building, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California 93422.
Subsequently, the City published a public Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR on April 20, 2026, inviting comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. The NOA was filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 2024070598) and was published in the County Clerk-Recorder’s office and the local newspaper, pursuant to the public noticing requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Draft EIR was available for public review from April 20 through
June 4, 2026. The Public Draft General Plan was also available for public review and comment during this time period.
This Final EIR was prepared to address comments received in response to the Public Review Draft EIR. The City has prepared a written response to the Draft EIR comments, and made textual changes to the Draft EIR where warranted. The responses to the comments are provided in this Final EIR in Chapter 2, and any changes to the text of the Draft EIR are summarized in Chapter 3, Errata. Responses to comments received
during the comment period for the Draft EIR do not involve any new significant impacts or “significant new information” that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Atascadero, incorporated in 1979, has a rich and varied history that has shaped its development
over time. Originally established as part of the historic Atascadero Colony in the early twentieth century, the City has evolved from its roots as a planned community with agricultural, residential, and civic uses into a vibrant municipality serving a diverse population. Over the decades, Atascadero has seen significant
changes in land use, infrastructure, and community character, influenced by regional growth, transportation improvements, and state and local planning initiatives.
Page 42 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Executive Summary
ES-2
The project encompasses the entire City and its planning area, which includes all lands within the City limits as well as adjacent areas within the Sphere of Influence. The update provides a comprehensive
framework to guide future growth and development, address community needs, and respond to challenges such as housing, economic development, transportation and open space preservation.
The project proposes a vision for Atascadero’s future that balances growth with the preservation of community character and natural resources. Detailed descriptions of proposed land use changes, policy updates, and implementation measures are provided in Draft EIR Chapter 2, Project Description.
Through this process, the City aims to ensure that future development is consistent with community values, supports a high quality of life, and meets the needs of current and future residents.
3. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires an EIR to describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the project or to the location of the project that would reduce or avoid significant impacts, and that could feasibly accomplish the basic objectives of the project. The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIR are briefly described as follows:
• No Project Alternative: The No Project Alternative assumes the City would continue
implementing its existing 2025 General Plan (adopted in 2002) rather than adopting the proposed 2045 update. Development through 2045 would follow current land use designations, zoning, and policies, resulting in modest population, housing, and job growth based on regional projections. While growth would generally occur in similar areas identified in the proposed plan, it would be at lower densities and rely more on redevelopment.
Unlike the 2045 General Plan Update, the 2025 General Plan lacks coordinated strategies for land use, mobility, infrastructure, and economic development. It prioritizes maintaining the City’s rural character through larger lot sizes, limits on density, and concentrated development within the urban
core and select commercial nodes. Although both plans support infill development and preservation of community character, the current plan provides fewer opportunities for housing and economic expansion, making it less capable of meeting projected housing needs, improving the jobs-housing
balance, or ensuring long-term fiscal sustainability. Existing zoning regulations and amendment procedures would remain in place.
Alternatives are described in detail in Chapter 5, Alternatives Analysis, of the Draft EIR. As summarized
in Chapter 5, no feasible alternatives were identified that would reduce any of the significant, unavoidable impacts that would result from the project, and the No Project Alternative would not meet the project’s basic objectives. Therefore, the project is the environmentally superior alternative.
4. COMMENTS RECEIVED
The Draft EIR addresses environmental impacts associated with the project that were known to the City,
raised during the NOP process, or raised during preparation of the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR discusses potentially significant impacts associated with aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology, greenhouse gas emissions and energy,
hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use planning and population/housing, mineral resources, noise, public services and recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and cumulative impacts.
Page 43 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Executive Summary
ES-3
A. NOP Comments
During the NOP process the City received 19 written comment letters on the NOP. The City received comment letters from the following organizations and agencies:
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• Native American Heritage Commission
• Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
• Sierra Club Santa Lucia
Copies of these letters are provided in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
B. Draft EIR Comments
During the Draft EIR review process, the City received comments from the following public agencies, organizations, or individuals:
• California Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, State Clearinghouse
• Atascadero Mutual Water Company
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• California Department of Transportation
Acting as the CEQA Lead Agency, the City has prepared a response to the Draft EIR comments. The responses to the comments are provided in this Final EIR in Chapter 2, Response to Comments, and all changes to the text of the Draft EIR are summarized in Chapter 3, Errata.
Page 44 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Executive Summary
ES-4
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 45 of 143
1-1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Atascadero (City) General Plan Update (the 2045 General Plan Update) and corresponding updates to the zoning code provisions of the Atascadero Municipal Code (the Zoning Code Update) (collectively, the project) consists of the Draft EIR, comments received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations and public agencies that commented on the Draft EIR, the City’s (as Lead Agency) responses to comments, and revisions to the Draft EIR. To certify the
Final EIR, the City Council must find that:
• The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
• The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the City and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approval of the project;
• The Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis (State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15090).
If the Final EIR is certified, the City Council will then review and consider the Final EIR before making a decision to approve the project. If the City Council decides to approve the project, it will adopt CEQA findings, including adopting or rejecting mitigation measures and alternatives to avoid or reduce significant impacts, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, the purpose of the MMRP is to ensure implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and adopted by decision-makers to mitigate or avoid the project’s significant environmental effects. CEQA also requires the adoption of findings prior to approval of a project for which a certified EIR identifies significant environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15092). If the EIR identifies significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated to less-than-significant levels and the project is approved, the findings must include a statement of overriding considerations for those impacts (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093[b]).
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15063 and 15082, on July 15, 2024, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to responsible, trustee, and affected agencies, the State Clearinghouse, and other interested parties for a 30-day public review period to begin the formal CEQA scoping process for the project. The NOP informed agencies and the public about the project and the City’s decision to prepare an EIR and included a request for comments on environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR. On July 24, 2024, the City held a scoping meeting at the Atascadero City Administration Building, located
at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California 93422 to receive comments on the scope of the EIR. During the 30-day public review period for the NOP, which ended on August 14, 2024, the City received 19 written comment letters on the NOP. The City has considered comments pertaining to the scope and content of the
EIR made by the public and agencies in preparing this EIR. The NOP and all comments received are presented in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
The City published a public Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR on April 20, 2026, inviting comments from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties on the Draft EIR.
Page 46 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 1 Introduction
1-2
The NOA was filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 2024070598) and was published in the County Clerk-Recorder’s office and the local newspaper, pursuant to the public noticing requirements of CEQA.
The public review period for the Draft EIR started on April 20, 2026, and ended on June 4, 2026. The Public Draft General Plan was also available for public review and comment during this time period. An electronic copy of the Draft EIR and Public Draft General Plan could be accessed through the internet on the City’s website at the following address: www.atascadero2045.org.
The Draft EIR contains a description of the project, description of the environmental setting, identification of project impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. The Draft EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less
than significant impact and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in the Draft EIR.
During the public review period, the City held 1 informational public meeting to provide agencies and members of the public an additional opportunity to ask questions and submit comments related to the Draft EIR. The public meeting was held on May 26, 2026, at the Atascadero City Hall Chambers and was also available online via Zoom. No public comments were received during this meeting.
The City received three comment letters regarding the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period from the following entities:
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Central Region 4
• California Department of Transportation, District 5
• Atascadero Mutual Water Company
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, this Final EIR responds to the comments received on the Draft EIR. The Final EIR also contains minor edits to the Draft EIR, which are included in
Chapter 3, Errata. This document and the Draft EIR, as amended herein, constitutes the Final EIR.
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE FINAL EIR
This Final EIR has been prepared consistent with Section 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which identifies the content requirements for Final EIRs. This Final EIR is organized in the following manner:
• Chapter 1. Introduction: This chapter summarizes the purpose of the Final EIR, identifies the CEQA Lead Agency, discusses the environmental review process, and outlines the organization of this Final EIR.
• Chapter 2. Response to Comments: This chapter includes a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies who commented on the Draft EIR; reproductions of the letters received from the public on the Draft EIR (coded for reference); and the responses of the Lead Agency to those comments.
• Chapter 3. Errata: This chapter includes text modifications to the Draft EIR. Changes are provided in revision marks with underline for new text and strikethrough for deleted text.
Page 47 of 143
2-1
CHAPTER 2. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Response to Comments chapter of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) presents the substantive
comments received on the Draft EIR for the City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code
Update (Project) together with the responses to those comments. Comments were received from multiple
entities, including state and local agencies and one non-agency organization. In accordance with
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15132(d), this Final EIR presents the
City of Atascadero’s (City’s) response to comments submitted during the Draft EIR review and
consultation process.
A list of persons, organizations and public agencies that submitted comments on the Draft EIR is
provided in Section 2.1 followed by the substantive comments received, reproduced in total and listed in
chronological order. A numerical annotation has been added as appropriate to delineate certain sections of
comments for purposes of organizing the City’s responses. The City’s response to comments directly
succeeds each comment.
2.1 PUBLIC COMMENT LETTERS AND RESPONSES
The following entities have submitted comments on the Draft EIR.
Table 2-1. Agency Comments
Code Agency Commenter Name Date Page
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife Julie Vance, Regional Manager June 4, 2026 2-3
Caltrans California Department of Transportation Chris Bjornstad, Associate
Transportation Planner,
Local Development Review
Coordinator
June 4, 2026 2-11
AMWC Atascadero Mutual Water Company John Neil, General Manager June 3, 2026 2-18
Page 48 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-2
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 49 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-3
2.1.1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Central Region 4
Page 50 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-4
Page 51 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-5
Page 52 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-6
Page 53 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-7
Page 54 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-8
Page 55 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-9
2.1.1.1 Response to Letter from California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Central Region 4
Comment No. Response
CDFW-1
The comment serves as an introduction to the comment letter and describes the project.
The City would like to thank the commenter for participating in the public review process of the Draft EIR. This is not a comment on the analysis contained in the EIR; therefore, no response is necessary.
CDFW-2
The commenter states that implementation of the 2045 General Plan could result in impacts to nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. The commenter recommends that projects tiering off of the Atascadero General Plan EIR occur outside the nesting season. If construction occurs during the nesting season, the commenter recommends that nesting bird surveys be conducted no more than 10 days prior to construction, that a qualified biologist establish behavioral baselines and monitor nests during construction, that work be halted and CDFW consulted if disturbances occur, and that no-disturbance buffers be established around active nests.
Section 4.4.5, Impact BIO-1, evaluates potential impacts to special-status wildlife species, including nesting birds, and identifies applicable regulatory protections. The 2045 General Plan is a program-level planning document and does not approve specific development projects. Future development subject to CEQA would undergo project-level environmental review, during which site-specific biological resources would be evaluated and appropriate avoidance and minimization measures would be identified where necessary. Because not all future discretionary projects tiering off of the Atascadero General Plan EIR would involve vegetation removal or activities that could affect nesting birds, the commenter’s recommended measures would be applied on a case by case, project-specific basis when deemed necessary to demonstrate compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and relevant California Fish and Game Code sections. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
CDFW-3
The commenter states that wildlife connectivity may be affected by habitat conversion and infrastructure that disrupt wildlife movement corridors. The commenter references Senate Bill 790, Assembly Bill 2344, and Assembly Bill 1889, which address wildlife connectivity and require consideration of connectivity in general plan conservation elements. The commenter notes that creeks and riparian corridors within the City, including Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and the Salinas River, function as wildlife movement corridors connecting upland habitats to the Salinas River watershed. The commenter states that the 2045 General Plan Update and Zoning Code Update could affect wildlife connectivity and sensitive species that rely on these corridors. The commenter acknowledges 2045 General Plan Update policies referenced in the Draft EIR that support watershed protection and riparian habitat preservation and recommends that future projects located near these corridors include wildlife movement studies, appropriate buffer distances, avoidance and minimization measures, monitoring, and compensatory mitigation where necessary.
The comment is noted. Potential impacts to wildlife movement corridors are evaluated in Section 4.4.5, Impact BIO-4 of the Draft EIR. The 2045 General Plan includes policies that protect riparian corridors and sensitive habitats, including Policies REC-4.1 and REC-4.3. Because the 2045 General Plan does not approve specific development projects, potential impacts to wildlife corridors would be evaluated during project-level environmental review, as applicable. Any necessary studies or mitigation would be identified based on site-specific conditions. Implementation of the General Plan policies that protect riparian corridors and sensitive habitats, including Policy REC-4.1 (Natural Resources Protection), which requires protection of natural and sensitive resource areas to the maximum extent practicable, and Policy REC-4.3 (Watershed Protection), which ensures that development along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, the Salinas River, and other riparian areas does not interrupt natural flows or adversely affect riparian ecosystems, combined with discretionary project-specific environmental review and mitigation where applicable, would help avoid or minimize habitat fragmentation and disruption of wildlife movement corridors. Additional supporting policies, such as Policy REC-3.2 (New Development), which requires development to minimize disturbance to the natural environment, and Policy LU-1.2 (Urban Services Line), which directs growth toward infill areas where infrastructure already exists, further reduce development pressure on undeveloped lands and sensitive habitat areas.
Accordingly, the framework established by the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update together with discretionary project-specific environmental review and regulatory compliance would address potential impacts to wildlife movement corridors along the City’s creek systems and the Salinas River watershed. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Page 56 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-10
Comment No. Response
CDFW-4
The commenter notes that reasonably foreseeable future projects tiered from the 2045 General Plan may be subject to CDFW’s regulatory authority pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. The commenter explains that Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires project proponents to notify CDFW prior to activities that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; alter the bed, bank, or channel; or deposit debris or other materials into such waterways.
The comment is noted. Section 4.4.2, Regulatory Setting, of the Draft EIR describes the requirements of Fish and Game Code Section 1602 and the potential need for a Streambed Alteration Agreement for activities affecting rivers, streams, lakes, or riparian vegetation. Future development projects would comply with applicable permitting requirements during project-level review. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
CDFW-5
The commenter requests that any special-status species or natural communities detected during surveys be reported to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and provides information on how to submit records.
The comment is noted. Section 4.4.4 of the Draft EIR describes the biological resources review conducted for the Planning Area, including consultation of the CNDDB. Future development projects may include biological surveys during project-level review, and special-status species observations may be reported to the CNDDB in accordance with standard procedures. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
CDFW-6
The commenter states that the 2045 General Plan would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife and notes that payment of CDFW filing fees is required upon filing of the Notice of Determination pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 753.5 and Fish and Game Code Section 711.4.
The comment is noted. Payment of applicable CDFW filing fees at the time of filing the Notice of Determination is an administrative requirement of CEQA. The comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue, and no changes to the environmental document are necessary.
CDFW-7
This comment serves as a conclusion to the comment letter. Additionally, the commenter extends gratitude to the Lead Agency for the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR and to assist the City in identifying and mitigating the Plan’s impacts on biological resources, and provides contact information for any questions or further coordination. This comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary.
CDFW-8 The commenter has provided a list of references from the comment letter. This comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary.
Page 57 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-11
2.1.2 California Department of Transportation, District 5
Page 58 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-12
Page 59 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-13
Page 60 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-14
Page 61 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-15
2.1.2.1 Response to Letter from California Department Transportation
Comment No. Response
Caltrans-1
The comment serves as an introduction to the comment letter and describes the project.
The City would like to thank the commenter for participating in the public review process of the Draft EIR. This is not a comment on the analysis contained in the EIR; therefore, no response is necessary.
Caltrans-2
The commenter states that Caltrans supports projects that promote a balanced, multimodal transportation network and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral components of the transportation system. The commenter acknowledges that the Draft EIR identifies consultation with Caltrans regarding improvements to U.S. 101 interchanges, State Route 41 (SR 41) Complete Streets projects, freeway overcrossings, and other multimodal improvements, and encourages early coordination with Caltrans for projects affecting the State Highway System (SHS).
The comment is noted. Section 4.14, Transportation, of the Draft EIR identifies coordination with Caltrans regarding improvements affecting the State Highway System. The 2045 General Plan includes policies supporting multimodal transportation and continued coordination with Caltrans on improvements to U.S. 101, SR 41, and related facilities. Future projects affecting the SHS would be coordinated with Caltrans during project-level planning and review. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Caltrans-3
The commenter requests that Synchro operational analyses be prepared for additional key intersections, including the U.S. 101 northbound off-ramp at Traffic Way and other intersections along the State Highway System, noting that although these intersections currently operate at Level of Service C or better, they may play an important role in future traffic operations.
The comment is noted. As described in Section 4.14.4, Impact Assessment and Methodology, of the Draft EIR, transportation impacts for the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update were evaluated using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 and Senate Bill 743. Because the 2045 General Plan is a program-level planning document, the Draft EIR does not include intersection-level operational analyses. Site-specific transportation studies, including intersection operational analyses where appropriate, may be prepared during project-level review or as part of ongoing City operations analyses for future development or transportation improvements associated with the General Plan and Zoning Code Update. No changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Caltrans-4
The commenter notes that any future work within the State’s right-of-way would require an encroachment permit from Caltrans and must comply with Caltrans engineering and environmental standards. The commenter states that permit conditions would be issued by the Caltrans Permits Office and may include project oversight depending on the complexity of the work.
The comment is noted. Future projects that involve work within the State right-of-way would be required to obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans and comply with applicable Caltrans standards and requirements during project-level design and permitting. In Section 4.14.5, Project-Specific Impacts and Mitigation Measures, of the Draft EIR, Impact TR-4 also notes that future development associated with community build-out pursuant to the 2045 General Plan would be subject to Municipal Code provisions governing construction activities, including roadway closures and encroachments (Atascadero Municipal Code Chapter 7-12, Encroachment on Public Property). Atascadero Municipal Code Chapter 7-12 establishes the City’s permitting requirements for work within public rights-of-way, including review and approval of encroachment permits, conditions governing construction activities, etc. The comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue, and no changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Caltrans-5
The commenter notes that, consistent with Senate Bill 743, Caltrans supports efficient development patterns, travel demand reduction strategies, and multimodal improvements. The commenter states that the Draft EIR evaluates VMT consistent with the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) Technical Advisory and acknowledges that the 2045 General Plan would exceed LCI significance thresholds for VMT. The commenter expresses appreciation for the City including policies and actions intended to reduce VMT.
The comment is noted. Section 4.14.5, Impact TR-2, of the Draft EIR evaluates VMT consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 and the LCI Technical Advisory. As described in that section, the 2045 General Plan includes policies and actions that promote multimodal transportation, infill development, and other strategies intended to reduce VMT to the greatest extent feasible. The comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue, and no changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Caltrans-6
The commenter states that Caltrans strongly supports the planning and implementation of Complete Streets that accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and vehicles of all ages and abilities.
This comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue ; therefore, no response is necessary.
Page 62 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-16
Comment No. Response
Caltrans-7
The commenter requests a description of the U.S. 101 North County Mobility Master Plan (2025), prepared by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Caltrans, and the City, as well as the Caltrans District 5 Active Transportation Plan (2021), in Section 4.14.2.4, Local, of the Draft EIR.
Descriptions of the U.S. 101 North County Mobility Master Plan and the Caltrans District 5 Active Transportation Plan have been added to Section 4.14.2.3, Regional, of the EIR for informational purposes. This revision does not constitute significant new information and does not require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Caltrans-8
The commenter requests including a description of Morro Road (State Route 41) as part of the SHS, which is owned, operated, and maintained by Caltrans. The commenter requests that Section 4.14.2, Freeways, and other applicable sections of the Draft EIR be revised to clearly identify SR 41 as part of the SHS.
The Draft EIR identifies SR 41/Morro Road as a major arterial roadway within the Planning Area; however, additional language has been added to clarify that SR 41 is also a state highway facility within the SHS. Revisions have been made in Section 4.14.1.2, Roadway Network, and Section 4.14.2.3, Regional, to clarify Caltrans’s jurisdiction over SR 41. These clarifications do not change the analysis or conclusions of the Draft EIR and do not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Caltrans-9
The commenter notes that Section 4.14.1.3 states that Figure 4.14-2 in the Draft EIR illustrates existing and planned bicycle facilities by type; however, the figure does not identify bicycle facilities or their classifications (Classes I, II, III, and IV). The commenter recommends revising Figure 4.14-2 to illustrate existing, planned, and proposed bicycle facilities within the City by facility type.
The intent of Figure 4.14-2 is to provide a large-scale overview of existing and planned bicycle and trail routes within the Atascadero Planning Area, consistent with the programmatic level of detail appropriate for the 2045 General Plan. Accordingly, the figure is intended to illustrate the locations of existing and proposed bicycle and trail routes and does not depict specific facility classifications. Section 4.14.1.3 of the Draft EIR has been amended to clarify that Figure 4.14-2 does not indicate the facility classifications would be included in the figure. This clarification does not change the analysis or conclusions of the Draft EIR and does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Caltrans-10
The commenter notes that Section 4.14.1.3, Bicycle and Pedestrian Network, of the Draft EIR briefly describes pedestrian conditions but does not identify or illustrate existing, planned, or proposed pedestrian facilities associated with the 2045 General Plan. The commenter recommends including an illustration of pedestrian facilities.
Section 4.14.1.3 describes the existing pedestrian environment and identifies factors affecting pedestrian mobility within the Planning Area. The 2045 General Plan Mobility Element includes policies and actions that promote pedestrian connectivity and safety throughout the City. In addition, Figure 4.14-2 illustrates existing and planned bicycle and trail routes within the Planning Area, and the trail network shown in this figure also functions as a component of the City’s pedestrian circulation system. As discussed under Impact TR-1, the Mobility Element includes policies and actions supporting Complete Streets improvements, enhanced pedestrian crossings, sidewalk and pathway improvements, and Safe Routes to School connections. Section 4.14 also discusses pedestrian mobility under Impact TR-2, which identifies Mobility Element policies and actions that support sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, Safe Routes to School improvements, and Complete Streets enhancements intended to reduce vehicle travel and improve multimodal access throughout the City.
Because the 2045 General Plan is a program-level planning document and does not identify specific pedestrian improvement projects, pedestrian facilities would be evaluated and identified during future project-level planning and design. The comment does not identify a deficiency in the environmental analysis, and no changes to the environmental Document are necessary.
Caltrans-11
The commenter requests that Section 4.14-11, State Route 41 Corridor Study, of the Draft General Plan include a reference source for the plan.
This section has been revised to include a direct reference to this plan and Chapter 8, References and Report Preparers, of the Draft EIR has been revised to include the full direct reference accordingly. This revision does not change the analysis or conclusions of the Draft EIR and does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Page 63 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-17
Comment No. Response
Caltrans-12
The commenter states that if Caltrans facilities are affected by future projects, those facilities must meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards after project completion. The commenter also states that bicycle and pedestrian access should be maintained during construction to support safe and equitable transportation for all users.
The comment is noted. Future projects that affect Caltrans facilities would be required to comply with applicable ADA requirements and Caltrans standards during project design and construction. Maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian access during construction activities would also be addressed during project-level planning and permitting, as applicable. The comment does not does not pertain to a significant environmental issue , and no changes to the environmental document are necessary.
Caltrans-13 This comment serves as a conclusion to the comment letter. Additionally, the commenter provides contact information for any questions or further clarification. This comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary.
Page 64 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-18
2.1.3 Atascadero Mutual Water Company
Page 65 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-19
2.1.3.1 Response to Letter from Atascadero Mutual Water Company
Comment No. Response
AMWC-1
The commenter notes that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were first detected in groundwater and the Salinas River underflow in 2013 and that AMWC currently treats drinking water to remove PFAS.
The comment is noted. Section 4.8.1.1.1, Groundwater, describes regional groundwater conditions and basin characteristics relevant to the hydrology and water quality analysis in the Draft EIR. Section 4.8.1.1.1 states that groundwater quality in the Atascadero Basin is generally suitable for both drinking water and agricultural purposes. The presence of PFAS in the groundwater and Salinas River underflow and AMWC’s treatment to remove PFAS does not alter this conclusion nor does it affect the impact conclusions of the Draft EIR. Therefore, no changes to the environmental document are necessary. In addition, this information does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
AMWC-2
The commenter recommends revising Section 4.15.1.1 to indicate that AMWC operates 15 active wells and nine booster stations.
Section 4.15.1.1, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, originally stated that AMWC operates 17 active wells and eight booster stations based on Atascadero Mutual Water Company’s website: (https://www.amwc.us/about-us). The EIR has been revised to clarify that AMWC operates 15 active wells and nine booster stations according to the AMWC comment. This revision does not constitute significant new information nor does it require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. The analysis of water supply and system capacity in the Draft EIR relied on AMWC’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (prepared in 2021), which is based on the correct number of active wells and booster stations in the system. The discrepancy in the number of wells stated in the Draft EIR reflects a clerical error and does not affect the underlying analysis or the conclusion that adequate water supplies are available. Therefore, the clarification does not change the impact analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR, and recirculation is not required.
AMWC-3
The commenter notes that AMWC is currently preparing a five-year update to its Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).
The comment is noted. Section 4.15.1.1, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, of the Draft EIR describes AMWC’s existing water supply system and references the most recent adopted UWMP available at the time of preparation of the Draft EIR (2020 UWMP). Section 4.8.2.2, Urban Water Management Planning Act, also acknowledges the 2020 UWMP as the most recent UWMP update available at the time of preparation. Text has been added to this section to reflect that the AMWC is currently in the process of preparing a 5-year update of its UWMP. The comment does not pertain to a significant environmental issue and this additional information does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
AMWC-4
The commenter recommends revising the last sentence in Section 4.15.1.1, Atascadero Groundwater Basin subsection, to indicate that the Department of Water Resources (DWR) approved the Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) on April 14, 2025, with recommendations. The commenter also notes that the Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) is conducting a five-year periodic evaluation of the GSP that will address DWR’s recommendations related to water quality.
Section 4.15.1.1 describes the regulatory framework and planning efforts associated with groundwater management in the Atascadero Basin. The Draft EIR states that the GSP was submitted for review to the California DWR, according to the Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency. The approval date by DWR was added to the section based on AMWC’s comment. This discrepancy identifies a clerical error and not a deficiency in the environmental analysis. Therefore, this clarification does not change the impact analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR, and recirculation is not required.
AMWC-5
The commenter recommends revising the text in Section 4.15.2. to replace the phrase “outlines the proactive management approach” with “outlines the adaptive management approach.”
The comment is noted. Section 4.15.2.3 provides a general summary of local plans and policies relevant to utilities and service systems, including a brief description of the Atascadero Groundwater Sustainability Plan. While the suggested wording change would not affect the analysis or conclusions of the Draft EIR, the text has been revised to correct this minor error for accuracy. Therefore, this clarification does not change the impact analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR, and recirculation is not required.
Page 66 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-20
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 67 of 143
3-1
CHAPTER 3. ERRATA
This chapter of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) includes minor edits to the Draft EIR as warranted resulting from responses to comments received during the public review period for the Draft EIR of the proposed 2045 General Plan Update and Zoning Code Update (project).
Revisions herein do not result in new significant environmental impacts, do not constitute significant new information, and do not alter the conclusions of the environmental analysis that would warrant recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. Changes are provided in revision marks with underline for new text and strikethrough for deleted text.
3.1 REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR
Executive Summary
No changes were made to the Executive Summary of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 1. Introduction
No changes were made to Chapter 1 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 2. Project Description
No changes were made to Chapter 2 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 3. Environmental Setting
No changes were made to Chapter 3 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 4. Environmental Impact Analysis
No changes were made to Chapter 4 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.1 Aesthetics
No changes were made to Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
No changes were made to Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.3 Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy
No changes were made to Section 4.3 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.4 Biological Resources
No changes were made to Section 4.4 of the Draft EIR.
Page 68 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-2
Section 4.5 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
No changes were made to Section 4.5 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.6 Geology and Soils
No changes were made to Section 4.6 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
No changes were made to Section 4.7 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
The following change was made to Section 4.8.1.1.1, Surface Water, on page 4.8-2 of the Draft EIR:
4.8.1.1.12 Surface Water
The following text was added to Section 4.8.2.3, Local, on page 4.8-10 of the Draft EIR:
The most recent UWMP update available at the time of preparation of this EIR is the 2020 UWMP update. AMWC is currently in the process of preparing a 5-year update of its UWMP.
Section 4.9 Land Use and Planning
No changes were made to Section 4.9 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.10 Mineral Resources
No changes were made to Section 4.10 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.11 Noise
No changes were made to Section 4.11 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.12 Population and Housing
No changes were made to Section 4.12 of the Draft EIR.
Section 4.13 Public Services and Recreation
No changes were made to Section 4.13 of the Draft EIR.
Page 69 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-3
Section 4.14 Transportation
The following text was added to Section 4.14.2.3, Regional, on page 4.14-10 of the Draft EIR:
U.S. 101 NORTH COUNTY MOBILITY MASTER PLAN
SLOCOG, in coordination with Caltrans, San Luis Obispo County, and the cities of Atascadero and Paso Robles, prepared the U.S. 101 North County Mobility Master Plan to evaluate transportation conditions and identify priority improvements along the northern
portion of the U.S. 101 corridor. The plan focuses on the segment extending from the Cuesta Grade to the San Luis Obispo–Monterey County line and includes related connections such as State Route 46. The study evaluates existing conditions, identifies key
mobility and safety issues, and develops a list of multimodal transportation improvements intended to enhance the movement of people and goods along the corridor. The plan also evaluates potential improvements to parallel routes and frontage roads and includes planning-level cost estimates, benefit–cost analyses, and public outreach results. Projects identified through the plan are intended to reduce congestion, improve safety and accessibility, and support environmental goals such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The plan synthesizes dozens of potential capital improvements with planning-level costs totaling approximately $306 million in current dollars and is intended to help position regional projects for future funding programs, including the California Transportation Commission’s Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SLOCOG 2025).
CALTRANS DISTRICT 5 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Caltrans prepared the District 5 Active Transportation Plan to identify opportunities to improve bicycle and pedestrian travel along and across the State Highway System within District 5, which includes San Luis Obispo County. The plan documents existing
conditions for active transportation, summarizes community and agency input, and identifies locations where improvements are needed to support walking and bicycling. The plan includes a prioritized list of bicycle and pedestrian needs along state highways and identifies barriers to safe and convenient non-motorized travel, such as limited crossing opportunities and gaps in pedestrian and bicycle facilities. While the plan does not serve as a construction program, it provides a framework for incorporating active transportation
improvements into future Caltrans projects and maintenance activities. The plan is intended to improve safety, enhance multimodal connectivity, and support statewide goals that promote walking and bicycling as viable transportation options for people of all ages and abilities (Caltrans 2021).
The following change was made to Section 4.14.1.2, Roadway Network, on page 4.14-1 of the Draft EIR:
Major arterials usually carry the highest volumes and/or longest trip in the City. Major arterials in Atascadero include El Camino Real and Morro Road/ California State Route 41 (SR 41) (MIG 2025). SR 41 is part of the State Highway System (SHS) and is owned, operated, and maintained by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Within the Planning Area, SR 41 functions as a major arterial roadway while also serving as a state highway facility.
The following change was made to Section 4.14.1.3, Bicycle and Pedestrian Network, on page 4.14-2 of the Draft EIR:
Figure 4.14-2 shows planned and existing bike and trail routes in Atascadero by type of
facility.
Page 70 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-4
The following change was made to Section 4.14.2.3, Regional, on page 4.14-10 of the Draft EIR:
The 2020 Transportation Impact Study Guide acts as a replacement for the 2002 Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies but is only intended for use with local land use projects and plans, not for transportation projects on the state highway system. Because SR 41 is a part of the SHS, improvements to SR 41 require coordination with Caltrans and must comply with applicable state design and operational standards.
The following change was made to Section 4.14.2.3, Regional, on page 4.14-11 of the Draft EIR:
A Complete Streets Feasibility Study was completed for SR 41 between El Camino Real and the City’s western limits (MIG 2023). The study evaluated potential improvements to the roadway that would improve safety for all modes of transportation while continuing to provide access to businesses. Improvements to bicycle and pedestrian access along Atascadero Avenue was added to the plan. The final plan included proposed Class IV protected bikeways on each side of the corridor. A portion of the improvements were
completed in 2025 (W-Trans 2016).
The following change was made to Section 4.14.2.4, Local, on page 4.14-11 of the Draft EIR:
The Interchange Operation Improvement Study evaluated traffic operations at six key
U.S. 101 interchanges within the City (W-Trans 2016MIG 2023).
Section 4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
The following change was made to Section 4.15.1.1, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, on page 4.15-1 of the Draft EIR:
The system includes nine storage tanks (ranging from 120,000 to 4.8 million gallons [MG]), 17 15 active wells, eight nine booster stations, five treatment buildings, and 20 pressure-reducing stations. AMWC also participates in the Nacimiento Water Project
(NWP) which is available to supplement water supply and groundwater recharge efforts.
The following change was made to Section 4.15.1.1, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, on page 4.15-4 of the Draft EIR:
DWR downgraded the Atascadero Basin’s priority status to “very low” in May 2018, lifting the SGMA compliance mandate however, the GSA chose to remain proactive and continues to manage groundwater resources in the basin. The Atascadero Basin GSP was adopted by the Executive Committee in 2022. The GSP has since been submitted for review to the California DWR (ABGSA 2025). DWR approved the Atascadero Basin GSP on April 14, 2025, with recommendations, and the ABGSA is currently conducting a five-year periodic evaluation of the GSP that will address DWR’s recommendations related to water quality (AMWC 2026).
The following change was made to Section 4.15.2, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, on page 4.15-12 of the Draft EIR:
The Atascadero GSP outlines the proactive adaptive management approach adopted for the Atascadero Basin, despite its designation as a very-low priority basin under the SGMA.
Page 71 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-5
Section 4.16 Wildfire
No changes were made to Section 4.16 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 5. Alternatives Analysis
No changes were made to Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 6. Other CEQA Considerations
No changes were made to Chapter 6 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 7. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
No changes were made to Chapter 7 of the Draft EIR.
Chapter 8. References and Report Preparers
The following change was made to Section 8.2.14, Traffic and Circulation, on page 8-15 of the Draft EIR:
W-Trans. 2016. SR 41 Complete Street Feasibility Study. Prepared for the City of Atascadero. September 15.
Page 72 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-6
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 73 of 143
4-1
CHAPTER 4. REFERENCES AND REPORT PREPARATION
4.1 REFERENCES
Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC). 2026. Comment Letter on the Draft 2045 General Plan. Letter from John B. Neil, General Manager, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, to the City of Atascadero regarding the Draft 2045 General Plan. June 3, 2026.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2021. Caltrans District 5 Active Transportation Plan – Summary Report. Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/transportation-planning/documents/active-transportation-complete-streets/district5-finalreport-a11y.pdf. Accessed June 24, 2026.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2025. U.S. 101 North San Luis Obispo County Mobility Master Plan (Multimodal Corridor Plan). Available at: https://www.slocog.org/programs/highways-streets-roads/us-highway-101/us-101-north-slo-
county-multimodal-corridor-plan. Accessed June 24, 2026.
W-Trans. 2016. SR 41 Complete Street Feasibility Study. Prepared for the City of Atascadero. September 15.
4.2 REPORT PREPARATION
This Final EIR has been prepared by the City of Atascadero (CEQA Lead Agency), in association with
SWCA Environmental Consultants.
4.2.1 CEQA Lead Agency
4.2.1.1 City of Atascadero
City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422
Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director Kelly Gleason, Planning Manager
4.2.2 Environmental Consultant Team
4.2.2.1 SWCA Environmental Consultants
SWCA Environmental Consultants 4111 Broad Street, Suite 210 San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Cassidy Bewley, Project Manager
Page 74 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 4 References and Report Preparation
4-2
4.3 FINAL EIR PREPARERS
The following is a list of individuals responsible for preparation of the EIR.
Responsibilities EIR Preparer
Introduction, Response to Comments, and Errata Cassidy Bewley, Project Manager / Senior Environmental Planner, SWCA
Mariah Gasch, Associate Project Environmental Planner, SWCA
Technical Editing and Document Production Jaimie Jones, Project Technical Editor, SWCA
Page 75 of 143
Statement of Overriding ConsideraƟons
CEQA Requirements
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires lead agencies to balance the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental
benefits, of a project against its unavoidable environmental impacts when determining whether
to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the impacts may be
considered “acceptable.” The lead agency must state in wriƟng the specific reasons to support its
acƟon based on the final EIR and/or other informaƟon in the record. The statement of overriding
consideraƟons must be supported by substanƟal evidence in the record.
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The following Project-related environmental impacts could not be eliminated or reduced to a
less-than-significant level with implementaƟon of miƟgaƟon measures:
1. Air Quality. The 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would apply only to land
located within the Planning Area; however, future development associated with
community buildout pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would
incrementally contribute to cumulaƟve air pollutant emissions within the regional air
basin in combinaƟon with growth occurring elsewhere in the County.
ImplementaƟon of the 2045 General Plan would incorporate numerous goals, policies,
and acƟons that are generally consistent with the SLOAPCD CAP, including compact
development paƩerns, mixed-use land uses, improved mulƟmodal transportaƟon, and an
improved jobs-housing raƟo, all of which would reduce VMT on a per capita basis relaƟve
to the exisƟng 2025 General Plan. However, build-out under the 2045 General Plan would
result in populaƟon levels exceeding those assumed in the most recent SLOCOG regional
growth forecasts, and total VMT would exceed LUCI-recommended thresholds; therefore,
this impact would be significant and unavoidable. (Impact AQ-1)
IMPACT AQ-1: THE PROJECT WOULD CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY PLAN.
Future development associated with Buildout pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and
Zoning Code Update would result in increased construcƟon and long-term operaƟonal
emissions of criteria pollutants. ConstrucƟon emissions would be temporary but
Page 76 of 143
potenƟally cumulaƟvely considerable due to overlapping development acƟvity and the
absence of plan-level construcƟon thresholds. Given the region’s nonaƩainment status
and uncertainty regarding the effecƟveness of future project-level miƟgaƟon, cumulaƟve
criteria pollutant impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (Impact AQ-2)
IMPACT AQ-2: THE PROJECT COULD RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE NET
INCREASE OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS NON-
ATTAINMENT.
ImplementaƟon of the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would increase the
potenƟal for cumulaƟve exposure of sensiƟve receptors to substanƟal pollutant
concentraƟons from both short-term construcƟon acƟvity and long-term mobile and
staƟonary sources, including areas near U.S. 101 and congested intersecƟons. General
Plan policies related to dust control, grading limitaƟons and land use buffering, together
with current discreƟonary project review pracƟces, would help to minimize exposure to
localized pollutants through project-level evaluaƟon and implementaƟon of SLOAPCD-
recommended measures; however, even with these policies and miƟgaƟon requirements,
it may not be feasible to reduce all cumulaƟve exposures below applicable significance
thresholds. Therefore, cumulaƟve impacts related to exposure of sensiƟve receptors
would be significant and unavoidable. (Impact AQ-3)
IMPACT AQ-3: THE PROJECT COULD EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS.
ImplementaƟon of the 2045 General Plan would incorporate numerous goals, policies,
and acƟons that are generally consistent with the SLOAPCD CAP, including compact
development paƩerns, mixed-use land uses, improved mulƟmodal transportaƟon, and an
improved jobs-housing raƟo, all of which would reduce VMT on a per capita basis relaƟve
to the exisƟng 2025 General Plan. However, build-out under the 2045 General Plan would
result in populaƟon levels exceeding those assumed in the most recent SLOCOG regional
growth forecasts, and total VMT would exceed LUCI-recommended thresholds. Because
these thresholds are intended to support statewide air quality and GHG-reducƟon goals,
exceedance of the thresholds indicates that mobile-source emission reducƟons assumed
in the SLOACPD’s CAP may not be fully achieved. As a result, implementaƟon of the 2045
General Plan would conflict with or obstruct implementaƟon of the applicable air quality
plan, and this impact would be cumulaƟvely considerable and significant and unavoidable.
Page 77 of 143
In addiƟon, despite VMT-reducing policies in the 2045 General Plan, total VMT would
exceed applicable LUCI thresholds. While project-specific miƟgaƟon of future
discreƟonary development projects may reduce impacts, the region’s nonaƩainment
status and the overall uncertainty regarding the effecƟveness of future project-level
miƟgaƟon renders cumulaƟve criteria polluƟon impacts significant and unavoidable.
Moreover, the Project would increase the potenƟal for cumulaƟve exposure of sensiƟve
receptors to substanƟal pollutant concentraƟons from both short-term construcƟon
acƟvity and long-term mobile and staƟonary sources. While General Plan policies related
to dust control, grading limitaƟons and land use buffering would help minimize exposure,
cumulaƟve impacts related to exposure of sensiƟve receptors remain significant and
unavoidable. (Impact AQ-5)
IMPACT AQ-5: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECTED LONG-TERM INCREASES IN VMT AND MOBILE-
SOURCE EMISSIONS.
2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Future development associated with community buildout
pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would result in long-term
increases in operaƟonal GHG emissions, primarily from mobile sources, with addiƟonal
contribuƟons from energy use, waste generaƟon, water use, and area sources.
ImplementaƟon of the 2045 General Plan includes numerous goals, policies, and acƟons
that support reducƟons in GHG emissions, including compact development paƩerns,
mixed-use land uses, improved mulƟmodal transportaƟon opƟons, energy-efficient site
planning and building design, and an improved jobs-housing raƟo, all of which would
reduce VMT on a per capita basis relaƟve to the exisƟng 2025 General Plan.
Although the 2045 General Plan policies and miƟgaƟon measures idenƟfied would reduce
GHG emissions relaƟve to exisƟng condiƟons, the magnitude and Ɵming of reducƟons
aƩributable to included measures cannot be accurately quanƟfied at this Ɵme. Therefore,
even with implementaƟon of 2045 General Plan policies and MM GHG-1.1 through MM
GHG-1.3, cumulaƟve GHG emissions associated with long-term increases in VMT and
mobile-source emissions would remain cumulaƟvely considerable. Accordingly,
cumulaƟve impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
(Impact GHG-1)
IMPACT GHG-1: THE PROJECT COULD GENERATE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, EITHER
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THAT MAY RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
Page 78 of 143
IMPACT AND COULD CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS
ADOPTED TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
The following miƟgaƟon measures are idenƟfied to reduce impacts to the greatest
extent feasible:
MM GHG-1.1 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan
prior to adopƟon:
Update the City of Atascadero Climate AcƟon Plan to idenƟfy ways to reduce GHG
emissions and limit climate change impacts on the residents to the extent
possible. The Climate AcƟon Plan shall integrate the State’s future GHG-reducƟon
goals, such as the State’s goal of aƩaining carbon neutrality by 2045.
MM GHG-1.2 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan
prior to adopƟon:
UnƟl the City adopts a qualified Climate AcƟon Plan consistent with MM GHG-1,
the City shall incorporate development standards into the Municipal Code for new
development projects located along exisƟng or planned public transit routes that
require features that promote the use of public transit. Examples include the
installaƟon of sidewalks or pathways that facilitate ease of access from on-site
locaƟons to nearby transit stops, installaƟon of transit improvements (e.g.,
benches, bus turnouts) for future planned transit stops located adjacent to the
development site.
MM GHG-1.3 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan
prior to adopƟon:
The City shall parƟcipate in SLOCOG’s Sustainable CommuniƟes Strategy/Regional
Blueprint Planning effort to help increase consistency between local development
plans and associated populaƟon and employment growth and the Regional
TransportaƟon Plan/Sustainable CommuniƟes Strategy.
ImplementaƟon of the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would result in
populaƟon levels exceeding those assumed in the most recent SLOCOG regional growth
forecasts, and total residenƟal and employment-based VMT would exceed LUCI-
recommended thresholds. Because these thresholds are intended to support statewide
GHG-reducƟon goals, exceedance of the thresholds indicates that projected reducƟons in
mobile-source GHG emissions would not be fully achieved. As a result, long-term
Page 79 of 143
increases in VMT and associated mobile-source emissions would remain the primary
contributor to cumulaƟve GHG emissions.
Although the 2045 General Plan policies and miƟgaƟon measures idenƟfied would reduce
GHG emissions relaƟve to exisƟng condiƟons, the magnitude and Ɵming of reducƟons
aƩributable to these measures cannot be accurately quanƟfied at this Ɵme. In addiƟon,
the 2045 General Plan does not require all-electric development and would generate VMT
at levels that are inconsistent with the assumpƟons underlying the State’s 2022 Scoping
Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality and SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS. Therefore, the impact is
significant and unavoidable. (Impact GHG-2)
IMPACT GHG-2: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECTED INCREASES IN VMT AND
MOBILE-SOURCE EMISSIONS AND WOULD CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE STATE AND
REGIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION PLANS.
MiƟgaƟon measures GHG-1.1 through GHG-1.3, enumerated above, have been idenƟfied
to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible. However, cumulaƟve GHG emissions
associates with long-term increases in VMT and mobile-source emissions would remain
cumulaƟvely considerable and impacts remain significant and unavoidable.
3. TransportaƟon. The geographic area of analysis for cumulaƟve VMT impacts includes San
Luis Obispo County, with the acknowledgement that VMT significance thresholds are
established within the statewide regulatory context with the intent of helping to achieve
statewide greenhouse gas emissions reducƟons targets. The analysis considered the
project’s potenƟal to impact VMT at a regional level using the SLOCOG TransportaƟon
Demand Model (TDM), which factors in projected growth across the enƟre county. Based
on this analysis, build-out pursuant to the 2045 General Plan would improve both
residenƟal and commute VMT on a per capita basis at a regional level when compared
with build-out pursuant to the 2025 General Plan, however, it would exceed applicable
VMT significance thresholds idenƟfied by LUCI.
This impact would be minimized to the greatest extent feasible through the 2045 General
Plan’s emphasis on focusing future growth in VMT-efficient areas and through
incorporaƟon of its policies and acƟons; however, impacts would sƟll be significant, and
no feasible miƟgaƟon measures have been idenƟfied that could miƟgate the remaining
factors contribuƟng to the exceedance of the LUCI thresholds, such as the large
geographic area of the City or the exisƟng low-density development paƩern within the
Page 80 of 143
City. Therefore, the project’s exceedance of the LUCI VMT thresholds would be
cumulaƟvely considerable and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. (Impact TR-
2)
IMPACT TR-2: THE PROJECT WOULD EXCEED APPLICABLE THRESHOLDS OF
SIGNIFICANCE ASSOCIATED WITH VMT.
Build-out pursuant to the 2045 General Plan would improve VMT on a per capita basis at
a regional level when compared with build-out pursuant to the 2025 General Plan,
however, it would exceed applicable VMT significance thresholds idenƟfied by LUCI. The
Technical Advisory published by LUCI includes evidence connecƟng the LUCI VMT
significance thresholds to the State’s greenhouse gas emissions reducƟon goals.
Therefore, the project’s exceedance of the LUCI VMT thresholds would have the potenƟal
to be detrimental to the State’s goals related to reducing VMT as a method of achieving
its greenhouse gas emissions reducƟon goals. This impact would be minimized to the
greatest extent feasible through the 2045 General Plan’s emphasis on focusing future
growth in VMT-efficient areas and through incorporaƟon of its policies and acƟons;
however, impacts would sƟll be significant, and no feasible miƟgaƟon measures have been
idenƟfied that could miƟgate the remaining factors contribuƟng to the exceedance of the
LUCI thresholds, such as thelarge geographic area of the City or the exisƟng low-density
development paƩern within the City. Therefore, the project’s exceedance of the LUCI VMT
thresholds would be cumulaƟvely considerable and impacts would be significant and
unavoidable. (Impact TR-2)
IMPACT TR-5: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH VMT.
Compelling Overriding ConsideraƟons and Project Benefits
The City Council of the City of Atascadero adopts and makes the following Statement of
Overriding ConsideraƟons regarding the significant, unavoidable impacts of the 2045 General
Plan and Zoning Code Update and the anƟcipated benefits of the Project.
The overall purpose of the Project is to provide a blueprint for the community through the year
2045. The current General Plan, adopted in 2002, requires an update to plan for future residenƟal
growth, as required by the State through the RHNA process, and associated infrastructure and
community needs associated with that anƟcipated growth.
The Project involves a comprehensive update to the current City of Atascadero (City) 2025
General Plan, which was adopted in 2002 and most recently amended in 2020 to reflect a 2045
Page 81 of 143
horizon year (2045 General Plan Update). The Project also includes updates to the Atascadero
Municipal Code to ensure consistency with the 2045 General Plan Update, clarify exisƟng
standards and pracƟces, and codify exisƟng City policies (Zoning Code Update). The 2045 General
Plan process involved extensive community and decision-maker discussions regarding future
growth and evolving community character. This engagement process informed the goals, policies,
acƟons, and programs included in the 2045 General Plan Update.
The 2045 General Plan Update idenƟfies a number of Guiding Principles that were developed
based on the input of community members during iniƟal engagement acƟviƟes and the City
Council’s strategic planning iniƟaƟves to provide a framework for the preparaƟon of the 2045
General Plan Update. The Guiding Principles include the following:
Guiding Principles – Our Places
Respect Atascadero’s semi-rural character as the community evolves.
Facilitate vibrant public spaces that encourage community connecƟons. Support City
parks, trails, and faciliƟes that provide access to a variety of recreaƟon experiences.
Promote investments in downtown that support the needs of local businesses and
residents and provide a quality experience for visitors.
Encourage synergisƟc commercial and residenƟal uses along the El Camino Real and
Morro Road corridors to support long-term viability of commercial spaces.
Guiding Principles – Our People
Support a culture that is welcoming, inclusive, and based on mutual respect.
Create and maintain opportuniƟes for people of all income levels and ages to live, work,
raise families, and reƟre in Atascadero.
Target growth to serve community needs and enhance the quality of life.
Guiding Principles – Our Economy
IncenƟvize a mix of business and revenue streams that support a resilient economy.
Diversify Atascadero’s employment opportuniƟes to address the needs of an evolving
workforce and aƩract jobs for all skill levels and income ranges.
Guiding Principles – Our Infrastructure
Facilitate safe, convenient, and comfortable connecƟons for people of all abiliƟes and in
different stages of life.
Support and maintain efficient and sustainable infrastructure systems.
Organize public service systems so that all neighborhoods and business districts have
access to public services and emergency response.
Page 82 of 143
Plan and prepare for community safety and resiliency from evolving climate threats,
natural, and human-caused hazards.
Guiding Principles – Our Natural Environment
Integrate Atascadero’s natural, historical, and cultural landscapes and resources into
planning decisions.
Each chapter of the General Plan discusses specific topics, but the overarching focus of the 2045
General Plan is a series of “Big Moves” idenƟfied by the community and City Council. These Big
Moves represent key land use objecƟves and strategies that help advance the Vision and Guiding
Principles and define how the community grows and evolves into the future. The 2045 General
Plan Update Big Moves are as follows:
Big Move A: Create a Mix of Housing Types
o Allow higher-density residenƟal and mixed-use projects within Downtown and
along key stretches of El Camino Real and Morro Road that are accessible to a
range of community services, ameniƟes, and acƟviƟes.
o Consider development incenƟves for projects that provide needed workforce
housing near areas of employment.
o Encourage incremental infill housing in tradiƟonally single-family areas that
maintains the character and neighborhood scale (second units, duplexes, coƩage
clusters).
Big Move B: AƩract New Industries and Higher Wage Jobs
o Encourage business investment through targeted regulatory incenƟves and
infrastructure prioriƟzaƟon (on-site parking reducƟons, infrastructure upgrades).
o AcƟvely market Atascadero as a business-friendly City, and engage technology,
research and development, and similar industries to locate in the City.
o Provide opportuniƟes for flexible building uses and conversion of spaces within
key commercial and mixed-use areas.
Big Move C: Improve Mobility, Access, and Safety
o Enhance mulƟmodal street design and ameniƟes along El Camino Real and
Morro Road to encourage and accommodate more walking and biking.
o Create a network of emergency routes for wildfire-prone areas that provide safe
evacuaƟon for residents and efficient entry for first responders.
o PrioriƟze key collector streets for mulƟmodal improvements to enhance mobility
opƟons.
Big Move D: Address Public Infrastructure Needs
o Expand telecommunicaƟons infrastructure and public uƟliƟes to and within key
employment areas.
Page 83 of 143
o Implement streetscape improvements along El Camino Real and Morro Road
near major planned residenƟal and employment nodes to incenƟvize new
development.
o Develop fiscal strategies for maintaining and expanding key infrastructure.
Big Move E: Ensure Fiscal Sustainability
o PrioriƟze public investments that have a posiƟve influence on long-term
economic growth, including focusing infrastructure improvements within
employment-generaƟng areas.
o Use financing mechanisms that aƩract new development that contributes to
near-term investment and long-term infrastructure maintenance.
o Acknowledge the fiscal implicaƟons of different land use types and the necessity
of maintaining a balanced land use mix to miƟgate fiscal vulnerabiliƟes during
variable market cycles.
The City Council has carefully balanced the benefits of the Project against the adverse impacts
idenƟfied in the EIR that could not be feasibly miƟgated to a level of insignificance. It is important
to note that the General Plan assumes a level of growth that is likely to exceed the actual level
of growth that our region will experience based on current state and regional trends. The General
Plan assumpƟon allows a conservaƟve evaluaƟon of environmental impacts that allows the City
a safe growth assumpƟon instead of underesƟmaƟng growth. Notwithstanding the idenƟficaƟon
and analysis of impacts that are idenƟfied in the EIR as being significant and which could not be
eliminated, lessened or miƟgated to a level of insignificance, the City Council, acƟng pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines SecƟon 15092 and 15093, hereby determines that significant effects on the
environment found to be unavoidable above (air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and
transportaƟon), are acceptable due to overriding consideraƟons described herein.
Based on the objecƟves idenƟfied for the Project, the Council has determined that the Project
should be approved; each of the overriding consideraƟons set forth below consƟtutes a separate
and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh its significant
adverse environmental effects and is an overriding consideraƟon warranƟng approval:
Our Places:
1. The Project would preserve the rural west side of Atascadero and encourage infill
development where infrastructure and services exist.
2. The Project would enhance the City’s Downtown and commercial nodes by encouraging
higher-density development and supporƟng mixed-use building typologies and uses to
create vibrant, walkable nodes.
Page 84 of 143
3. The Project focuses on gentle density infill and missing-middle housing typologies
adjacent to key corridors and commercial nodes to maintain community character while
supporƟng commercial acƟviƟes and enhancing economic prosperity.
Our People:
1. The Project supports a variety of housing types, jobs, and recreaƟonal opportuniƟes for
all residents.
2. The Project supports community acƟviƟes and engagement, focusing on creaƟng events
and spaces for residents and visitors alike.
Our Economy:
1. The Project idenƟfies areas for light industrial, emerging technology, employment
centers, and resident serving centers to support a vibrant, well-rounded economic base.
2. The Project emphasizes placemaking as a means of supporƟng, not only residents, but
providing unique opportuniƟes for tourism that maintains and celebrates community
character.
Our Infrastructure:
1. The Project focuses on creaƟng safe roads for all users, including vehicles, bikes, and
pedestrians.
2. The Project supports efforts to upgrade criƟcal infrastructure, such as wastewater
faciliƟes, stormwater faciliƟes, and roads, to ensure adequate and safe services for
residents and visitors.
3. The Project provides a framework to maintain adequate levels of emergency response
and services for the community.
Our Environment:
1. The Project supports integraƟon of the natural environment by increasing access and
appropriate use of open space areas.
2. The Project encourages trails and connecƟons to open space and park areas, providing
opportuniƟes for all forms of recreaƟon.
In summary, in consideraƟon of State requirements and community need to plan for anƟcipated
future growth, and the analysis of project outcomes presented in the Final EIR, the City Council
of the City of Atascadero finds that the economic, social, and environmental benefits of meeƟng
the Project’s goals and objecƟves outweigh the significant and unavoidable air quality,
greenhouse gas emission, and transportaƟon impacts associated with the Project and its
implementaƟon.
Page 85 of 143
Findings of Fact
1. Introduction
1.1 Overview and Organization
This document presents the Findings of Fact for the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR)
of the City of Atascadero’s Comprehensive General Plan and Zoning Code Update (Project). The
content and format of the Findings of Fact are designed to meet the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Final EIR identifies significant environmental
effects that would result from the implementation of the Project, as well as potential alternatives
to the Project. For each significant effect of the Project identified in the Final EIR, the City Council
of the City of Atascadero (City Council) is adopting one or more of the findings as provided in
CEQA and specified in Section 15091 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA
Guidelines). For most significant effects, the City Council finds that the mitigation measures
identified in the Final EIR, as adopted, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects to a less-
than-significant level. As provided in Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council is
balancing the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project against the
unavoidable environmental effects. Regarding those unavoidable effects, the City Council is
adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Concurrent with the adoption of these findings, the City Council also adopts a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) for the Project. The City Council finds that the MMRP,
which is incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings, meets the requirements of
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of
measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the Project. Pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3), the City Council finds that the Final EIR reflects the City of
Atascadero’s independent judgment as the Lead Agency for the Project. The Findings of Fact are
organized into the following sections:
Section 1: Introduction.
Section 2: Project Description and Objectives.
Section 3: Findings Regarding Independent Review and Judgement
Section 4: Less-Than-Significant Environmental Effects; Mitigation Incorporated.
Section 5: Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects.
Section 6: Findings Regarding Project Alternatives.
The MMRP and Statement of Overriding Considerations are incorporated by reference and are
provided under a separate cover.
Page 86 of 143
1.2 Statutory Requirements
CEQA, and particularly the CEQA Guidelines, require that:
No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which
identified one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency
makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief
explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which
avoid of substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final
EIR.
b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency. Such changes have been adopted by another other agency or can and
should be adopted by another agency.
c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures of project alternatives identified in
the Final EIR.
For those significant effects that City Council determines are not feasible to mitigate to a less-
than-significant level, the City Council is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the
environment (see Public Resources Code Section 21081(b)). The CEQA Guidelines state in Section
15093 that:
“If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-
wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered ‘acceptable.’”
1.3 Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings of Fact, the records of proceedings for the City Council’s
decisions on the Project consist of: (a) matters of common knowledge to the City of Atascadero,
including, but not limited to, federal, state and local laws and regulations and policies; and (b) the
following documents, which are in custody of the City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Ave, Atascadero:
The Responses to Comments document for the Project (RTC document) and the Draft
Environmental Impact Report for the Project (Draft EIR), which together comprise the
Final EIR for the Atascadero 2045 General Plan and Comprehensive Zoning Code Update
Project (Final EIR);
Page 87 of 143
Notice of Preparation (NOP) and other public notices issued by the City of Atascadero in
conjunction with the Project;
All testimony, documentary evidence, and correspondence submitted in response to the
Draft EIR by agencies or members of the public during the public comment period on the
Draft EIR and responses to those comments (Final EIR Chapter 2);
MMRP;
All findings, statements of overriding consideration, and resolutions adopted by the City
Council in connection with the Project, and documents cited or referred to therein;
All final technical reports and addenda, studies, memoranda, maps, correspondence and
all planning documents prepared by the City of Atascadero or the City’s consultants
relating to the Project;
All documents submitted to the City of Atascadero by agencies or members of the public
in connection with development of the Project;
All actions of the Atascadero City Council and Atascadero Planning Commission with
respect to the Project;
All references included in the Draft EIR;
Applicable adopted local, regional, and state plans and related environmental analyses;
Meeting agenda, minutes and staff reports of the Atascadero City Council and the
Atascadero Planning Commission; and
Other documents regarding coordination and consultation with the public and public
agencies and other documents designated by the City of Atascadero.
1.4 Identification of Environmental Setting for Use in Determining Significance of
Effects of the Project
The CEQA Guidelines require environmental impact reports to include a description of the
physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project and that “[t]his environmental
setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency
determines whether an impact is significant.” (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15125, subd. (a).)
Consistent with the CEQA Guidelines, the environmental setting discussion for each
environmental topic describes the baseline physical environmental conditions for each of the
Project components that could have associated physical environmental impacts. For purposes of
the analyses in the EIR, baseline conditions are those that existed at the time that the NOP was
published in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2 (July 2024). With some
environmental resources, such as transportation, a baseline analysis also considered impacts
under build-out of the existing General Plan.
Page 88 of 143
Impacts evaluated the physical changes associated with community buildout anticipated to occur
under the 2045 General Plan Update and Zoning Code Update as well as the physical effects that
may result from the establishment and implementation of the goals and policies of the project.
Where appropriate impacts were evaluated relative to conditions that would exist without
implementation of the Project in the future.
2. Project Description and Objectives
2.1 Project Description
The project involves a comprehensive update to the current City of Atascadero 2025 General Plan
to reflect a 2045 horizon year (2045 General Plan Update). The Project also includes updates to
the Atascadero Zoning Code to ensure consistency with the 2045 General Plan Update to clarify
existing standards and practices and codify current City policy.
The 2045 General Plan Update would be comprehensive and internally consistent, serving as the
City’s top-level planning document to guide the City’s future growth and development. The
Zoning Code Update will implement General Plan Placetypes and provide code consistency with
this guiding document.
According to state law, the Atascadero General Plans is required to cover the following topics:
land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, air quality, and safety.
The 2045 General Plan Update is a comprehensive update to the City’s General Plan and includes
the following chapters, which incorporate all required State specified elements:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Vision and Guiding Principles
Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Form Element
Chapter 4: Economic Development Element
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
Chapter 7: Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Chapter 8: Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
The Zoning Code Update will:
1. Update zoning to be consistent with the new General Plan Placetypes
2. Reorganize the chapters for increased accessibility
3. Make minor changes to certain administrative processes
Page 89 of 143
The Zoning Code Update focuses on reorganization of Title 9 for readability and accessibility while
incorporating new zoning districts to correspond to updated General Plan Placetypes. This
ensures that the City can provide for consistent implementation following adoption of the 2045
General Plan.
The revised organization consolidates the zoning topics into eight chapters. Existing standards or
policies will be reorganized accordingly to improve the utility and readability of the Zoning Code.
The chapters include:
Ch 1: Enactment And Applicability
Ch 2: Zoning Districts, Allowable Uses, and Development Standards
Ch 3: Regulations Applicable to All Zoning Districts
Ch 4: Standards for Specific Uses
Ch 5: Nonconformities
Ch 6: Entitlement Processing Procedures
Ch 7: Zoning Code Administration
Ch 8: Definitions
The Zoning Code Update will include new land use definitions that are intended to match and
implement the General Plan Placetypes. These redefined uses will be used to update specific
zoning district use tables to ensure that zoning aligns with General Plan vision, policies and goals.
To further implement the General Plan, the Zoning Code Update will include objective
development standards for mixed-use sites and the innovation/flex zone as well as special use
standards, lighting standards, and temporary and mobile event regulations in alignment with the
General Plan goals and policies. The Zoning Code Update also includes any standards or
regulations identified as required mitigation in the adopted EIR.
Consistent with CEQA, the EIR for the Project is a program-level EIR based on the build-out and
policy implementation assumptions for the 2045 horizon year.
Refer to Chapter 2 of the Draft EIR, Project Description, for the full project description, location,
background, guiding principles, and summary of elements.
2.2 Project Need and Objectives
2.2.1 Need for the Project
A City’s general plan is the primary policy document that lays out the overarching vision and
policies for how a city will develop and function in the future. All elements of the general plan
have equal legal status, which means that one policy does not supersede another policy. It also
means that any optional element or topic a city includes in its general plan has the same legal
status as required elements.
Page 90 of 143
The current City General Plan, which is referred to as the 2025 General Plan, was adopted in 2002.
Although there have been minor amendments, the 2025 General Plan has not been
comprehensively updated since 2002. Therefore, shifts in demographics, land use, transportation,
economics, community character, and the housing market warrant a comprehensive update. A
changing economic and fiscal landscape, along with the need to supply additional workforce
housing and head-of-household jobs, further supports the need to ensure the City’s visions, goals,
policies, and programs are current and adequately address community needs.
The Zoning Code Update process was initially authorized by the City Council in September 2024
and is intended to implement the General Plan to maintain policy consistency. Updates to the
Zoning Code are informed by the General Plan. Once the draft 2045 General Plan was circulated
for public comment, the identification and update of Zoning Code standards commenced, and
final adoption of Zoning Code amendments are expected to follow adoption of the General Plan.
The code update focuses on reformatting Title 9 for readability and accessibility while
incorporating and refining the new General Plan Placetypes as zoning districts.
2.3.2 Project Purpose and Objectives
The 2045 General Plan Update would be comprehensive and internally consistent, serving as the
City’s top-level planning document to guide the City’s future growth and development. The
Zoning Code Update will implement General Plan Placetypes and provide code consistency with
this guiding document.
The Vision Statement serves as the foundation of the General Plan and reflects input from
residents, local business and property owners, and elected and appointed officials. The statement
expresses the vision for Atascadero, both as an end goal and as the lens through which long-term
decisions will be made:
Atascadero provides Opportunities for all residents and business owners to thrive. Our
community-focused culture pursues investments and land use strategies that create a
diversity of housing types, support local businesses, improve all mobility modes, and
respect our natural environment. Collective community actions improve conditions for
current and future generations.
The 2045 General Plan Update identifies a number of Guiding Principles that were developed
based on the input of community members during initial engagement activities and the City
Council’s strategic planning initiatives. The Guiding Principles both guided preparation of the 2045
General Plan Update and will be used by City staff and decision-makers when implementing the
2045 General Plan Update. For the purposes of this EIR, the Guiding Principles serve as the project
objectives which are clearly identified in each chapter of this EIR (e.g., Chapter 5, Alternatives
Analysis). The Guiding Principles include the following:
Page 91 of 143
Guiding Principles – Our Places
Respect Atascadero’s semi-rural character as the community evolves.
Facilitate vibrant public spaces that encourage community connections. Support City
parks, trails, and facilities that provide access to a variety of recreation experiences.
Promote investments in downtown that support the needs of local businesses and
residents and provide a quality experience for visitors.
Encourage synergistic commercial and residential uses along the El Camino Real and
Morro Road corridors to support long-term viability of commercial spaces.
Guiding Principles – Our People
Support a culture that is welcoming, inclusive, and based on mutual respect.
Create and maintain opportunities for people of all income levels and ages to live, work,
raise families, and retire in Atascadero.
Target growth to serve community needs and enhance the quality of life.
Guiding Principles – Our Economy
Incentivize a mix of business and revenue streams that support a resilient economy.
Diversify Atascadero’s employment opportunities to address the needs of an evolving
workforce and attract jobs for all skill levels and income ranges.
Guiding Principles – Our Infrastructure
Facilitate safe, convenient, and comfortable connections for people of all abilities and in
different stages of life.
Support and maintain efficient and sustainable infrastructure systems.
Organize public service systems so that all neighborhoods and business districts have
access to public services and emergency response.
Plan and prepare for community safety and resiliency from evolving climate threats,
natural, and human-caused hazards.
Guiding Principles – Our Natural Environment
Integrate Atascadero’s natural, historical, and cultural landscapes and resources into
planning decisions.
3. Findings Regarding Independent Review and Judgement
Page 92 of 143
Each member of the City Council was provided with a copy of the Draft EIR for the Atascadero
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update in May 2026 and a complete copy of the Final EIR for
the Project in August 2026. The City Council of the City of Atascadero hereby finds that the EIR
has been completed in accordance with CEQA; that the EIR reflects the City’s own independent
judgment as the lead agency for the Project; and that the City Council has independently
reviewed and considered the EIR prior to taking any final action with respect to the Project.
4. Less-Than-Significant Environmental Effects; Mitigation Incorporated
The City Council of the City of Atascadero finds that as discussed below, the following potentially
significant impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the implementation of
the corresponding mitigation measures for the Project.
4.1 Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-9: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of the Project on the environment (Pub. Res.
Code §21081(a)(1); 14 Cal. Code Regs. §15091(a)(1)).
Facts in Support of Findings: Buildout of the Project would occur within areas with
paleontological sensitivity. Ground-disturbing activities associated with future development
pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update could potentially encounter
paleontological resources. In addition to State regulatory requirements, which prohibit the
unauthorized excavation, removal or destruction of paleontological sites or features, the City
Council of the City of Atascadero adopts the following mitigation measure that would require
development projects with the potential to disturb paleontologically sensitive geologic units to
prepare a paleontological resource study to avoid and minimize potential impacts to unique
paleontological resources. Because individual projects would be required to evaluate and mitigate
potential paleontological impacts resulting from ground-disturbing activities, impacts to unique
paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features of the Project would be mitigated
to a less than significant level.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.6-26 through 4.6-28.
Mitigation Measure GEO-9.1
The City shall incorporate the following Policy and Actions into the Recreation, Open Space, and
Natural Resources Element of the 2045General Plan prior to adoption:
Page 93 of 143
Policy REC-6.3: Paleontological Resource Protection. Protect unique paleontological
resources from disturbance associated with development.
o Action A: Maintain a current GIS-based map of generalized areas of
paleontologically sensitive areas and areas that have yielded significant fossils.
o Action B: Require preparation of a Paleontological Resource Study for projects that
would include proposed development within a geologic unit with high
paleontological sensitivity and earthwork would occur in areas that have not
previously been developed with urban uses, or when excavation depths would
exceed those previously disturbed. The Paleontological Resource Study shall
evaluate potential impacts to unique paleontological resources and identify
appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures in accordance with processional
standards set forth by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology.
4.2 Utilities and Service Systems
Impact USS-3: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of the Project on the environment (Pub. Res.
Code §21081(a)(1); 14 Cal. Code Regs. §15091(a)(1)).
Facts in Support of Findings: Pursuant to the March 2025 draft updated Wastewater Collection
System Master Plan, the City’s wastewater collection system can meet current demand without
expansion and can likely meet near-term demand with interim improvements. Future capacity
will be accommodated through long-term planning provisions and large-scale improvements
incorporated into the City’ Capital Improvement Program. To ensure the City’s wastewater
collection and treatment infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve future development
associated with buildout of the 2045 General Plan Update and Zoning Code Update, the City
Council of the City of Atascadero adopts the following mitigation measure that would require new
development projects to be reviewed during the permitting process to ensure that wastewater
collection and treatment facilities have adequate capacity. Because individual projects would be
required to demonstrate adequate wastewater collection and treatment capacity, utility impacts
related to adequacy to serve the Project’s demand on the wastewater treatment system would
be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.15-20 through 4.15-22.
Mitigation Measure USS 3.1
Page 94 of 143
The City shall incorporate the following Action into the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption, under
Policy PSI-3.3:
Action D: Require all proposed new projects and new development requiring wastewater
collection and treatment service to be reviewed for adequate wastewater collection and
treatment capacity prior to issuance of building permits.
4.3 Cumulative Impacts
Impact GEO-10: Would the project potentially result in cumulative impacts related to geologic
hazards and the loss or disturbance of geologic and paleontological resources?
Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of the Project on the environment (Pub. Res.
Code §21081(a)(1); 14 Cal. Code Regs. §15091(a)(1)).
Facts in Support of Findings: Cumulative impacts to geologic and paleontological resources could
arise if multiple projects in the region disturb or remove unique geologic features or deposits with
high paleontological sensitivity, resulting in the cumulative loss of scientifically significant
resources. The City Council of the City of Atascadero adopts the following mitigation measure
that would require development projects with the potential to disturb paleontologically sensitive
geologic units to prepare a paleontological resource study to avoid and minimize potential
cumulative impacts to unique paleontological resources. While cumulative development in the
San Luis Obispo County region could potentially result in loss of geologic and paleontological
resources, the Project’s contribution to such impacts would be less than significant because
individual projects would be required to evaluate and mitigate potential paleontological impacts
resulting from ground-disturbing activities in accordance with MM GEO-9.1.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.6-28 through 4.6-29.
Mitigation Measure GEO-9.1
See Section 4.1 above.
5. Significant and Unavoidable Effects
The Draft EIR identified the following significant or potentially significant impacts as remaining
significant and unavoidable because the impacts cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant
level. Regarding each significant effect that is not avoided or that is not substantially lessened,
the Agency is adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration in accordance with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093.
Page 95 of 143
5.1 Air Quality
1. Impact AQ-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable Air Quality Plan?
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific economic, social
or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings: The 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update are
consistent with the land use and TCMs identified in SLOAPCD’s CAP. In addition, the 2045
General Plan and Zoning Code Update focuses growth in more VMT-efficient areas at
higher densities and with more travel options, so it produces fewer VMT per capita and
per employee than the existing 2025 General Plan. However, even with this focus on VMT-
reducing development and implementation of 2045 General Plan policies, the 2045
General Plan and Zoning Code Update is inconsistent with the SLOAPCD’s CAP because the
growth attributable to the project would result in VMT that would exceed LUCI’s
recommended significance thresholds. No feasible mitigation measures have been
identified that would further reduce this impact, due to unmitigable contributing factors
such as the existing development pattern and geography of the City.
The No Project Alternative considered in the Draft EIR would produce more VMT per
capita and per employee than the Project and is anticipated to result in air quality impacts
that are more significant than the Project. In addition, the No Project Alternative would
not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the other alternatives identified and discussed in
Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were identified that could both reduce air quality impacts
to a less-than-significant level and meet the Project objectives related to accommodating
population growth.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-38 through 4.3-44; 5-11 through 5-12.
2. Impact AQ-2: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific economic, social
or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
Page 96 of 143
Facts in Support of Findings: The City of Atascadero development review process requires
a review of consistency with local and state policies, including SLOAPCD regulations and
CEQA. Consistent with existing practices, each new discretionary development project
associated with community buildout pursuant with the 2045 General Plan and Zoning
Code Update would be required to be reviewed for consistency with these policies to help
reduce local and regional impacts. Potentially significant impacts would require
implementation of additional project-specific mitigation measures to further reduce
project-generated emissions and associated air quality impacts; however, given the
region’s current nonattainment status and uncertainty regarding the timing and intensity
of development activities, the need for project-specific mitigation measures for individual
development projects and the effectiveness of future mitigation for individual
development projects, short-term and long-term air quality impacts would be significant
and unavoidable.
Similar to the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would result in a cumulatively
considerable increase of short-term air quality impacts and long term mobile emissions
that would contribute to the region’s nonattainment status for ozone. Impacts of the No
Project Alternative would be anticipated to be increased in comparison to the proposed
project, due to the No Project Alternative resulting in higher VMT per capita and per
employee. In addition, the No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s
objectives. Of the other alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR,
none were identified that could both reduce air quality impacts to a less-than-significant
level and meet the Project objectives related to accommodating population growth.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-45 through 4.3-46; 5-11 through 5-12.
3. Impact AQ-3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific economic, social
or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings: The 2045 General Plan policies minimize short- and long-
term exposure to localized pollution, and no additional mitigation measures beyond those
included in the 2045 General Plan were identified as necessary to comply with state and
local regulations. Even with consistency with SLOAPCD guidance, it is conceivable that
some development projects may be large enough or close enough to a sensitive receptor
Page 97 of 143
that applicable project level significance thresholds would be exceeded. In the event that
a significant impact is identified for an individual project, the SLOAPCD-recommended
mitigation measures would be recorded in individual project’s CEQA analysis and would
be required to reduce project-related impacts; however, even with mitigation, it may not
be possible to reduce potential emissions of TACs or exposure to localized airborne
pollutants and all health-related risks to nearby receptors to levels below the SLOAPCD-
recommended significance thresholds. As a result, this impact would be considered
significant and unavoidable.
Similar to the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would facilitate development
of land uses considered to be sensitive receptors, as well as new development near
existing sensitive receptors. Future development associated with community buildout
pursuant to the 2025 General Plan could potentially include short-term, construction
sources of TACs and long-term, operational sources of TACs, including stationary and
mobile sources. In addition, SLOAPCD Rule 402, nuisance, prohibits the discharge of air
contaminants or other materials, including odors, that would cause injury, detriment,
nuisance, or annoyance to a considerable number of individuals. Furthermore, the No
Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the other alternatives
identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were identified that could
both reduce air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level and meet the Project
objectives related to accommodating population growth. As a result, the No Project
Alternative impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations would be similar to those of the proposed project.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-46 through 4.3-49; 5-11 through 5-12.
4. Cumulative Impact AQ-5: Would the project result in cumulatively considerable impacts
associated with projected long-term increases in VMT and Mobile Source Emissions?
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this cumulative impact,
beyond the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific
economic, social or other considerations, including provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or
project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the 2045 General Plan would incorporate
numerous goals, policies, and actions that are generally consistent with the SLOAPCD CAP,
including compact development patterns, mixed-use land uses, improved multimodal
Page 98 of 143
transportation, and an improved jobs-housing ratio, all of which would reduce VMT on a
per capita basis relative to the existing 2025 General Plan. However, build-out under the
2045 General Plan would result in population levels exceeding those assumed in the most
recent SLOCOG regional growth forecasts, and total VMT would exceed LUCI-
recommended thresholds. As a result, implementation of the 2045 General Plan would
conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and this impact
would be cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable.
San Luis Obispo County is in nonattainment for ozone under the state standard. Future
development associated with community buildout pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and
Zoning Code Update would result in increased construction and long-term operational
emissions of criteria pollutants. Construction emissions would be temporary but
potentially cumulatively considerable due to overlapping development activity and the
absence of plan-level construction thresholds. Long-term operational emissions would
increase due to additional vehicle trips and stationary sources and, despite VMT-reducing
policies, total VMT would exceed applicable thresholds. Future discretionary
development projects would be evaluated for short-term construction and long-term
operational air quality impacts in accordance with SLOAPCD-recommended guidance and
would be required to implement project-specific mitigation, as feasible; however, given
the region’s nonattainment status and uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of future
project-level mitigation, cumulative criteria pollutant impacts would remain significant
and unavoidable.
Implementation of the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would increase the
potential for cumulative exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations from both short-term construction activity and long-term mobile and
stationary sources, including areas near U.S. 101 and congested intersections. General
Plan policies related to dust control, grading limitations, and land use buffering, together
with current discretionary project review practices, would help to minimize exposure to
localized pollutants through project-level evaluation and implementation of SLOAPCD-
recommended measures; however, even with these policies and mitigation requirements,
it may not be feasible to reduce all cumulative exposures below applicable significance
thresholds. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors
would be significant and unavoidable.
The No Project Alternative considered in the Draft EIR would produce more VMT per
capita and per employee than the Project and is anticipated to result in air quality impacts
that are more significant than the Project. Similar to the proposed project, the No Project
Page 99 of 143
Alternative would result in a cumulatively considerable increase of short-term air quality
impacts and long term mobile emissions that would contribute to the region’s
nonattainment status for ozone. Furthermore, the No Project alternative would have
similar impacts to sensitive receptors, with both short-term const4ruction level impacts
and long-term operational impacts due to continued growth.
The No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the other
alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were identified
that could both reduce air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level and meet the
Project objectives related to accommodating population growth. As a result, the No
Project Alternative impacts associated with air quality would be greater than or similar to
those of the proposed project.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-60 through 4.3-61; 5-11 through 5-12.
5.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
1. Impact GHG-1: a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Would the project
conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Findings: The impact to greenhouse gas emissions due to Project implementation is not
expected to be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of feasible
mitigation measures. Specific economic, social or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
additional mitigation measure or project alternatives identified in the final EIR that would
reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Facts in Support of Findings: The 2045 General Plan includes numerous goals, policies,
and action items that would help to reduce criteria pollutant emissions, energy demands,
and VMT. These include those goals, policies and associated action item list in the previous
discussion of Impact AQ-1. However, although policies contained in the 2045 General Plan,
proposed Mitigation Measures, and implementation of future regulatory requirements
would reduce the GHG emissions at buildout, the extent of GHG reductions attributable
to these measures cannot be accurately quantified at this time and projected future-year
GHG emissions could potentially exceed applicable thresholds given uncertainties in the
timing and effectiveness of these measures. In addition, projected increases in VMT
attributable to the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would still exceed
applicable LUCI thresholds and would conflict with CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan. Therefore,
this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
Page 100 of 143
Under the No Project Alternative, the City’s jobs-to-housing ratio was projected to worsen
from a year 2015 ratio of 0.77 to a ratio of 0.71 by the year 2030. In addition, the 2025
General Plan would produce more VMT per capita and per employee than the proposed
project, which would be inconsistent with LUCI recommended significance thresholds and
statewide planning and climate change policies and efforts, such as CARB’s Climate
Change Scoping Plan. As a result, long-term increases in VMT and associated mobile-
source emissions would remain the primary contributor to cumulative GHG emissions.
Because VMT per capita emissions and per employee emissions would be higher than the
proposed project under the No Project Alternative, environmental impacts associated
with GHG emissions, conflicts with applicable GHG reduction plans, and cumulative GHG
impacts would all be increased in comparison to the proposed project.
In addition, the No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the
other alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were
identified that could both reduce greenhouse gas emission impacts to a less-than-
significant level and meet the Project objectives related to accommodating population
growth. As a result, the No Project Alternative impacts associated with greenhouse gas
emissions would be increased in comparison to the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures: The City Council of the City of Atascadero adopts the following
mitigation measures. Implementation of GHG-1.1 would incorporate a policy into the
2045 General Plan requiring the update of the City’s Climate Action Plan to identify ways
to achieve GHG reductions in support of the State’s future GHG-reduction efforts. MM
GHG-1.2 would incorporate a policy into the 2045 General Plan to require implementation
of additional measures for land use development projects in support of the State’s 2045
carbon-neutrality goal. MM GHG-1.3 would incorporate a policy into the 2045 General
Plan requiring that the City participate in SLOCOG’s Sustainable Communities
Strategy/Regional Blueprint Planning effort to ensure that local development plans and
associated population and employment growth are consistent with the RTP/SCS.
Mitigation Measure GHG-1.1
The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to
adoption:
Update the City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan to identify ways to reduce GHG
emissions and limit climate change impacts on the residents to the extent possible.
The Climate Action Plan shall integrate the State’s future GHG-reduction goals, such
as the State’s goal of attaining carbon neutrality by 2045.
Mitigation Measure GHG-2
Page 101 of 143
The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to
adoption:
Until the City adopts a qualified Climate Action Plan consistent with MM GHG-1, the
City shall incorporate development standards into the Municipal Code for new
development projects located along existing or planned public transit routes that
require features that promote the use of public transit. Examples include the
installation of sidewalks or pathways that facilitate ease of access from on-site
locations to nearby transit stops, installation of transit improvements (e.g., benches,
bus turnouts) for future planned transit stops located adjacent to the development
site.
Mitigation Measure GHG-1.3
The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to
adoption:
The City shall participate in SLOCOG’s Sustainable Communities Strategy/Regional
Blueprint Planning effort to help increase consistency between local development
plans and associated population and employment growth and the Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-51 through 4.3-56; 5-12.
2. Impact GHG-2: Would the project result in cumulatively considerable greenhouse gas
emissions associated with the projected increase in VMT and mobile-source emissions
and would conflict with applicable state and regional greenhouse gas reduction plans.
Findings: The cumulative impact on greenhouse gas emissions due to Project
implementation is not expected to be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with
implementation of feasible mitigation measures. Specific economic, social or other
considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible additional mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the 2045 General Plan would include
numerous goals, policies, and actions that support reductions in GHG emissions, including
compact development patterns, mixed-use land uses, improved multimodal
transportation options, energy-efficient site planning and building design, and an
improved jobs-housing ratio, all of which would reduce VMT on a per capita basis relative
to the existing 2025 General Plan. In addition, implementation of MM GHG-1.1 would
require the City to update its Climate Action Plan to identify additional strategies to
achieve GHG reductions in support of the State’s long-term climate goals. MM GHG-1.2
would require implementation of additional measures for future land use development
Page 102 of 143
projects to further reduce GHG emissions, and MM GHG-1.3 would require the City to
participate in SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS planning effort to improve consistency between local
growth and regional transportation and GHG-reduction planning.
However, implementation of the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would result
in population levels exceeding those assumed in the most recent SLOCOG regional growth
forecasts, and total residential and employment-based VMT would exceed LUCI-
recommended thresholds. Because these thresholds are intended to support statewide
GHG-reduction goals, exceedance of the thresholds indicates that projected reductions in
mobile-source GHG emissions would not be fully achieved. As a result, long-term
increases in VMT and associated mobile-source emissions would remain the primary
contributor to cumulative GHG emissions. Future development associated with
community buildout pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update would
result in long-term increases in operational GHG emissions, primarily from mobile
sources, with additional contributions from energy use, waste generation, water use, and
area sources.
Although the 2045 General Plan policies and mitigation measures identified would reduce
GHG emissions relative to existing conditions, the magnitude and timing of reductions
attributable to these measures cannot be accurately quantified at this time. Therefore,
even with implementation of 2045 General Plan policies and MM GHG-1.1 through MM
GHG-1.3, cumulative GHG emissions associated with long-term increases in VMT and
mobile-source emissions would remain cumulatively considerable. Accordingly,
cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
Under the No Project Alternative, the City’s jobs-to-housing ratio was projected to worsen
from a year 2015 ratio of 0.77 to a ratio of 0.71 by the year 2030. In addition, the 2025
General Plan would produce more VMT per capita and per employee than the proposed
project, which would be inconsistent with LUCI recommended significance thresholds and
statewide planning and climate change policies and efforts, such as CARB’s Climate
Change Scoping Plan. As a result, long-term increases in VMT and associated mobile-
source emissions would remain the primary contributor to cumulative GHG emissions.
Because VMT per capita emissions and per employee emissions would be higher than the
proposed project under the No Project Alternative, environmental impacts associated
with GHG emissions, conflicts with applicable GHG reduction plans, and cumulative GHG
impacts would all be increased in comparison to the Project.
In addition, the No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the
other alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were
identified that could both reduce greenhouse gas emission impacts to a less-than-
significant level and meet the Project objectives related to accommodating population
Page 103 of 143
growth. As a result, the No Project Alternative impacts associated with greenhouse gas
emissions would be increased in comparison to the Project.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.3-51 through 4.3-56; 5-12.
5.3: Transportation
1. Impact TR-2: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific economic, social
or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
Facts in support of findings: Future development associated with community build-out
pursuant to the 2045 General Plan and corresponding Zoning Code Update would exceed
the VMT significance thresholds identified by the LUCI, resulting in a significant impact;
however, the 2045 General Plan focuses future growth in more VMT-efficient areas at
higher densities and with more travel options, which results in producing fewer VMT per
capita and per employment than the 2025 General Plan and includes policies and actions
that would minimize and reduce VMT associated with future development to the
maximum extent feasible. Other factors contributing to the exceedance of the VMT
thresholds, such as the City’s large geographic area and existing low-density development
patterns, cannot be feasibly mitigated. Therefore, impacts would be significant and
unavoidable.
Under the No Project Alternative, continued reliance on the existing General Plan’s land
use framework would result in development patterns that are less supportive of transit
use and alternative travel modes, such as lower multifamily and mixed-use density and a
diminished focus on job centric development, thereby increasing automobile dependency
and associated VMT. Although neither the No Project Alternative nor the proposed project
would meet the LUCI-recommended thresholds for residential or commute VMT, the
proposed 2045 General Plan Update would perform better on a regional efficiency basis
by concentrating growth in areas with a greater mix of uses and travel options.
The No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the other
alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were identified
that could both reduce VMT impacts to a less-than-significant level and meet the Project
Page 104 of 143
objectives related to accommodating population growth. As a result, the No Project
Alternative impacts associated with VMT would be increased in comparison to the Project.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.14-17 through 4.14-23; 5-13 through 5-14.
2. Impact TR-5: The project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated
with VMT.
Findings: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the
2045 General Plan and Zoning Code Update policy framework. Specific economic, social
or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
Facts to Support Findings: As documented under Impact TR-2, build-out pursuant to the
2045 General Plan would improve both residential and commute VMT on a per capita
basis at a regional level when compared with build-out pursuant to the 2025 General Plan,
however, it would exceed applicable VMT significance thresholds identified by LUCI. The
Technical Advisory published by LUCI includes evidence connecting the LUCI VMT
significance thresholds to the State’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals.
Therefore, the project’s exceedance of the LUCI VMT thresholds would have the potential
to be detrimental to the State’s goals related to reducing VMT as a method of achieving
its greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. As described under Impact TR-2 above, this
impact would be minimized to the greatest extent feasible through the 2045 General
Plan’s emphasis on focusing future growth in VMT-efficient areas and through
incorporation of its policies and actions; however, impacts would still be significant.
Under the No Project Alternative, continued reliance on the existing General Plan’s land
use framework would result in development patterns that are less supportive of transit
use and alternative travel modes, such as lower multifamily and mixed-use density and a
diminished focus on job centric development, thereby increasing automobile dependency
and associated VMT. Although neither the No Project Alternative nor the proposed project
would meet the LUCI-recommended thresholds for residential or commute VMT, the
proposed 2045 General Plan Update would perform better on a regional efficiency basis
by concentrating growth in areas with a greater mix of uses and travel options.
The No Project Alternative would not achieve the Project’s objectives. Of the other
alternatives identified and discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, none were identified
that could both reduce VMT impacts to a less-than-significant level and meet the Project
Page 105 of 143
objectives related to accommodating population growth. As a result, the No Project
Alternative impacts associated with VMT would be increased in comparison to the Project.
Reference: Draft EIR, Pages 4.14-27 through 4.14-28; 5-13 through 5-14.
6. Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, appropriate alternatives for EIR analysis are those that
meet most of the basic project objectives and avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
environmental effects of the proposed project. The Draft EIR included consideration of multiple
alternatives, including Alternative Location, Reduced Density, and a No Project alternative. The
Alternative Location alternative is not feasible as the General plan is required to cover the limits
of the City’s jurisdiction, and thus, this alternative was rejected. The Reduced Density Alternative
included maintaining residential densities at or similar to the level of the existing 2025 General
Plan and focusing on development in areas surrounding the City. However, Atascadero has limited
potential for annexations due to topographical features and infrastructure limitations, thus, this
alternative was rejected.
The No Project alternative discusses the comparative impacts based on the existing policies and
land use form in the 2025 General Plan, as described below. The City Council of the City of
Atascadero certifies the following regarding the alternative analyzed in the EIR:
6.1 No Project Alternative
Description: The No Project Alternative would assume that buildout of the City would occur in a
manner that is consistent with SLOCOG’s current population, housing, and employment
projections for the City, including an increase in total population of approximately 2,550 residents
(8.45%) between 2025 and 2060, the addition of roughly 1,975 housing units (15.77%), and
growth of approximately 3,200 jobs (30.67%).
Under the No Project Alternative, future development and transportation planning would
continue to be guided by the 2025 General Plan, which does not incorporate the coordinated land
use, mobility, infrastructure, and fiscal strategies proposed as part of the 2045 General Plan
Update. Growth would be generally located in the same areas identified in the 2045 General Plan
with less residential density potential and greater reliance on property redevelopment.
Under the No Project Alternative, the land uses of the 2025 General Plan would remain the same.
While both the 2025 General Plan and 2045 General Plan include similar policies related to areas
of higher intensity development based on the location of services and goals to maintain
community character, the 2025 General Plan includes less density and fewer opportunities for
housing and quality commercial development to retain the economic health of the City. The 2025
Page 106 of 143
General Plan includes policies to protect and preserve the rural atmosphere of the community by
assuring “elbow room” for residents by means of maintenance of large lot sizes which increase in
proportion to distance beyond the Urban Core, concentrating higher density development
downtown and within the Urban Core, and focusing master planned commercial uses at distinct
nodes along arterial corridors. The current land use designations throughout the City would
remain unchanged. The 2025 General Plan also calls for infill development inside the Urban
Services Line (USL) where services can be provided in a cost-efficient manner. Beyond the USL,
the plan intends for the Rural Service Area to retain rural residential to reinforce the City's identity
and maintain open space characteristics. These policies and goals are echoed in the 2045 General
Plan Update but provide for minimal growth under the 2025 General Plan, which is insufficient to
meet projected housing needs and support reliable fiscal health. Specifically, the 2045 General
Plan expands areas available for mixed-use and multi-family development key to meeting historic
growth rates and State RHNA, in addition to supporting commercial development that offers head
of household and expanded workforce opportunities to improve the jobs/housing balance.
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Zoning Code would continue to be implemented
and would maintain established public hearing and amendment procedures consistent with
Government Code Section 65358(b), including limited amendment cycles and City Council review.
Finding: Continued implementation of the 2025 General Plan would not establish an updated
community vision through 2045, nor would it provide a modernized legal and policy foundation
for land use decision-making that reflects current growth conditions, State policy direction, and
CEQA requirements. In addition, the No Project Alternative would not serve as a comprehensive
guide for coordinated land use, circulation, environmental management, housing, infrastructure,
and public health and safety planning through the 2045 horizon year, thereby limiting the City’s
ability to strategically address multimodal transportation, emergency preparedness, GHG
reduction, and long-term fiscal sustainability. Inability to plan for potential population growth and
associated fiscal challenges would limit the City’s ability to adequately manage impacts and
infrastructure needs.
Under the No Project Alternative, most environmental impacts would be similar to those
associated with the proposed 2045 General Plan Update, with impacts associated with air quality,
GHG emissions, and transportation among the issue areas that would experience increased
impacts over the proposed project, as discussed further below.
Facts in Support of Finding: While both the 2025 General Plan and 2045 General Plan include
similar policies related to areas of higher intensity development based on the location of services
and goals to maintain community character, the 2025 General Plan includes less density and
fewer opportunities for housing and quality commercial development to retain the economic
Page 107 of 143
health of the City. Beyond the USL, the 2025 General Plan intends for the Rural Service Area to
retain rural residential to reinforce the City's identity and maintain open space characteristics.
The 2045 General Plan would place greater emphasis on directing higher-density residential and
mixed-use development to Downtown and key corridors such as El Camino Real and Morro Road,
supporting workforce housing near employment centers, and encouraging incremental infill
development that maintains neighborhood character. The proposed plan would also strengthen
policies aimed at attracting higher-wage industries through flexible land use regulations, targeted
infrastructure investments, and reduced parking requirements, while prioritizing multimodal
transportation improvements, complete streets, and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle
connectivity to support a healthier jobs-housing balance. In addition, the 2045 General Plan
would expand policies addressing emergency access and evacuation in wildfire-prone areas and
integrate infrastructure planning with long-term fiscal sustainability considerations.
Because the 2025 General Plan does not allow for the expansion of housing opportunities and
investment in commercial uses to meet projected future needs, it is insufficient to meet projected
housing needs and support reliable fiscal health. Accordingly, this alternative would be potentially
inconsistent with the following project objectives:
Promote investments in downtown that support the needs of local businesses and
residents and provide a quality experience for visitors.
Create and maintain opportunities for people of all income levels and ages to live, work,
raise families, and retire in Atascadero.
Target growth to serve community needs and enhance the quality of life.
Incentivize a mix of business and revenue streams that support a resilient economy.
Diversify Atascadero’s employment opportunities to address the needs of an evolving
workforce and attract jobs for all skill levels and income ranges.
Reference: Draft EIR Chapter 5.
Page 108 of 143
7-1
CHAPTER 7. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
7.1 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
When a Lead Agency makes findings on significant environmental effects identified in an EIR, the agency must also adopt a “reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment” (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) and State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15091(d) and 15097). The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) is implemented to ensure that the Mitigation Measures (MMs) and project revisions identified in the EIR are implemented. Therefore, the MMRP must include all changes in the proposed project either adopted by the project proponent or made conditions of approval by the Lead or
Responsible Agency.
7.2 ADMINISTRATION OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The City of Atascadero (City) is the Lead Agency responsible for the adoption of the MMRP. The City is also responsible for implementation of the MMRP, in coordination with other identified entities. According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097(a), a public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private entity that accepts the delegation.
However, until mitigation measures have been completed, the Lead Agency remains responsible for ensuring that the implementation of the measure occurs in accordance with the program.
7.2.1 Mitigation Measures
Table 7-1 is structured to enable quick reference to MMs and the associated monitoring program based on the environmental resource. The numbering of MMs correlates with numbering of measures found in the
Chapter 4, Environmental Impacts Analysis of this EIR.
Page 109 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
7-2
Table 7-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy
GHG-1.1 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption:
Update the City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan to identify ways to reduce GHG emissions and limit climate change impacts on the residents to the extent possible. The Climate Action Plan shall integrate the State’s future GHG-reduction goals, such as the State’s goal of attaining carbon neutrality by 2045.
Incorporate the referenced policy into the 2045 General Plan
Prior to adoption of 2045 General Plan City of Atascadero Community Development Department (CDD)
GHG/mm-1.2 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption:
Until the City adopts a qualified Climate Action Plan consistent with Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the City shall incorporate development standards into the Municipal Code for new development projects located along existing or planned public transit routes that require features that promote the use of public transit. Examples include the installation of sidewalks or pathways that facilitate ease of access from onsite locations to nearby transit stops, installation of transit improvements (e.g., benches, bus turnouts) for future planned transit stops located adjacent to the development site.
Incorporate the referenced policy into the 2045 General Plan and update the City Zoning Code accordingly
Prior to adoption of 2045 General Plan City of Atascadero CDD
GHG-1.3 The City shall incorporate the following policy into the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption:
The City shall participate in SLOCOG’s Sustainable Communities Strategy/Regional Blueprint Planning effort to help increase consistency between local development plans and associated population and employment growth and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.
Incorporate the referenced policy into the 2045 General Plan
Prior to adoption of 2045 General Plan City of Atascadero CDD
Page 110 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
7-3
Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party
Geology and Soils
GEO-9.1 The City shall incorporate the following Policy and Actions into the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element of the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption:
• Policy REC-6.3: Paleontological Resource Protection. Protect unique paleontological resources from disturbance associated with development.
Action A: Maintain a current GIS-based map of generalized areas of paleontologically sensitive areas and areas that have yielded significant fossils.
Action B: Require preparation of a Paleontological Resource Study for projects that would include proposed development within a geologic unit with high paleontological sensitivity and earthwork would occur in areas that have not previously been developed with urban uses, or when excavation depths would exceed those previously disturbed. The Paleontological Resource Study shall evaluate potential impacts to unique paleontological resources and identify appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures in accordance with processional standards set forth by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology.
Incorporate the referenced policy into the 2045 General Plan
Prior to adoption of 2045 General Plan City of Atascadero CDD
Utilities and Services Systems
USS-3.1 The City shall incorporate the following Action into the 2045 General Plan prior to adoption, under Policy PSI-3.3:
• Action D: Require all proposed new projects and new development requiring wastewater collection and treatment service to be reviewed for adequate wastewater collection and treatment capacity prior to issuance of building permits.
Incorporate the referenced policy into the 2045 General Plan
Prior to adoption of 2045 General Plan City of Atascadero CDD
Page 111 of 143
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
7-4
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 112 of 143
08/18/26 | Item F2 | A achment 1 | Exhibit B
Exhibit B
The Public Hearing Draft of the 2045 General Plan can be found at:
www.atascadero2045.org/docs
and is on file in the planning Department of the City of Atascadero
Page 113 of 143
Draft Memorandum
To: Dan Amsden and Laura Stetson, MIG
Phil Dunsmore and Kelly Gleason, City of Atascadero
From: Benjamin C. Sigman, Megan Gregory, and Andrei Dumitrescu;
Economic & Planning Systems
Subject: Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS #211093
Date: March 20, 2026
The City of Atascadero retained Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) as part of a team led
by MIG to assess the fiscal impact of the City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
(GPU). This fiscal impact analysis (FIA) draws on land use, population, and employment
projections provided to EPS by the GPU consultant team and City. The City’s General
Fund budget for fiscal year 2026 (documented in the Adopted Budget for Fiscal Years
2025–26 and 2026–27) forms the basis of the FIA, with land use changes analyzed in the
context of FY2026 revenue and cost conditions. The purpose of the FIA is to ensure the
GPU is fiscally sustainable for the City and to evaluate net positive or negative fiscal
implications attributable to major land use categories in the General Plan. The FIA may
also help formulate development priorities, fiscal policies, and/or public service approaches
that enhance fiscal sustainability in Atascadero.
This memorandum describes the methodology and results of the FIA. The growth
scenario consists of net new growth in Atascadero that would be enabled through the
GPU. This growth is over and above the current General Plan. The FIA assesses the
extent to which the GPU-enabled growth will generate General Fund revenues relative to
the cost of providing municipal services to new residents and employees. The FIA
quantifies projected annual revenues, including property tax, sales tax, transient
occupancy tax, business license tax, and other General Fund sources. The analysis also
estimates expenditures required to serve new populations using department-by-
department cost metrics derived from the City budget.
The following Key Findings highlight the GPU’s estimated annual net fiscal impact at full
buildout. Actual fiscal impacts will depend on a variety of factors that cannot be
predicted with certainty, including variable market conditions, future changes in City or
State budgeting, the efficiency of various City departments in providing services, and
other factors. The analysis presents all impact estimates in constant 2026 dollars at full
buildout of the General Plan Update.
Page 114 of 143
Draft Memorandum Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 2
Key Findings
1. The FIA projects that future development under the GPU will generate annual
General Fund revenues that exceed the cost of public services at full buildout. The
growth scenario produces a net fiscal impact of approximately $3.9 million annually.
This positive net fiscal impact represents the difference between total annual General
Fund revenues and municipal service costs. The growth scenario generates an
estimated $9.9 million for the City annually, which is offset by approximately $6.0
million in service costs. Summary Table 1 presents annual fiscal impact estimates for
the GPU growth scenario. Fiscal surpluses provide the City with discretionary funds
that could be allocated toward maintaining or enhancing public services in
Atascadero.
Summary Table 1. Summary of Annual Fiscal Impact at Buildout (2026$)
2. The largest contributor to General Fund revenue from the GPU is combined
property tax revenues which total an estimated $4.8 million annually. Combined
property taxes include traditional property tax and property tax in lieu of vehicle
license fees (VLF) that accrue to the General Fund. The increase in property tax is
primarily due to the significant rise in assessed value associated with new
development. In addition, combined sales taxes represent a significant portion of net
new revenue, estimated at approximately $3.7 million, about 37 percent of new
General Fund revenue.
3. Public Safety (Police and Fire) expenditures represent the majority of the municipal
service cost burden created by the GPU growth. Accounting for nearly ninety percent of
the General Fund budget necessary to serve new development, the FIA estimates annual
Police and Fire department expenditures will increase by an estimated $5.0 million. Public
Works and other municipal service categories comprise the remaining share of costs, but
at materially lower cost levels. These estimates reflect input from City staff indicating
that the City is currently operating with suboptimal staffing levels and anticipates adding
personnel to improve service and accommodate the additional demands, administrative
workload, and operational processes associated with General Plan buildout.
4. Hotel and retail development provides the highest estimated net fiscal benefits due
to strong tax revenue and relatively modest municipal service cost. Hotel uses
generate comparatively strong net fiscal benefits due to transient occupancy tax
General Fund
Revenues and Expenditures
Net Annual General Fund Revenues $9,860,000
Net Annual General Fund Expenditures -$5,970,000
Net Annual Impact on General Fund $3,889,000
Page 115 of 143
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Page 3
revenue and relatively modest municipal service needs. Retail is fiscally beneficial
because of a combined sales tax that includes a voter-approved tax measure (D-20).
The FIA finds that most new housing may not generate net fiscal benefits. Summary
Table 2 presents FIA results by land use category.
Summary Table 2. Summary of Annual Fiscal Impact at Buildout by Land Use (2026$)
The FIA evaluates fiscal impacts from the General Plan Update overall and for individual
land uses. The FIA may inform land use decision making but is not intended for City
budgeting purposes. FIA results are directional indicators of fiscal performance and do
not indicate projected budget deficits or surpluses. Typically, cities balance the budget
each year to accommodate shifting revenue and cost factors. For example, the projected
fiscal benefit of the GPU may allow the City to reduce liabilities such as deferred
maintenance, improve service levels, or build up reserves.
Assumptions and Methodology
This section describes the FIA methodology and calculations with references to the
attached table set.
• Table 1 summarizes Atascadero’s current citywide demographics, including total
housing units, occupied households, population, average household size, jobs, and
daytime service population.1 These baseline metrics establish the City’s current
residential and employment levels, which are used to calculate per-unit and per-capita
revenue and cost factors. For example, the population, household, job, and service-
population totals inform how much the City currently spends per resident, household,
employee, and service-population equivalent on services such as police, fire, general
government, community development, and public works. The FIA applies per-capita,
per-household, and per-service-population cost factors to GPU growth to estimate the
1 For the purposes of this analysis, daytime service population is defined as the total residential population plus 50 percent of total employment. Employment is down-weighted to reflect their relatively lower service burden (i.e., workers do not consume City services to the same extent as residents).
General Fund Revenues and Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Impact
Single Family - Market Rate per unit $2,484 $2,058 $427
Multifamily - Small Lot Market Rate per unit $1,803 $1,634 $169
Multifamily - Traditional Market Rate per unit $1,272 $1,634 -$362
Multifamily - Med./High Density Market Rate per unit $1,272 $1,634 -$362
Multifamily - BMR per unit $1,027 $1,634 -$606
Retail per 1,000 sq.ft.$8,334 $1,013 $7,320
Office per 1,000 sq.ft.$850 $777 $73
Industrial per 1,000 sq.ft.$585 $453 $132
Hotel per room $4,760 $182 $4,578
*Numbers may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Page 116 of 143
Draft Memorandum Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 4
future General Fund expenditure obligations associated with new residents and jobs at
buildout.
• Table 2 presents the summary of fiscal impact results of the GPU at buildout.
• Table 3 presents the summary of fiscal impact results by individual land use of the
GPU at buildout.
• Table 4 presents the detailed annual General Fund fiscal impact of the GPU at
buildout, summarizing all projected revenues and expenditures to calculate the annual
net General Fund impact. Revenue categories include property tax, sales tax, transient
occupancy tax, business license tax, among other General Fund sources. Expenditures
reflect the estimated costs of providing City services by department, including general
government, police, fire, and public works, among others.
• Table 5 presents the detailed annual General Fund fiscal impact of the GPU at buildout
by land use category. The same revenue and expenditure categories from Table 4 are
shown.
• Table 6 summarizes the development program for the GPU and presents
corresponding growth estimates for new residents, employees, and service population.
The residential program includes net new single-family and multifamily units,
distinguishing between market-rate and below-market-rate (BMR). Based on direction
from the City, the FIA assumes affordable housing will be 5 percent of traditional and
medium/high-density multifamily units. The analysis assumes that BMR units will be
inclusionary units, not tax-exempt affordable housing projects. Household density
assumptions for each housing type from MIG inform new residents estimates. The
commercial program presents net new square footage for retail, office, and industrial
uses, as well as new hotel rooms. Employment density assumptions from MIG inform
new employee estimates.
• Table 7 summarizes the City of Atascadero’s FY 2026 General Fund revenues and
presents the estimating factors used to project future revenues associated with new
development. The table lists each major General Fund revenue source along with the
formula or per-unit factor applied in the analysis. Revenue categories including
cannabis business tax, revenues from other agencies, fines and forfeitures, and
revenues from use of money will not be significantly impacted by the GPU.
• Table 8 summarizes the City of Atascadero’s FY 2026 General Fund expenditures and
identifies the estimating factors used to project incremental municipal service costs at
buildout. The table presents each major department’s adopted General Fund budget,
the percentage of expenditures that vary with population or service demands, and the
resulting variable cost amounts. The City is currently operating with limited staff and
anticipates expanding staffing resources as the GPU is built out. City staff provided
estimates of additional expenses to augment current General Fund Expenditures to
account for increased staffing demands.
Page 117 of 143
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Page 5
Most City departments operate with some fixed amount of administration and
overhead that does not vary as the City’s service population grows or contracts. For
example, as a city grows it only needs one City Manager or one City Clerk, but other
municipal operations need to expand to accommodate increasing service demand. The
analysis applies a “percent variable” factor to departmental expenditures to represent
the proportion of expenditures that will scale up with increases in service population.
Expenditures assumed to be fixed include administrative and overhead costs, such as
managerial/supervisor compensation. These costs would be unaffected by new
development.
The FIA translates variable spending into per capita expenditure amounts based on
citywide service population. Each department’s per capita cost is then multiplied by
the projected service population increase from Table 6 to derive the total estimated
annual General Fund expenditures at buildout for each City department. The resulting
expenditure estimates reflect the total annual General Fund costs and serve as a key
input to the fiscal evaluation.
• Table 9 presents the estimated assessed value of new development. EPS and City staff
research informs the per-unit and per-square-foot values that are applied to the
residential and commercial development programs from Table 6. The FIA
differentiates between market-rate units for single-family, market-rate multifamily,
and below-market-rate multifamily units. Value assumptions for affordable housing
derive from income-based calculations based on 2025 HCD Income Limits and HUD
Utility Allowances for San Luis Obispo County. The analysis multiplies per-unit values
by the projected number of units in each category to determine the assessed value
subtotal for residential development.
The assessed value assumptions for retail, office, industrial, and hotel space reflect
local market data. The analysis multiplies commercial values by net new square
footage and hotel rooms to generate the commercial assessed value. The residential
and commercial subtotals are combined to determine the total assessed value
associated with the GPU. These totals provide the foundation for projecting property-
tax-related revenues.
• Tables 10, 11, and 12 summarize the revenues derived based on assessed value
estimates, which include the City’s share of the one percent property tax, property tax
in lieu of vehicle license fees (VLF), and property transfer tax. The FIA estimates the
City of Atascadero’s General Fund will capture approximately 17 percent of new
property tax growth, while the balance goes to other affected taxing entities (e.g.,
school districts). Property tax in lieu of VLF revenue is based on the pro rata growth in
Atascadero’s assessed value attributable to the GPU, over the existing Citywide
assessed valuation basis.
Table 12 estimates property transfer tax revenue using turnover rates of five percent
and a tax rate of $0.275 per $500 of value. Combined, the three assessed value–based
revenue sources generate approximately $4.77 million, accounting for approximately
Page 118 of 143
Draft Memorandum Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 6
48 percent of total net new General Fund indicating that growth in assessed value is
likely to be the second largest single contributor to new General Fund revenue at
buildout.
• Table 13 estimates the transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenue generated by new hotel
development. The average daily rate of $166 and a 70 percent occupancy level reflect
recent “Upper Midscale” and “Midscale” hotel market data for the City of Atascadero
and neighboring areas.
The FIA calculates annual taxable room revenue by multiplying total rooms, the daily
rate, the occupancy rate, and the number of days in a year. This results in
approximately $9.54 million in annual room revenue. Applying the City of Atascadero’s
10 percent TOT rate yields estimated annual General Fund TOT revenues of
approximately $954,000.
• Table 14 documents the assumptions and calculations for new residential, employee,
and on-site taxable spending under the General Plan Update. Key assumptions include:
o 30 percent of new residential spending2 and 50 percent of new employee
spending is captured in Atascadero. EPS reviewed CoStar retail inventory
within a 20-to-30-minute trade area relative to the buildout and the City’s
historical taxable sales performance relative to comparable jurisdictions to
inform the conservative spending capture rate.
o 30 percent of new residential and employee spending occurs at GPU-enabled
retail establishments.
o 5 percent of new retail space would be owned or operated by a non-profit
organization and would not generate sales tax.
o Atascadero’s General Fund receives one percent of taxable sales from the
local Bradley-Burns Sales and Use Tax and an additional one percent of
taxable sales from the local voter-approved Measure D-20.
• Table 15 summarizes the remaining General Fund revenue sources generated by the GPU
at buildout, including business license tax and franchise taxes. These revenues are
estimated by applying per-employee and per–service population factors derived from the
City’s FY 2026 adopted budget.
2 Household retail spending is estimated in Appendix Table A-6, based on household incomes estimated in Appendix Tables A-2, A-4 and A-5.
Page 119 of 143
Draft Memorandum Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 7
Appendix A: Supporting Data and
Calculation Appendix Tables
Page 120 of 143
Draft Memorandum Atascadero General Plan Update Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 8
Appendix Tables
Supporting data and calculations are presented in the appendix tables.
Appendix Table A-1 – Maximum Allowable Rent Calculation of BMR Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-2 – Average Capitalized Value of BMR Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-3 – Assessed Value Calculation of Market Rate Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-4 – Income Calculation of Market Rate Ownership Residential Units
Appendix Table A-5 – Income Calculation of Market Rate Rental Residential Units
Appendix Table A-6 – Estimated Household Income and Per Household Retail Spending
Page 121 of 143
Table of Contents
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Table 1 Atascadero Citywide Demographic Assumptions
Table 2 Summary of Fiscal Impacts
Table 3 Summary of Fiscal Impacts by Land Use
Table 4 Annual General Fund Detailed Fiscal Impact
Table 5 Annual Detailed General Fund Fiscal Impact by Land Use
Table 6 Development Program and Density
Table 7 FY2025-2026 Budget Revenue Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors
Table 8 FY2025-2026 Budget Expense Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors
Table 9 Estimated Assessed Value of Proposed Development
Table 10 Estimated Property Tax Revenue
Table 11 Estimated Property Tax in Lieu of VLF Revenue
Table 12 Estimated Property Transfer Tax Revenue
Table 13 Estimated Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Revenue
Table 14 Estimated General Fund Annual Sales Tax Revenue
Table 15 Estimated General Fund Other Tax and Fee Revenue
Appendix Table A-1 Maximum Allowable Rent Calculation of BMR Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-2 Average Capitalized Value of BMR Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-3 Assessed Value Calculation of Market Rate Multifamily Units
Appendix Table A-4 Income Calculation of Market Rate Ownership Residential and Small Lot Units
Appendix Table A-5 Income Calculation of Market Rate Rental Residential Units
Appendix Table A-6 Estimated Household Income and Per Household Retail Spending
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Page 122 of 143
Table 1
Atascadero Citywide Demographic Assumptions
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Citywide Total Sources
Total Housing Units 12,527 Department of Finance 1/1/2025
Occupied Households 11,957 Department of Finance 1/1/2025
Population 30,134 Department of Finance 1/1/2025
Persons per Household (City Avg.) 2.41 Department of Finance 2025
Employees 9,729 MIG Analysis
Service Population1 34,999 Department of Finance 2025/MIG Analysis
[1] Daytime service population is calculating by adding total residential population and half of total employment.
Source: MIG Analysis; DOF
Page 123 of 143
Table 2
Summary of Fiscal Impacts
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
General Fund
Revenues and Expenditures
Net Annual General Fund Revenues $9,860,000
Net Annual General Fund Expenditures -$5,970,000
Net Annual Impact on General Fund $3,889,000
*Numbers may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Page 124 of 143
Table 3
Summary of Fiscal Impacts by Land Use
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
General Fund Revenues and Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Impact
Single Family - Market Rate per unit $2,484 $2,058 $427
Multifamily - Small Lot Market Rate per unit $1,803 $1,634 $169
Multifamily - Traditional Market Rate per unit $1,272 $1,634 -$362
Multifamily - Med./High Density Market Rate per unit $1,272 $1,634 -$362
Multifamily - BMR per unit $1,027 $1,634 -$606
Retail per 1,000 sq.ft.$8,334 $1,013 $7,320
Office per 1,000 sq.ft.$850 $777 $73
Industrial per 1,000 sq.ft.$585 $453 $132
Hotel per room $4,760 $182 $4,578
*Numbers may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Page 125 of 143
Table 4
Annual General Fund Detailed Fiscal Impact
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Annual General Fund Impacts (Rounded)
General Fund Revenues
Property Tax $3,260,000
Property Tax in-Lieu of VLF $1,459,000
Property Transfer Tax $53,000
Sales Tax $1,846,000
Sales Tax Measure D-20 $1,846,000
Transient Occupancy Tax $954,000
Business License Tax $62,000
Franchise Taxes1 $380,000
Total Revenues $9,860,000
General Fund Expenditures
General Government2 $112,000
Police $2,845,000
Fire $2,106,000
Community Development $186,000
Community Services $242,000
Public Works $480,000
Other Uses $0
Total Expenditures $5,970,000
Annual Net Impact on General Fund $3,889,000
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
*Values shown are rounded to the nearest thousand. Numbers may not sum due to rounding.
[2] Includes City Council, City Clerk, City Treasurer, Legal, City Manager, and Administrative
Services.
[1] Inclusive of Cable Television, Electricity, Garbage Disposal, Chicago Grade Landfill Fee, Gas,
and Wastewater revenue categories.
Page 126 of 143
Table 5
Annual Detailed General Fund Fiscal Impact by Land Use
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
General Fund Revenues Single Family
and Expenditures Market Rate Small Lot Traditional Med./High Density BMR Retail Office Industrial Hotel
(per room)
General Fund Revenues
Property Tax $1,445 $1,037 $703 $703 $539 $646 $485 $363 $340
Property Tax in-Lieu of VLF $647 $464 $315 $315 $241 $289 $217 $163 $152
Property Transfer Tax $23 $17 $11 $11 $9 $10 $8 $6 $6
Sales Tax $119 $91 $69 $69 $68 $3,635 $25 $0 $0
Sales Tax Measure D-20 $119 $91 $69 $69 $68 $3,635 $25 $0 $0
Transient Occupancy Tax $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,241
Business License Tax $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54 $42 $24 $10
Franchise Taxes1 $131 $104 $104 $104 $104 $64 $49 $29 $12
Total Revenues $2,484 $1,803 $1,272 $1,272 $1,027 $8,334 $850 $585 $4,760
General Fund Expenditures
General Government2 $39 $31 $31 $31 $31 $19 $15 $9 $3
Police $980 $778 $778 $778 $778 $483 $370 $216 $87
Fire $726 $576 $576 $576 $576 $357 $274 $160 $64
Community Development $64 $51 $51 $51 $51 $32 $24 $14 $6
Community Services $83 $66 $66 $66 $66 $41 $32 $18 $7
Public Works $165 $131 $131 $131 $131 $81 $62 $36 $15
Other Uses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $2,058 $1,634 $1,634 $1,634 $1,634 $1,013 $777 $453 $182
Annual Net Impact on General Fund $427 $169 -$362 -$362 -$606 $7,320 $73 $132 $4,578
*Numbers may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
[1] Inclusive of Cable Television, Electricity, Garbage Disposal, Chicago Grade Landfill Fee, Gas, and Wastewater revenue categories.
[2] Includes City Council, City Clerk, City Treasurer, Legal, City Manager, and Administrative Services.
Non-ResidentialMultifamily
(per unit)(per 1,000 sq. ft.)
Page 127 of 143
Table 6
Development Program and Density
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Residents/
Employees3
Residential
Single Family - Market Rate 205 units 2.82 people per household 578
Multifamily - Small Lot Market Rate 815 units 2.24 people per household 1,825
Multifamily - Traditional Market Rate 427 units 2.24 people per household 956
Multifamily - Med./High Density Market Rate 1,349 units 2.24 people per household 3,020
Multifamily - BMR 94 units 2.24 people per household 210
Subtotal 2,890 units 6,590
Commercial Program
Retail 440,958 Sq. Ft. 360 square feet per employee 1,225
Office 594,666 Sq. Ft. 469 square feet per employee 1,267
Industrial 467,501 Sq. Ft. 805 square feet per employee 581
Hotel4 225 Keys 2 rooms per employee 113
Subtotal 1,544,176 Sq. Ft. 3,185
Total New Service Population5 8,182
[1] Net new development based on projections provided by MIG.
[3] Net new residents and employment estimates provided by MIG projections.
[5] Total service population equals residents plus 1/2 of employment.
Sources: MIG; Economic & Planning Systems
Net New
Development1 Density Assumptions2
[2] Household size assumptions are based on MIG population projections and calibrated to ACS household size data. Slightly higher values than
ACS data are used to reconcile projected housing units with the total population forecast. Employment density calculated by dividing MIG provided
net new commercial development by employee count. Lodging assumes 0.5 employees per 550-square-foot room (i.e., 2 rooms per employee).
[4] Hotel development equivalent to 41,051 square feet. Key count assumption from direction of City staff.
Page 128 of 143
Table 7
FY2025-2026 Budget Revenue Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
FY2025-26 General Fund
Item Estimated Revenues
Property Taxes
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $4,108,520 %of Citywide AV growth
Other Property Taxes1 $9,086,160 17%of base property tax rate (1%)
RPTTF Distribution $800,200 Not Estimated
Other Local Taxes
Sales & Use Tax $5,018,000 1%of estimated taxable sales
Sales Tax Measure D-20 $6,657,200 1%of estimated taxable sales
Transient Occupancy Tax $2,043,200 10%of room revenue
Property Transfer Tax $156,550 $0.275 per $500 in value
Business License Tax $190,000 $19.53 per employee
Cannabis Business Tax $52,020 Not Estimated
Franchise Taxes
Cable Television $218,500 $6.24 per service population
Electricity $443,730 $12.68 per service population
Garbage Disposal $718,320 $20.52 per service population
Chicago Grade Landfill Fee $18,400 $0.53 per service population
Gas $109,750 $3.14 per service population
Wastewater $115,090 $3.29 per service population
Other Revenues
Charges for Services $2,641,010 Not Estimated
Permits & Fees $892,730 Not Estimated
Revenues from Other Agencies $262,960 Not Estimated
Fines and Foreitures $35,420 Not Estimated
Revenues from Use of Money $285,000 Not Estimated
Other Revenues $2,601,200 Not Estimated
Total Revenues $36,453,960
Sources: City of Atascadero Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2025-26 & 2026-27; City of Atascadero Municipal Code; Economic &
Planning Systems
[1] Per adopted budget pg. D-1, the City receives between 16% - 18% of the property tax collected, exclusive of VLF.
Estimating Factors
Page 129 of 143
Table 8
FY2025-2026 Budget Expense Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
City General Fund
Expenditures Additions1 Revised FY 25/26 Percent Variable Per Capita Est. Ann. Total
Item (FY25-26 Requested) Expenditures Variable2 Expenses Expenditures at Buildout3
General Government4 $4,266,240 $530,000 $4,796,240 10%$479,624 34,999 Service Pop.$13.70 $112,134
Police $12,849,320 $670,000 $13,519,320 90%$12,167,388 34,999 Service Pop.$347.65 $2,844,670
Fire $9,057,410 $950,000 $10,007,410 90%$9,006,669 34,999 Service Pop.$257.34 $2,105,711
Community Development $3,175,620 $0 $3,175,620 25%$793,905 34,999 Service Pop.$22.68 $185,611
Community Services $3,870,730 $270,000 $4,140,730 25%$1,035,183 34,999 Service Pop.$29.58 $242,020
Public Works $3,744,110 $360,000 $4,104,110 50%$2,052,055 34,999 Service Pop.$58.63 $479,759
Other Uses $3,000 $0 $3,000 25%$750 34,999 Service Pop.$0.02 $175
Total Expenditures $36,966,430 $2,780,000 $39,746,430 $25,535,574 $5,970,081
Citywide
Estimating Factors
[1] Per discussion with City staff, additional costs reflect future staffing needs, as the City is currently operating with lean staffing levels and anticipates increased demands associated with General Plan buildout.
[4] Includes City Council, City Clerk, City Treasurer, Legal, City Manager, and Administrative Services.
Sources: City of Atascadero Adopted Budget FY 25-26 & 26-27; Economic & Planning Systems
[3] Per Capita Expenditures multiplied by estimated total service population at buildout for projected development found in Table 6.
[2] Percentage of costs that are population-dependent, as opposed to fixed costs or costs recovered through fees or charges.
Page 130 of 143
Table 9
Estimated Assessed Value of Proposed Development
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
(DU/Sq. Ft.)1 Net Assessed Value
Formula:a b c = a * b
Residential Program
Single Family
Market Rate2 $850,000 per unit 205 $174,250,000
Multifamily
Small Lot - Market Rate2 $610,000 per unit 815 $497,150,000
Traditional Market Rate3 $413,600 per unit 427 $176,607,200
Medium/High Density3 $413,600 per unit 1,349 $557,946,400
BMR4 $316,800 per unit 94 $29,779,200
Residential Subtotal $1,435,732,800
Commercial Program5
Retail $400 per Sq. Ft. 440,958 $167,564,040
Office $300 per Sq. Ft. 594,666 $169,479,810
Industrial $225 per Sq. Ft. 467,501 $99,928,339
Hotel $200,000 per room 225 $45,000,000
Commercial Subtotal6 $481,972,189
Total Net Assessed Value $1,917,704,989
Sources: CoStar Group; Redfin; MIG; Economic & Planning Systems
Assumptions
[1] Values per Table 6.
[2] City of Atascadero single family and small lot multifamily market sale data from Redfin and discussions with local realtors.
Values confirmed by City of Atascadero staff.
[3] City of Atascadero multifamily rental data from CoStar. Assessed value calculated using income capitalization approach.
See Appendix Table A-3.
[5] Sales comparison approach with City of Atascadero and San Luis Obispo County recent sales market data from CoStar to
determine average market sale price per square foot/room.
[4] Assumes density bonus and inclusionary units, not 100% affordable tax-exempt projects. Assessed value calculated using
income capitalization approach. See Appendix Table A-2.
[6] Assumes 5% of total commercial uses (except hotel) are owned/operated by tax-exempt, non profit organizations.
Page 131 of 143
Table 10
Estimated Property Tax Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Formula:
Residential $1,435,732,800
Retail $167,564,040
Office $169,479,810
Industrial $99,928,339
Hotel $45,000,000
Total Assessed Value1 a $1,917,704,989
Property Tax Revenue2 1%b = a * 1%$19,177,050
Atascadero General Fund Revenue3 17.00%c = b * 17%$3,260,098
Total Net Assessed
Sources: City of Atascadero Adopted Budget FY 25-26 & 26-27; Economic & Planning Systems
[1] Values based on assessed value calculations in Table 9.
[2] Property tax revenue is 1% of total assessed value, as established by Proposition 13.
[3] 17% of propery tax revenue is allocated to the General Fund.
Value at BuildoutLand Use
Page 132 of 143
Table 11
Estimated Property Tax in Lieu of VLF Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Formula:
Total Assessed Value1 a $1,917,704,989
Citywide Assessed Value2 b $5,399,498,000
Assessed Value Net Increase c = a / b 36%
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF
Existing Citywide Property Tax in Lieu of VLF3 d $4,108,520
Net Property Tax in Lieu of VLF Revenue e = c * d $1,459,197
[1] See Table 10 for total assessed value
[3] See Table 7.
Total Net Assessed
Value at Buildout
[2] Most recent assessed property value provided by the CA State Board of Equalization (Table 11) Assessed Property Values by City
(2024-25 Assessment).
Sources: CA BOE; City of Atascadero Adopted Budget FY 25-26 & 26-27; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 133 of 143
Table 12
Estimated Property Transfer Tax Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Total Net Assessed Land Use Value At Buildout
Assessed Value Estimate
Residential
Single Family $174,250,000
Multifamily $1,261,482,800
Nonresidential
Retail $167,564,040
Office $169,479,810
Industrial $99,928,339
Hotel $45,000,000
Total Assessed Value1 $1,917,704,989
Average Annual Turnover2
Residential Single Family 5%$8,712,500Multifamily 5%$63,074,140Nonresidential Retail 5%$8,378,202Office 5%$8,473,991Industrial 5%$4,996,417Hotel 5%$2,250,000
Property Transfer Tax Revenue3 $0.275 per $500
in value $52,737
Sources: City of Atascadero Municipal Code, Economic & Planning Systems
Assumption
[1] See Table 9 for assessed values.
[2] EPS assumption based on long-term averages. A turnover rate of 5 percent suggests that
properties trade approximately once every 20 years.
[3] Property Transfer Tax rate as stated in Section 3-2.02 of the City of Atascadero Municipal Code
Page 134 of 143
Table 13
Estimated Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Total
Formula:
Total Hotel Rooms1 225 a
Average Daily Rate2 $166 b
Occupancy Rate3 70.0%c
Annual Hotel Room Revenues $9,542,925 d = a * b * c * 365
General Fund TOT Revenue 10%of revenue $954,293 e = d * 10%
[1] See Table 6.
Assumption
Sources: CoStar Group; City of Atascadero Adopted Budget FY 25/26 & 26/27; Economic & Planning Systems
[2] Twelve-month average daily rate for Upper Midscale and Midscale Hotel market data per CoStar Group for area
within 15 mi radius of City of Atascadero.
[3] Typical stablizied occupancy at a high-performing hotel is 80%. This FIA conservatively assumes 70% occupancy.
Page 135 of 143
Table 14
Estimated General Fund Annual Sales Tax Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Total Estimates1
Household Retail Purchases in Atascadero
Single Family
Market Rate for Sale 205 units $8,135,879
Multifamily
Market Rate Small Lot 815 units $24,614,527
Market Rate Traditional 427 units $9,888,229
Market Rate Med./High Density 1,349 units $31,239,393
BMR Rental 94 units $2,116,698
Net New HH Retail Sales in Atascadero 30%Spending Capture $22,798,418
Employee Retail Purchases in Atascadero
Daily Worker Taxable Spending2 $9.82 per work day
Annual Worker Taxable Spending3 240 workdays/year $2,356
Atascadero Spending Capture4 50%$1,178
Number of Workers5 1,267
Net New Worker Taxable Spending in Atascadero6 $1,492,333
On-site Sales
New Taxable Retail Space (Sq. Ft.)7 418,910
Gross Taxable Retail Sales8 $500 per square foot $209,455,050
Sales Net of Redistributed Sales in City 80%of total taxable sales $167,564,040
Net New On-Site Taxable Sales9 95.7%of net taxable sales $160,276,815
Total Net Taxable Retail Sales $184,567,565
Total Sales Tax Revenue 1%of taxable sales $1,845,676
Total Sales Tax (Measure D-20) Revenue 1%of taxable sales $1,845,676
[5] Office employment per Table 6.
[6] Calculated by multiplying Atascadero Spending Capture per employee with the total number of workers.
[8] EPS professional assumption.
Sources: BLS 2024 CEX Survey; ICSC Survey; City of Atascadero Municipal Code; Economic & Planning Systems
Assumptions
[4] Employee retail purchase spending capture is adjusted to reflect that not all employees will make retail purchases within city limits
during the workday. EPS professional assumption.
[1] Total household retail spending calculated by multiplying number of units with calculated retail spending per household in Appendix
Table A-6.
[2] Per-day limited suburban employee spending from ICSC survey data adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
[3] Assumes five days per work week for 48 work weeks each year.
[7] See Table 6, assumes 5% of new retail space will be owned/operated by a non-profit organization, and therefore would be exempt
from sales tax.
[9] Net New On-Site Taxable Sales assumes that 30% of net new household and worker taxable spending is captured on-site and
therefore treated as redistributed spending, with that portion deducted from gross on-site taxable sales to derive the net new
percentage.
Page 136 of 143
Table 15
Estimated General Fund Other Tax and Fee Revenue
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Buildout Total
Business License Tax $19.53 per employee 3,185 employees $62,206
Franchise Taxes3 $46.40 per service population 8,182 service pop. $379,633
Total $441,840
[1] See Table 7 for estimating factors.
Sources: Economic & Planning Systems
[2] See Table 6 for service population and employee counts.
Assumptions2Allocation Factor1
[3] Inclusive of Cable Television, Electricity, Garbage Disposal, Chicago Grade Landfill Fee, Gas, and Wastewater revenue categories.
Page 137 of 143
Appendix Table A-1
Maximum Allowable Rent Calculation of BMR Multifamily Units
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Low Income
Item (51-80% AMI)Formula:
BMR Multifamily (1 Bedroom)
Average HH Income (2 Person)1 $89,050 aHousing Costs as % of Income (Front Ratio) 30%bAnnual Housing Cost $26,715 c = a * bMonthly Housing Cost $2,226 d = c / 12
Monthly Utility Allowance2 $233 e
Maximum Rent $1,993 f = d - e
BMR Multifamily (2 Bedrooms)
Average HH Income (3 Person)1 $100,200 g
Annual Housing Cost $30,060 h = b * g
Monthly Housing Cost $2,505 i = h / 12
Monthly Utility Allowance2 $355 j
Maximum Rent $2,150 k = i - j
Sources: City of Atascadero; HCD San Luis Obispo County; HUD San Luis Obispo County; Economic &
Planning Systems
[1] HCD 2025 Income Limits for San Luis Obispo County.
[2] Based on San Luis Obispo County HUD 2025 utility allowances for a 2 and 3 person household.
Page 138 of 143
Appendix Table A-2
Average Capitalized Value of BMR Multifamily Units
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item 2BR Unit1 1BR Unit1 Based on Average HH Size2
HH Size3 3.00 2.00 2.24
BMR HH Income $100,200 $89,050 $91,715
BMR Rent - Low Income (50-80% AMI)$2,150 $1,993 $2,031
(less) OPEX4 30%-$609
(less) Vacancy4 5%-$102
Monthly NOI Per Unit $1,320
Annualized NOI Per Unit $15,840
Capitalized Value4 5%$316,800
*Capitalized value rounded to nearest hundred.
Sources: Economic & Planning Systems
[3] Average multifamily household size (2.24) determined in Table 6.
[4] OPEX, Vacancy, and Cap Rate based on EPS professional assumptions.
Monthly BMR Rent
[1] See Appendix Table A-1 for allowable monthly rent calculations.
[2] The “Based on Average HH Size” income and rent is calculated using linear interpolation between the 1-bedroom (2-person household)
and 2-bedroom (3-person household) incomes/rents. The formula adjusts the 1-bedroom income/rent proportionally to the difference
between the average household size and the base 1-bedroom household size, assuming a linear relationship between household size and
income/rent.
Page 139 of 143
Appendix Table A-3
Assessed Value Calculation of Market Rate Multifamily Units
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Assumption
Market Rate Multifamily1
Average Rent2 $2,757
OPEX3 30%-$827
Vacancy3 5%-$138Monthly NOI Per Unit $1,792Annualized NOI Per Unit $21,505
Capitalized Value4 5.2%$413,600
*Capitalized value rounded to nearest hundred.
[1] For both traditional and medium and high density multifamily units.
[3] Based on EPS professional assumptions.
Sources: CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems
[4] Average multifamily cap rate in City of Atascadero per CoStar group data.
[2] Average CoStar market rent based on CoStar data for properties located within a 15-mile radius of the
City of Atascadero, constructed in 2023 or later.
Page 140 of 143
Appendix Table A-4Income Calculation of Market Rate Ownership Residential and Small Lot UnitsCity of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Formula Single Family Small Lot
Average Sale Price1 a $850,000 $610,000
Mortgage Amount2 b = a * 0.8 $680,000 $488,000
Mortgage Payment3 c = PMT(6.17%,30,b)$50,303 $36,100
Property Taxes4 d = a * 1.11119%$9,445 $6,698
HOA Dues5 e $1,632 $265
Home Insurance6 f $1,200 $427
Utilities7 g $4,260 $4,260
Total Annual Home Costs h = sum(c:g)$66,840 $47,749
% of Income8 i 35%35%
Estimated Household Income j = h / i $190,972 $136,426
[1] Based on City of Atascadero single family and small lot market sale data from Redfin and discussions with local realtors.
[8] Assumed annual housing cost as percent of total household income.
Sources: Redfin; County of San Luis Obispo HCD; County of San Luis Obispo HUD; Economic & Planning Systems
[2] Mortgage amount assumes a 20% downpayment.
[3] Annual mortgage payment assumes a 6.17% interest rate and a 30 year term.
[4] Total property tax (1.11119%) is the combined base rate of 1% plus additional voter approved local assessments as
provided by the San Luis Obispo County Auditor-Controller.
[5] Average HOA is based on City of Atascadro single family market sale data from Redfin.
[6] EPS assumption.
[7] Utility allowance calculated using 2025 County of San Luis Obispo HUD Utility Allowance Table for a three person
Page 141 of 143
Appendix Table A-5
Income Calculation of Market Rate Rental Residential Units
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Formula Multifamily
Average Monthly Market Rate Rent1 a $2,757
Average Monthly Utility Cost2 b $294
Total Montly Housing Cost c = a + b $3,051
Housing Costs as % of Income3 d 35%
Estimated Household Income4 e = (c*12) / d $104,606
[1] City of Atascadero average market rent per CoStar data.
[2] Utility allowance calculated using 2025 County of San Luis Obispo HUD Utility Allowance Table average for two
and three person households.
[3] Assumed monthly housing cost as percent of total household income.
Sources: Costar, County of San Luis Obispo HUD; Economic & Planning Systems
[4] For households living in traditional and medium and high density multifamily units.
Page 142 of 143
Appendix Table A-6
Estimated Household Income and Per Household Retail Spending
City of Atascadero General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis; EPS 211093
Item Estimated
Household Income1
Single Family
Market Rate for Sale $190,972 20.8%of HH income $39,687
Multifamily
Small Lot $136,426 22.1%of HH income $30,202
Market Rate Rental3 $104,606 22.1%of HH income $23,157
BMR Rental $91,715 24.6%of HH income $22,518
Assumptions2
[2] Percent of HH income spent on retail, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2024 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table
1203.
[1] See Appendix Tables A-2, A-4 and A-5 for calculated household incomes.
Sources: BLS 2024 CEX Survey; Economic & Planning Systems
[3] Income of households living in traditional and medium and high density multifamily units.
Total Estimated
Retail Spending per HH
Page 143 of 143