HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC_2026_09_22_AgendaPacket Item G1 Attachment 1 Exhibit A, EIRSCH 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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Contents
iv
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Executive Summary
ES-4
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-2
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-4
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-5
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-6
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-7
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-8
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-12
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-13
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-14
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-18
2.1.3 Atascadero Mutual Water Company
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Final EIR Chapter 2 Response to Comments
2-20
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Final EIR Chapter 3 Errata
3-6
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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);
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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:
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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:
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
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
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
7-4
This page intentionally left blank.
09/22/2026 | Item G1 | Attachment 1 | Exhibit A