HomeMy WebLinkAboutEDN 2026-0001 AppendicesAuthentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX A
Notice of Preparation and
Summary of Comments Received
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Notice Of Preparation
TO: RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND INTERESTED PARTIES
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO COMPREHENSIVE 2045 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Notice of Preparation
Notice is hereby given that the City of Atascadero (City) will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the
Atascadero Comprehensive 2045 General Plan Update (project or 2045 General Plan Update). This
Notice of Preparation (NOP) is hereby provided pursuant to Section 15082(a) of the State CEQA
Guidelines. The City is requesting your views as to the scope and content of the environmental
information that is relevant to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the project
and/or your organization’s or individual interest in the project. Responsible agencies will need to use the
EIR prepared for the project when considering a permit or other approval for the project. The City is
issuing this NOP to notify public agencies and the public and to request input regarding the scope and
content of the Draft EIR for this project.
Review and Response Period
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, this NOP is being circulated for a 30-day comment
period from July 15, 2024 to August 14, 2024. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(b),
responses to this NOP must be provided during this comment period. No Initial Study (IS) is attached
because the Lead Agency has determined that an EIR is required for the project, which will consider each
issue area included in the IS/CEQA Environmental Checklist Form, and is therefore not required to
prepare an Initial Study per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(a).
Written comments may be submitted to the City’s Community Development Department at the address
below:
City of Atascadero
6598 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
(805) 461-5000
www.Atascadero.org
City of Atascadero
Community Development Department
Attn: Kelly Gleason, Planning Manager
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Comments may also be submitted electronically to: planning@atascadero.org.
Notice of Public Scoping Meeting
In addition, as the project is of regional and areawide significance and in accordance with Section
15082(c)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a scoping meeting will be held by the City on July 24th, 2024
from 4:00 PM to 7:00 PM. The scoping meeting will be held at the Atascadero City Administration
Building, located at 6500 Palma Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422.
As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Atascadero does not
discriminate. Closed captioning or other assistive services may be provided upon request. Other services,
such as translation between English and other languages, may also be provided upon request. To ensure
availability of services, please make your request no later than three working days (72 hours) prior to the
meeting by contacting the City at the phone number or by the email shown at the end of this notice.
Project Title: City of Atascadero Comprehensive 2045 General Plan Update
State Clearinghouse #: Pending
Project Location:
The project location, or Planning Area, encompasses all properties within the city of Atascadero
incorporated city limits and its surrounding Sphere of Influence (SOI). The city of Atascadero is located in
northern San Luis Obispo County, California, on U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) approximately 13 miles east
of the Pacific Ocean. Atascadero is nestled between the Santa Lucia Mountains to the west and the
Salinas River to the east. U.S. 101 bisects the community running north/south. California State Route 41
(SR 41) also bisects the city and provides east/west access for travelers to reach the Pacific Coast and the
California Central Valley. The city of Atascadero encompasses approximately 26 square miles of varied
residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial, park, and open space landscapes. The Planning Area,
which includes the SOI, encompasses approximately 20,218 acres or 32 square miles.1
Project Description:
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. This 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. The
goals, policies, and actions established in the 2045 General Plan Update would be interrelated and
considered together when making decisions related to land use, mobility, growth, preservation, and
development.
1 Source: San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) 2024
The project involves a comprehensive update to the City of Atascadero’s current 2025 General Plan
(2025 General Plan), which was adopted in 2002 and most recently amended in 2016.
Since Atascadero adopted its current General Plan in 2002, shifts in demographics, land use,
transportation, economics, community character, and the housing market warrant the need for a
comprehensive update. A changing economic and fiscal landscape, along with the need to supply
additional workforce housing and head of household jobs, further support the need to ensure the City’s
visions, goals, policies, and programs are current and adequately address community needs.
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 overall role of the
2045 General Plan Update is to:
• Define a realistic community vision for Atascadero through the year 2045.
• Provide the legal foundation for local government decision-making. This includes but is not
limited to zoning regulations, ordinances, guidelines, standards, other adopted Citywide plans,
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) decisions and projects, all of
which must be consistent with the General Plan.
• Express policy direction in regard to the physical, social, economic, cultural, and environmental
character of the city.
• Serve as a comprehensive guide for making decisions regulating land use, circulation,
environmental management, parks and recreation, housing, noise, public health, and safety.
• Provide citizens the opportunity to participate in the planning and decision-making process of
their community; and
• Inform citizens, developers, decision-makers, and other cities and counties of the ground rules
that guide development within a particular community.
General Plan Elements:
According to State law, General Plans are required to cover nine topics: land use, circulation, housing,
conservation, open space, noise, air quality, safety, and environmental justice (note: including
environmental justice is only required when a city has a State-identified disadvantaged community,
which Atascadero does not). Jurisdictions may include any other topics that are relevant to planning its
future and may address the required topics in conjunction with these other topics.
The 2025 General Plan contains the following elements:
• Land Use, Conservation, and Open Space Element
• Circulation Element
• Safety and Noise Element
• Housing Element
The 2045 General Plan Update would include the following elements:
• Land Use and Community Form Element
• Economic Development Element
• Mobility Element
• Recreation and Open Space Element
• Public Services and Infrastructure Element
• Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
The City of Atascadero Housing Element was adopted in 2020 and is valid until 2028. It will not be part of
this current update process.
Proposed Land Use Plan:
The 2045 General Plan Update will include a combination of new and refined land uses and updated land
use designations referred to here as “placetypes”. Placetypes intend to create more clarity around the
character of new development. Placetypes are similar to land use designations, as they set densities and
intensities, but also include detail on the character of the various types of uses, including scale, design
quality, and relationship to the street. Placetypes would be further refined by zoning districts, which
provide more detailed distinction of allowed uses and development standards within each placetype
established in the 2045 General Plan Update. Placetypes, or updated land use designations, that will be
included in the 2045 General Plan Update are as follows:
• Rural Residential (0.1-1 dwelling units per acre [du/ac])
• Single Family Residential (1-4 du/ac)
• Low Density Multi-Family (5-12 du/ac)
• Medium Density Multi-Family (13-24 du/ac)
• High Density Multi-Family (25-36 du/ac)
• Mixed Use (20-36 du/acre)
• Downtown Mixed Use (20-45 du/ac)
• Commercial
• Community Recreation
• Innovation/Flex
• Industrial
• Conservation/Parks/Open Space
• Public/Quasi Public
• Agriculture (0.1-1 du/ac)
General Plan Population and Employment Growth Projections
The 2045 General Plan Update will include city population and employment growth projections based on
land capacity, ability to expand infrastructure, and the anticipated growth rates for both residential and
commercial sectors based on multiple factors. These projections will be used to make assumptions about
anticipated infrastructure and service needs over the planning period.
• The city’s current (2024) population is 30,158 and the forecasted population for the planning
period (through 2045) is 38,112, an increase of approximately 21% for the 20-year planning
period, or just over 1% per year.2 (The 2025 General Plan projected the city’s population would
grow to 36,000 by 2025)
2 Population estimates assume a 2.42 person per household ratio and a 95.45% occupancy rate, based on
demographic trends.
• The city’s current number of dwelling units (2024) is 12,431; the forecasted number of dwelling
units for the planning period (through 2045) is 15,976.
• The city’s current total employment (2024) is 8,603 jobs. This results in a jobs/housing balance
ratio of 0.69. Anticipated employment in 2045 is 13,438. This will result in a change to the
jobs/housing ratio to 0.84.
The City will consider all written comments regarding the potential environmental effects of the project
received during the NOP public review period. All written comments received will be reviewed and
considered by the City as part of the environmental analysis of the proposed project and will become a
part of the public record for the EIR.
Potential Environmental Effects:
The 2045 General Plan Update will guide growth in Atascadero over the next twenty years. The potential
environmental effects associated with the growth of a community include, but are not necessarily
limited to, impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural
resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology/water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services and
recreation, transportation, utility and service systems, and wildfire. In addition to analyzing the proposed
project’s environmental effects, the EIR will also include a reasonable range of alternatives to the project
to reduce and avoid environmental impacts to the extent feasible.
Responses to NOP:
Written comments regarding the project should be addressed to the City via the contact information
below. Comments will be accepted from July 15, 2024 to August 14, 2024.
City of Atascadero
Community Development Department
Attn: Kelly Gleason, Planning Manager
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
planning@atascadero.org
Date: July 12, 2024 Signature: FOR
Kelly Gleason, Planning Manager
planning@atascadero.org
(805) 470-3446
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-1
Table A-1. Summary of NOP Comments and EIR Response Locations
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
NOP Comments
California Native American Heritage Commission • Notes consultation requirements pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18 and Assembly Bill 52 (AB) 52
• Recommends early and thorough tribal consultation
• Offers guidance on cultural resources assessment and mitigation
• Information on tribal consultation and cultural resources assessment can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife • Establishes role and regulatory authority
• Provides recommendations for biological resource analysis
• Offers regulatory and procedural guidance for biological resource assessment
• Information on biological resource analysis can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians • Requests no further consultation on the project • While this comment does not raise any environmental concerns, a summary of all tribal consultation conducted for the project under SB 18 and AB 52 can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources.
Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club • Raises concerns about lack of specific, lasting, and enforced Land Use and Conservation element in the general plan update, particularly regarding the Salinas River and accompanying wildlife and ecosystems
• While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, a discussion of potential impacts pertaining to biological resources, including aquatic and riparian habitats associated with the Salinas River, is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Request for the Salinas River and its tributaries to be protected from any increase of sand mining operations
• The 2045 General Plan Update maintains existing policies and does not propose changes that would result in or allow for increased sand mining operations within the Salinas River and its tributaries within city limits. Information on mining and mineral resources can be found in Section 4.10, Mineral Resources.
Edward Young and Trudy Valdez • Request for City to consider rezoning their property for high-density residential or mixed-use development in EIR
• While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, information on land uses and zoning is provided in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, and information regarding housing demand is provided in Section 4.12, Population and Housing.
N/A (no name provided) • Request to establish an overlay plan for the potential downstream coverage by water of all areas within Atascadero City limits
• Information relating to water quality, flood hazards, and stormwater is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Request to establish the Salinas River and its tributaries as areas to receive environmental mitigation projects
• While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, information regarding water quality of the Salinas River and other surface water features within city limits can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology
and Water Quality.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-2
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Request to mitigate any Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) Projects • Any projects by AMWC would be required to be consistent with the 2045 General Plan, the effects of which are evaluated throughout Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis.
• Request to establish, name, and protect all cultural resources within the city limits, including a procedure for communication with affected communities
• Information on cultural resources can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources.
• Request for re-zoning of all lands along the Salinas River to non-industrial activities and recreational zoning
• The 2045 General Plan Update would not establish any new industrial zoned land adjacent to the Salinas River. While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, information on zoning can be found in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning.
N/A (no name provided) • Request for the review and completion of all existing DeAnza Trail plans • While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, information on trail plans and recreational facilities can be found in Section 4.14, Public Services and Recreation.
• Request for the re-zoning of all AMWC properties to agricultural or recreational use with no commercial use allowance
• While this comment is directed towards the proposed General Plan Update rather than providing input regarding the scope of the EIR, information on land use and zoning can be found in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning.
• Request for monitoring of all water leaving sewer plant • Information on water quality can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Comments regarding the creation and conservation of public open spaces, parks, and trails
• Information on parks and recreation can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Request to inform public of process • The City is required to follow all public notification requirements per the requirements of CEQA. Additional information on public participation can be found in Chapter 1, Introduction and Chapter 9, Response to Comments.
Nancy Johnson • Requests remapping of the Salinas River including current determination of the top of bank, high-water mark, and floodplain
• These types of features change over time and are required to be reevaluated any time a project could affect the Salinas River to determine regulatory agency jurisdiction and permitting requirements. Information regarding hydrology can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Requests info on which consulting firms are working on EIR and GP update • As consultants to the City, the General Plan Update was supported by MIG, Inc. and the EIR was supported by SWCA Environmental Consultants, Inc. Additional details regarding the preparers of this EIR are provided in Chapter 8, References and Report Preparation.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-3
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Question regarding terminology change for zoning designations • Information on zoning designations can be found in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning.
• Question regarding changing goals for Eagle Ranch • Information regarding Specific Plans, including Eagle Ranch, can be found in the Land Use and Community Form Element of the 2045 General Plan Update.
• Requests historic De Anza Trail exhibit and inclusion of trail system connectivity in impact analysis
• Information on public trails, including the De Anza Trail, can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Comment regarding outline of legal public use activities allowed on the Salinas River • Information on uses allowed on the Salinas River and associated tributaries is based on the applicable Placetype and Zoning Districts identified in the Land Use and Community Form Element.
• Request for EIR to discuss damage due to motorized vehicle use along the Salinas River
• Any existing damage due to motorized vehicle use will be considered part of the environmental baseline against which the 2045 General Plan Update will be evaluated. Potential environmental impacts related to changes in allowed uses along the Salinas River proposed by the 2045 General Plan Update will be evaluated throughout Chapter 4,
Environmental Impact Analysis.
• Requests Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) be included for motorized vehicle damage
• Any existing damage due to motorized vehicle use will be considered part of the environmental baseline against which the 2045 General Plan Update will be evaluated. Potential environmental impacts related to changes in allowed uses along the Salinas River proposed by the 2045 General Plan Update will be evaluated throughout Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis.
• Requests impacts of development within the boundaries of the Salinas River be discussed with recommendations provided
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes discussion, policies, and actions pertaining to balancing safety, protection of natural resources, and economic development for public and private development in close proximity to sensitive lands, including creeks, riparian corridors, and wetlands in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element. Any existing development in proximity to the Salinas River will be considered part of the environmental baseline against which the 2045 General Plan Update will be evaluated. Any potential impacts resulting from proposed changes in permitted development along the Salinas River will be evaluated throughout Chapter 4, Environmental
Impact Analysis.
• Information regarding impacts associated with stormwater runoff, water quality, and erosion can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-4
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Requests updated mapping of boundaries and protected areas of Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek
• While this comment is directed towards content of the General Plan Update rather than input regarding the scope of the EIR, information regarding hydrology can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Requests the EIR study the effects of multi-use public trails to make determinations regarding equestrian and motorized vehicle use
• Information on public recreation and associated environmental effects being proposed by the 2045 General Plan Update can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Requests use of Salinas River as ‘mitigation bank’ for development projects in other areas that require mitigation
• This comment is directed towards content of the General Plan Update rather than input regarding the scope of the EIR, Mitigation banking is typically a strategy used for mitigating impacts to biological resources. Information regarding biological resources, including aquatic and riparian habitats associated with the Salinas River, is provided in Section 4.4,
Biological Resources.
Eric Greening • Requests update to maps of areas affected by Salinas Dam failure • Information on dam failure mapping can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality
• Requests survey of historical sources to help develop mitigation measures for bio impacts
• Information on impacts to biological resources can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Requests all non-motorized routes be seen as transportation infrastructure
• Requests review of Short-Range Transit Plan
• Information on transportation infrastructure and transit plans, including the Atascadero Bicycle Transportation Plan, can be found in Section 4.14,
Transportation. The City has not developed or published a “Short-Range Transit Plan.”
Alejandra Prendergast • Request for baseline mapping of environmentally sensitive habitat zones within city limits
• Requests creation of buffer areas for sensitive habitats
• Requests development criteria within buffers
• Requests mitigation measures and environmental protection for sensitive areas
• Information on sensitive habitat mapping, development buffers, and mitigation can be found in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources.
• Excited for development • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
• Concerned about state of environmental resources • Information on existing conditions and potential impacts to environmental resources can be found throughout Chapter 4, Environmental Impact
Analysis.
Audrey Taub, SLO Beaver Brigade • Request for City to support acquisition of conservation easements for Salinas River Corridor (SRC)
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions pertaining to the establishment of conservation easements in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element. This comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-5
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Requests inclusion of Water Element, including a Planning and Regulatory Section
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes discussion and policies pertaining to water supply and delivery, wastewater collection and treatment, and stormwater drainage and flood protection in Chapter 8, Public Services and Infrastructure Element.
• This comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR. However, information on existing conditions and potential impacts associated with water quality, groundwater supply, stormwater drainage, and flood hazards is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Requests the City maintain oversight over AMWC • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
• Requests mapping, protection, and appropriate zoning of rivers, creeks, and riparian zones
• This comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR. However, information on existing conditions and potential impacts associated with rivers, creeks, and riparian zones can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Statement of intent to form Salinas River Conservancy • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
Ann Colby • Questions about climate change, fire insurance, public safety, and wildfire issues
• Information regarding climate change can be found in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy, and information regarding wildfire and associated public safety concerns can be found in Section 4.16, Wildfire.
• Questions about wildlife, natural habitat conservation, and places to connect with nature
• Information regarding wildlife and natural habitat conservation can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding existing and future public recreation areas can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and
Recreation.
• Questions regarding equestrian and non-motorized access • Information on equestrian and non-motorized access can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Questions regarding the City’s response to new forms of transportation (e-bikes, scooters, etc.) to ensure public safety
• Information on all modes of transportation and transportation safety can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
• Comments regarding SRC restoration and protection • Information on the Salinas River restoration and protection can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Comments regarding involvement of community groups and using developer funds for restoration and stewardship
• N/A (no environmental issues raised)
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-6
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
David Broadwater • Concern for the degradation of the SRC including illegal motor vehicle use, lack of enforcement, and lack of General Plan and Municipal Code provisions including request for City to enforce Municipal Code and General Plan Goals to prevent damage to the SRC
• Information on potential impacts to the Salinas River due to proposed changes in the 2045 General Plan Update can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning.
• Comments regarding the removal of Conservation as an element of the updated General Plan and recommendations regarding designated conservation zones
• Information regarding natural resource conservation is provided in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element of the 2045 General Plan Update.
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, information regarding conservation of natural resources can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Comments regarding community and economic potential of Salinas River as well as the adoption of a broader, long-term vision for its future
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, information regarding conservation of natural resources can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources and information regarding water quality of surface water features, including the Salinas River, can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and
Water Quality.
Jennifer Cohn • Comments regarding equestrian safety and access to existing trails
• Comments regarding the extension of trails
• Information on public recreation trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
Gordon L. Fuglie • Request for the re-vegetation of AMWC property with native plants and the screening of well heads/pumping stations
• The EIR will evaluate any potential impacts associated with changes proposed in the 2045 General Plan Update. The existing condition of AMWC properties will be considered part of the environmental baseline.
• Request for trail systems on AMWC property and maintenance of AMWC access roads
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, information on existing and future public recreation trails and maintenance can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation, and information on transportation and roads can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
• Concern regarding water quality, pollution, and beaver presence in the SRC • Information on water quality, pollution, and beaver presence in the SRC can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Comments regarding the acquisition of lands that abut the western side of the Salinas River and joining then to existing AMWC property
• N/A (no environmental concerns raised)
• Comments regarding noise pollution from motorized vehicles on AMWC property and the De Anza trail
• Information on existing noise conditions and potential noise impacts associated with the 2045 General Plan Update can be found in Section 4.11, Noise.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-7
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Comments regarding ecological restoration of disturbed natural areas due to vehicle use on AMWC property
• Information on existing conditions and impacts to biological resources, including habitats associated with the Salinas River, can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources and information regarding water quality can be found in Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
Dorothy Jennings • Comments regarding Salinas River planning with other agencies (e.g., the County)
• Information on existing conditions and impacts to biological resources, including habitats associated with the Salinas River, can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources and information regarding water quality can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Request to eliminate motor vehicles from the SRC and provide alternate locations for recreational motorized vehicle use
• Information on recreational activities can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Request for identification of the Salinas River as navigable and subject to the Public Trust
• The Salinas River is likely under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Information regarding impacts to plant and wildlife habitats associated with the Salinas River is provided in Section 4.4., Biological Resources.
• Request for inclusion of existing plans such as the San Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail
• Information on existing and future recreation trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
• Information on bicycle infrastructure and connectivity can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
• Request for pedestrian and bicycle connectivity from all areas within the city to the Anza Trail and the Salinas River
• Information on bicycle infrastructure and connectivity can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
• Comments regarding endangered species and their protection • Information on endangered species can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Request for recognition of the Anza Trail story as a cultural resource • Information on existing and future recreation trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and
Recreation, and information on historic and cultural resources can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources.
• Comments regarding the inclusion of a Conservation Element • The 2045 General Plan Update includes a Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element that includes information, policies, and actions associated with conservation of natural resources.
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, additional information on conservation of natural resources can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-8
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
Teresa and John E. Robinson • Request for frequent use of the word “conservation” • The 2045 General Plan Update includes a Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element that includes information, policies, and actions associated with conservation of natural resources. Information regarding conservation can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
• Request to prohibit backyard burning, fireworks, the use of the Salinas Riverbed by motorized vehicles, and wood-burning fireplaces for all new construction
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, the 2045 General Plan Update includes discussion, policies, and actions pertaining to wildland and urban fire risks in the Safety Element.
• Information on wildfire risks is included in Section 4.16, Wildfire.
• Request for creation of joint oversight commission for the SRC • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
• Request to block illegal off-road vehicles from entering the SRC at Halcon Road and provide citations to those that do
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, the 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Recent California case law has established that code enforcement/illegal activities are not environmental issues to be evaluated under CEQA.
• Request to establish setbacks for development along the SRC • The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update, additional information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Request to establish the Salinas River Wildlife Refuge • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-9
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Request for zero tolerance for homeless encampments in the SRC • The 2045 General Plan Update does not include an update to the Housing Element, as that element was recently prepared in 2020.
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update, an evaluation of the 2045 General Plan Update’s potential to displace people or existing housing is discussed in Section 4.12, Population and Housing, information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Request to stop use of pesticides and herbicides wherever possible and to prohibit weedkillers in public schools
• Information on pesticides and herbicides can be found in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
• Request to remove encampments along Atascadero Creek • The 2045 General Plan Update does not include an update to the Housing Element, as that element was recently prepared in 2020.
• An evaluation of the 2045 General Plan Update’s potential to displace people or existing housing is discussed in Section 4.12, Population and Housing, information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4,
Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Protect ground water and waterways by removing encampments and trash and encouraging the El Camino Homeless Organization (ECHO) to stop distributing so much plastic
• While this comment is directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update, an evaluation of the 2045 General Plan Update’s potential to displace people or existing housing is discussed in Section 4.12, Population and Housing, information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Request to move ECHO away from schools and churches • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
Jill and Rob Urmy • Concerns regarding open space, clean air, and flora and fauna • Information on parks and open space can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services
and Recreation.
• Information on air quality can be found in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and Energy.
• Information on biological resources can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-10
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
• Concerns regarding motor vehicle use along the SRC • The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4,
Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Desire to recreate safely and protect open space • Information on parks, open space, and recreation is provided in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
Dolores Howard • Concern regarding the exclusion of environmental justice discourse • Information on why no Environmental Justice Element was prepared as part of the 2045 General Plan Update is discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description.
• Request for Tribal Cultural Resources to be addressed separately from Cultural Resources
• Information on cultural resources and tribal cultural resources can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. While these two topics are discussed in the same section of the EIR, they are addressed separately and have different analyses.
• Request to protect the rights of nature through wildlife corridors and the mapping and protection of riparian zones, environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHAs)
• Information on wildlife corridors, riparian habitats, and sensitive natural communities can be found in Section 4.4, Biological Resources.
Ranel Porter • Concern regarding ATV use in the SRC
• Concern regarding the protection of the SRC, specifically regarding beavers, climate change, and indigenous resources
• Request for the mapping of the Salinas River to better protect and honor it
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Information on existing conditions and potential impacts to wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality, flood hazards, and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Information on cultural resources and tribal cultural resources can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources.
Scoping Meeting Comments
N/A • Concern regarding speeding on San Jacinto Avenue • The 2045 General Plan Update includes a discussion, policies, and actions pertaining to traffic safety in the Mobility Element.
• Information on traffic safety can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-11
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
N/A • Support for Salinas River protections, specifically regarding recreation, beaver habitat, and water supply
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Information on existing conditions and potential impacts to wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding groundwater supply is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and
Water Quality.
N/A • Flood potential for existing residential areas and new growth areas
• Updated flood hazard mapping
• Information on flood potential and hazard mapping can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology &and Water Quality.
• Affordable housing priority • Information on housing supply and demand and affordable housing can be found in Section 4.12, Population and Housing.
N/A • Need for updated maps of flood hazard from Salinas Dam failure • Information on flood hazard mapping and inundation areas in the event of a dam failure can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Revision of Urban Services Line • The 2045 General Plan Update includes discussion, policies, and actions pertaining to concentrating new and infill development within the Urban Services Line in areas where utilities and public services exist or are planned.
• Information on the Urban Services Line can be found in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning.
N/A • ATV park with regional trail connections • Information on existing and future planned recreational facilities can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
N/A • Walking trail along creek from Sunken Gardens to Three Bridges • While this comment is directed towards the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, information on existing and future planned public trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
N/A • Replace rock barricades at Halcon Road to prevent illegal off-road vehicles from entering the Salinas riverbed
• The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Information on existing conditions and potential impacts to wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding groundwater supply is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-12
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
N/A • Zero tolerance for encampments along Salinas Riverbed
• Establish the Salinas River Wildlife Refuge
• Establish a Salinas River Joint Commission
• While these comments are directed towards preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update, an evaluation of the 2045 General Plan Update’s potential to displace people or existing housing is discussed in Section 4.12, Population and Housing, information on wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding surface water quality and stormwater pollution is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
N/A • Ensure developments along the Salinas River preserve the integrity along the river • The 2045 General Plan Update includes policies and actions to protect biological resources, including protection of surface waters and watersheds, in the Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element.
• Information on existing conditions and potential impacts to wildlife habitats associated with the SRC is provided in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and information regarding groundwater supply is provided in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
• Make De Anza trail fully connected and for non-motorized use • Information on trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
N/A • Requesting mixed use of Sean Knoplt’s El Camino property • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
N/A • Dam failure • Information on dam failure can be found in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
N/A • Ensure industrial dust is kept outside of sensitive or unsafe zones • Information on dust and air quality can be found in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy.
N/A • Request for De Anza Trail to work with County to connect to Santa Margarita • Information on trails can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
N/A • Repaving at San Gabriel Road • Information on roadway improvements can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
N/A • Request for stoplights at Santa Rosa and Highway 101 to be in all one-way direction • Information on traffic control can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
N/A • Concern about proximity of electric vehicle charging to homes, schools, etc. and risk of electromagnetic radiation
• Information on health hazards can be found in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
• Inclusion of electromagnetic pollution in the Safety Element. • While this comment is directed towards the preparation of the 2045 General Plan Update rather than the scope of the EIR, information on health hazards can be found in section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
• Lobbying for repeal of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 • N/A (no environmental issues raised)
N/A • Request for 4-way stop signs on both sides of the Curbaril Interchange • Information on traffic control can be found in Section 4.14, Transportation.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-13
Commentor Summary of NOP Comments EIR Chapter or Section Addressing Comments
N/A • Request to consider area near “Garcia” as ATV rec area • Information on existing and planned public recreational facilities can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
N/A • Request for designated ATV area
• Question regarding getting homeowners to allow trails through their property
• Information on existing and planned public recreational facilities can be found in Section 4.13, Public Services and Recreation.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendix A Notice of Preparation
A-14
This page intentionally left blank.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report Appendices
APPENDIX B Draft 2045 General Plan
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Authentic Atascadero
2045 General Plan
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT II
Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1
Historical Context ................................................................................................. 1-2
Authentic Atascadero .......................................................................................... 1-3
Community Involvement ..................................................................................... 1-5
Planning Area ....................................................................................................... 1-6
The “Big Moves” .................................................................................................... 1-7
A: Create a Mix of Housing ................................................................................. 1-8
B: Attract New Industries and Higher Wage Jobs ............................................ 1-9
C: Improve Mobility, Access, and Safety ......................................................... 1-10
D: Address Public Infrastructure Needs ......................................................... 1-11
E: Ensure Fiscal Sustainability.......................................................................... 1-12
General Plan Chapters....................................................................................... 1-13
Key Terms ........................................................................................................... 1-14
Implementation Categories .............................................................................. 1-14
User Groups ....................................................................................................... 1-16
Chapter 2: General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 2-1
Vision Statement .................................................................................................. 2-2
Guiding Principles ................................................................................................ 2-2
Our Places ............................................................................................................ 2-2
Our People ........................................................................................................... 2-3
Our Economy ....................................................................................................... 2-3
Our Infrastructure ............................................................................................... 2-3
Our Natural Environment .................................................................................. 2-3
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT III
Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Form Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 3-1
Land Use and Community Form Priorities ........................................................ 3-2
Strategic, Targeted, and Managed Growth ....................................................... 3-3
Placetypes and Land Use Plan ............................................................................ 3-4
Rural Residential ............................................................................................... 3-11
Single-Family Residential .................................................................................. 3-12
Low Density Multi-Family ................................................................................. 3-13
Medium Density Multi-Family .......................................................................... 3-14
High Density Multi-Family ................................................................................ 3-15
Mixed Use ........................................................................................................... 3-16
Downtown Mixed Use ....................................................................................... 3-18
Commercial ........................................................................................................ 3-19
Innovation/Flex .................................................................................................. 3-21
Industrial ............................................................................................................ 3-22
Public/Quasi-Public ........................................................................................... 3-23
Conservation/Parks/Open Space .................................................................... 3-24
Agriculture .......................................................................................................... 3-25
Land Use and Community Form Goals, Policies, and Actions ....................... 3-25
Citywide Growth and Development ................................................................. 3-26
Key Nodes and Corridors .................................................................................. 3-29
Morro Road (Highway 41) ................................................................................. 3-31
Industrial Areas .................................................................................................. 3-31
Downtown .......................................................................................................... 3-32
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT IV
Chapter 4: Economic Development Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4-1
Economic Prosperity and Diversity .................................................................... 4-4
Business Retention and Attraction ..................................................................... 4-5
Partnerships ......................................................................................................... 4-6
Fiscal Health ......................................................................................................... 4-8
Chapter 5: Housing Element
Currently bound separately
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 6-1
Mobility Priorities ................................................................................................. 6-3
Street Classification System ................................................................................ 6-5
Mobility Goals, Policies, and Actions .................................................................. 6-6
Circulation Network ............................................................................................. 6-6
Parking ................................................................................................................ 6-10
Freeway Access and Interchanges ................................................................... 6-11
Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Equestrian Facilities ................................................. 6-12
Transit and Travel Demand Management ....................................................... 6-14
Emerging Mobility Technology ......................................................................... 6-16
Chapter 7: Recreation and Open Space Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 7-1
Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources Priorities ...................................... 7-2
Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Goals,
Policies, and Actions ............................................................................................ 7-4
Trails ...................................................................................................................... 7-6
Open Space Conservation ................................................................................... 7-6
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT V
Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 7-8
Cultural and Historic Resources ....................................................................... 7-11
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction ................................................... 7-12
Chapter 8: Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 8-1
Public Services and Infrastructure Priorities ..................................................... 8-2
Public Services and Infrastructure Goals, Policies, and Actions ...................... 8-3
Efficient and Fiscally Sustainable Operations ................................................... 8-4
Water Supply and Delivery .................................................................................. 8-5
Wastewater Collection and Treatment .............................................................. 8-6
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Protection ..................................................... 8-7
Solid Waste and Recycling ................................................................................... 8-8
Energy ................................................................................................................... 8-9
Telecommunications ......................................................................................... 8-10
Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 9-1
Safety and Emergency Preparedness Priorities ................................................ 9-2
Relationship to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan ............................................. 9-6
Safety and Emergency Preparedness Goals, Policies, and Actions ................. 9-7
Wildfire Risks ........................................................................................................ 9-7
Flooding .............................................................................................................. 9-10
Hazardous Materials .......................................................................................... 9-12
Seismic and Geological Hazards ....................................................................... 9-13
Noise ................................................................................................................... 9-14
Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response ......................................... 9-17
Police Services .................................................................................................... 9-20
Fire Protection Services and Emergency Medical Response ......................... 9-21
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT VI
Glossary
Glossary ............................................................................................................... G-1
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 1: Introduction
The 2045 General Plan articulates the shared community vision for preservation, growth, and
change in our community. This General Plan is a long-range policy document that guides decision-
making and establishes the intent for the design and development of new projects, conservation
of natural resources, promotion of economic development, improvements to mobility and
infrastructure systems, expansion of public services, and enhancement of community amenities.
This General Plan directs how Atascadero will look and how residents, property owners, business
owners, and visitors will experience our City today and well into the future. While the Plan
identifies 2045 as a horizon year, not all initiatives and goals in this Plan may be achieved by then.
However, this Plan defines the interconnected actions we will pursue to create the conditions for
the City we envision.
In 2002, the City adopted a plan focused on “smart growth” shaped by four guiding principles:
Protect the natural environment.
Improve the appearance and character of Atascadero.
Provide a secure revenue base.
Promote well-planned neighborhoods.
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-2
This Plan recognizes what has been achieved: new housing types, public and private
reinvestments in Downtown, development focused within the Urban Services Line, and the
continued consideration of hillsides and habitats. Planning for the next two to three decades will
build upon these successes while accounting for the rapid technological and societal changes
affecting how people work, shop, enjoy leisure time, and move in, around, and through the City.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused many shifts likely to be permanent, particularly work-at-home
jobs, online shopping, and home food delivery. These conditions, as well as the impacts of climate
change, will guide development of Atascadero’s next generation General Plan.
Initiated in 2023, this update effort focused on revisiting, refining, and updating goals, policies,
and actions to reflect evolving trends, demographics, and collective ideas. Residents, business
owners, and other community members participated in a robust public engagement program to
ensure that all perspectives were shared and represented in the shaping of this Plan.
Historical Context
While this General Plan looks towards the future, it is also important to understand the past,
Atascadero is distinguished by its unique history. The community was founded in 1913, when
Edward Gardner Lewis envisioned establishing a model colony of 38 square miles that could grow
to 30,000 residents. Lewis moved forward with the vision, overseeing the sale of land plots,
construction of more than 100 miles of local roads, and founding of the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Development halted abruptly in 1924 when Lewis declared bankruptcy, and the Great
Depression slowed growth for decades after.
Atascadero was a planned community from the beginning, with a focus on creating a welcoming
environment for residents through features such as wide, tree-lined streets and a defined civic
center. The City attracted individuals and families seeking a retreat from the busier urban centers
of California. Atascadero incorporated in 1979, after which a surge in population and ensuing
development of residential and commercial areas shaped the community we experience today.
Throughout the mid-20th century, Atascadero continued to develop as a suburban community
with a strong sense of local identity. The City’s growth was influenced by its early master planning
efforts and the charm of its surrounding landscapes, which attracted both new residents and
visitors. Today, Atascadero is known for its blend of historical charm, community-focused living,
and its scenic Central Coast setting, reflecting its origins as a thoughtfully designed, model City.
Atascadero has a historic charm that comes from many preserved sites citywide. Although most
of the colony-era homes are not listed on the State or National register, 17 prominent sites are
either listed or eligible for historic status, and another 17 potential historic resources are located
throughout the community.
Atascadero City Hall (also known as the Doran Building) is a key architectural landmark and
symbol of the City's early vision. Designed by architect Walter D. Bliss in the Italian Renaissance
style, the building is central to the City’s historic identity and continues to serve as a civic hub.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-3
Built in 1914, the Atascadero Printery is a notable example of early 20th-century industrial
architecture. Originally constructed as a printing facility, it features distinctive Italian Renaissance
design elements.
The Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District, established in the early 20th century,
encompasses a collection of well-preserved residential properties that showcase the City’s early
planning and architectural styles, including Mission Revival and Craftsman. Both the Bucklin
House and the Jorgens House serve as early examples of residential architecture in Atascadero.
The homes feature elements of the Mission Revival style and have been well preserved.
Following the early colony years, Atascadero’s growth resulted from major infrastructure
investments: the construction of Highway 101, establishment of the Atascadero State Hospital
(which brought many new jobs to the community), and provision of sewer service to the town
center, which resulted in a near doubling of the population within the town boundaries. In 1979,
Atascadero incorporated, becoming the second largest City in the County at that time.
Authentic Atascadero
The 2045 General Plan ꟷ Authentic Atascadero ꟷ frames the community vision for how
Atascadero should grow and respond to change over the coming years and decades. As the City's
overarching policy document, every land use, mobility, and infrastructure decision made by
elected and appointed City officials and City staff must be consistent with the General Plan vision,
goals, policies, programs, and actions.
State law requires that every City prepare and adopt a comprehensive and long-range General
Plan (California Government Code Section 65300) and that the plan inform the content and
application of programs and ordinances that govern land use, infrastructure investments, and
generally, the spending of public monies. The General Plan and its maps, diagrams, and policies
are reflected, for example, in the Zoning Ordinance and economic development strategies. Also,
under California law, all specific plans, area plans, community plans, zoning ordinances,
subdivision maps, and public works projects must be consistent with the General Plan.
While a General Plan can cover a variety of topics based on a community’s specific needs, State
law requires that it address these seven topics, or elements: Land Use, Circulation, Housing,
Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. An eighth topic, Environmental Justice, is only
required to be addressed if a City includes “disadvantaged communities,” as designated by the
State. Atascadero does not have any State-identified disadvantaged communities.
The required elements must establish policy direction relating to:
The use and development of properties citywide
Accommodation of all modes of transportation
The provision of parks and other open spaces to meet community needs
The types of housing available in the community
The use and consideration of natural resources
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-4
The provision of public safety services and protection against natural and human-caused
hazards (including noise)
The 2045 General Plan is structured around topics that emerged through an extensive community
engagement process. As noted above, General Plans are required to contain a minimum of seven
State-mandated elements, but municipalities have flexibility in the organization of the chapters
and content to reflect local preferences and sensibilities. Table 1-1 indicates how the General Plan
chapters relate to the State-mandated elements.
Table 1-1: State-Required General Plan Topics
Atascadero 2045
General Plan Chapters
State Mandated Elements
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
To
p
i
c
s
La
n
d
U
s
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Op
e
n
S
p
a
c
e
No
i
s
e
Sa
f
e
t
y
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
J
u
s
t
i
c
e
2
Chapter 1: Introduction
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
c
o
v
e
r
No
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
i
n
A
t
a
s
c
a
d
e
r
o
Chapter 2: General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles
Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Form Element
Chapter 4: Economic Development Element
Chapter 5: Housing Element
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
Chapter 7: Recreation and Open Space Element
Chapter 8: Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Glossary
1. The State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) requires Housing Elements to be
periodically reviewed, updated, and certified. The City of Atascadero Housing Element is included under separate cover.
2. The State of California requires jurisdictions to prepare an Environmental Justice Element only if they have one or more
communities that are identified as “disadvantaged communities” based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0. The City of Atascadero does
not have any identified disadvantaged communities as of 2024 when this General Plan was prepared.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-5
Community Involvement
Beginning in early 2023, City staff undertook a series of community engagement activities to
promote and inform the 2045 General Plan. The City was committed to designing and
implementing an inclusive and dynamic engagement process to ensure robust and genuine
feedback from the community, civic and City leaders, and the private sector. The following is a
summary of key engagement materials and activities that took place during the process.
General Plan Update Website
The City prepared a dedicated General Plan Update website (www.atascadero2045.org) that kept
the public informed and allowed people to directly submit comments. The website compiled all
events, documents, and other materials associated with the project.
Stakeholder Interviews and Focus Groups
City staff met with a range of stakeholders, civic leaders, and community groups throughout the
process to discuss challenges and opportunities, alternatives, and draft policies. These meetings
allowed for important discussions to occur that helped inform the process and ultimately the
goals, policies, and actions included in the 2045 General Plan.
Community Engagement Series #1: Vision for the Future
In early 2023, the City hosted a series of targeted group discussions and an open house to solicit
community ideas on a vision for the future of Atascadero and feedback on challenges and
emerging opportunities; these conversations informed the Alternatives phase of the project.
These meetings and workshops provided an opportunity for the community to learn about the
process and the importance of the General Plan, and to discuss the future of Atascadero. Events
in this series included informational pop-up events during concurrent community-led
programming, an open house that allowed discussions based on each General Plan element, and
the creation of an Existing Conditions Atlas that allowed community members to use maps to
comment on specific areas throughout the City and identify opportunities, challenges, or
additional questions.
Community Engagement Series #2: Alternatives
In Fall 2023, the City hosted a series of pop-up events, focus group meetings, open houses, high
school student policy projects, and an online survey to solicit community ideas on a preferred
land use and growth alternative for the future of Atascadero. These interactive events and
activities provided community members and stakeholders with an opportunity to learn about the
proposed new land use designations—called Placetypes—and areas of change (focus areas),
provide feedback on growth ideas and concepts for each focus area, and discuss additional things
they would improve or change in the future. Focus areas were a key part of the alternatives
discussion and used throughout the planning process to inform community discussions around
potential changes, investments, and key priorities.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-6
Community 2045 General Plan Open House
[Note: this section will be updated later]
City Council Study Sessions
The Atascadero City Council was actively involved in all phases of the project. In addition to their
role as the legislative body for the City, the Council also functioned as an advisory committee for
the General Plan Update, holding study sessions on a regular basis to consider policy strategies,
review community feedback, and provide direction to City staff on key topics to study and choices
for the future. Each study sessions was a public meeting, and the community was encouraged to
attend and provide feedback.
Public Hearings
[Note: this section will be updated later]
Planning Area
In 2023, when the planning process for this General Plan began, the incorporated City boundaries
encompassed about 26 square miles, less than the extent Lewis envisioned for the model colony.
However, under State law, the City has the authority and ability to plan beyond its boundaries
within an area referred to as its sphere of influence (SOI). Together, the incorporated City area
and the sphere of influence are termed the “Planning Area,” which generally coincides with the
historic Atascadero Colony boundary. The 2045 General Plan Planning Area boundary (see Figure
1-2) covers about 32 square miles. The following is a more detailed summary of the purpose and
size of each major boundary.
City Limits
The Atascadero City limits encompass approximately 26 square miles, or 16,738 acres, as of 2024.
The City has land use authority over all properties within these limits, except for properties owned
by the State of California, San Luis Obispo County, and public school districts.
Urban Services Line (USL)
Atascadero’s Urban Services Line (USL) designates land within the City limits where services, in
particular water and sewer, are provided or may be provided in the future. Due to topography,
environmental, and physical constraints, rural residential development is and will remain the
predominant land use development pattern outside the USL.
Sphere of Influence (SOI)
The SOI represents adjacent unincorporated areas that currently, or may in the future, receive
City services. The San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCo,
identifies two unincorporated areas within the City’s SOI, totaling approximately five square
miles, or 3,466 acres. The most significant is a property known as Eagle Ranch, abutting
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-7
Atascadero’s southern City boundary. Eagle Ranch contains existing colony lots (452) and is
subject to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between San Luis Obispo County and the City of
Atascadero that guides the future annexation and development of this area.
The “Big Moves”
The 2045 General Plan process involved extensive community and decision-maker discussions
regarding future growth and evolving community character. This engagement process
(summarized above) helped inform the goals, policies, actions, and programs included in this
General Plan. While each chapter discusses specific topics, the community and City Council
identified a series “Big Moves” that establish the overarching focus of the 2045 General Plan. The
Big Moves represent key land use objectives and strategies that will help advance the Vision and
Guiding Principles (see Chapter 2) and define how the community grows and evolves into the
future.
CREATE A MIX OF
HOUSING TYPES
ATTRACT NEW
INDUSTRIES AND
HIGHER WAGE JOBS
IMPROVE MOBILITY,
ACCESS,AND
SAFETY
ADDRESS PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE
NEEDS
ENSURE FISCAL
SUSTAINAIBLITY
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-8
Big Move A
Create a Mix of Housing
This 2045 General Plan identifies ways to support future community needs and choices by
expanding the types, formats, and affordability of new housing in Atascadero.
Key Policy Considerations
Allow higher-density residential 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, amenities, and activities.
Consider development incentives for projects that provide needed workforce housing
near areas of employment.
Encourage incremental infill housing in traditionally single-family areas that maintains the
character and neighborhood scale (second units, duplexes, cottage clusters).
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-9
Big Move B
Attract New Industries and Higher Wage Jobs
The 2045 General Plan identifies ways to cultivate a successful, resilient, and diverse business
environment that supports existing and new businesses, attracts innovative and emerging
industries, and increases higher wage jobs in Atascadero.
Key Policy Considerations
Encourage business investment through targeted regulatory incentives and infrastructure
prioritization (onsite parking reductions, infrastructure upgrades).
Actively market Atascadero as a business-friendly City, and engage technology, research
and development, and similar industries to locate in the City.
Provide opportunities for flexible building uses and conversion of spaces within key
commercial and mixed-use areas.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-10
Big Move C
Improve Mobility, Access, and Safety
The 2045 General Plan identifies ways to create and maintain a circulation network that provides
safe, efficient, and convenient mobility choices.
Key Policy Considerations
Enhance multi-modal street design and amenities along El Camino Real and Morro Road
to encourage and accommodate more walking and biking.
Create a network of emergency routes for wildfire-prone areas that provide safe
evacuation for residents and efficient entry for first responders.
Prioritize key collector streets for multi-modal improvements to enhance mobility options.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-11
Big Move D
Address Public Infrastructure Needs
The 2045 General Plan identifies ways to maintain adequate and efficient backbone infrastructure
to support current and future community, business, and development needs in Atascadero.
Key Policy Considerations
Expand telecommunications infrastructure and public utilities to and within key
employment areas.
Implement streetscape improvements along El Camino Real and Morro Road near major
planned residential and employment nodes to incentivize new development.
Develop fiscal strategies for maintaining and expanding key infrastructure.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-12
Big Move E
Ensure Fiscal Sustainability
The 2045 General Plan identifies ways to balance new public investment and private development
to maintain sustainable and resilient fiscal resources for the City.
Key Policy Considerations
Prioritize public investments that have a positive influence on long-term economic
growth, including focusing infrastructure improvements within employment-generating
areas.
Use financing mechanisms that attract new development that contributes to near-term
investment and long-term infrastructure maintenance.
Acknowledge the fiscal implications of different land use types and the necessity of
maintaining a balanced land use mix to mitigate fiscal vulnerabilities during variable
market cycles.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-13
General Plan Chapters
The 2045 General Plan is organized into the following chapters.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Describes the context of Atascadero and the 2045 General Plan process, including the extensive
community outreach and feedback that informed goals, policies, actions, and programs going
forward. It also identifies the Planning Area, provides an overview of general plan requirements,
presents the “Big Moves,” and summarizes the approach, structure, and key components of the
2045 General Plan.
Chapter 2: General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles
Presents the community’s vision for Atascadero and guiding principles that will shape the vision.
Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Form Element
Fulfills the State requirements for the Land Use Element and identifies policies to preserve and
foster community character when exploring opportunities for growth. This chapter outlines goals
and policies for development citywide, as well as for unique areas within Atascadero.
Chapter 4: Economic Development Element
Represents a topic emphasized by community members and City leaders, but it is not required by
State law. This chapter provides policies to diversify the economic base and expand employment
opportunities by attracting new businesses and supporting existing businesses.
Chapter 5: Housing Element
Fulfills State requirements and certified by the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) in January 2021 as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element update process.
Adopted by the City Council in November 2020, the City of Atascadero 2021-2028 Housing
Element is a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe,
decent, and affordable housing for residents. In accordance with State law, Housing Elements are
updated every eight years and thus is on a different update cycle than this General Plan
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
Fulfills State requirements for the Circulation Element and outlines policies to balance all modes
of travel throughout Atascadero, with an emphasis on multi-modal transportation along major
corridors, strategies to improve circulation at key intersections and freeway overpasses, and
identifying opportunities for expanded bicycle routes and pedestrian connections and trails.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-14
Chapter 7: Recreation and Open Space Element
Fulfills State requirements for the Conservation and Open Space Elements, which focus on
resource preservation, park space, and recreation resources.
Chapter 8: Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Addresses topics required for the Safety and Circulation Elements, including water supply,
storage, and delivery, wastewater collection and treatment, flood control and stormwater
management, solid waste management, energy, and telecommunications.
Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Fulfills State requirements for the Safety and Noise Elements. This chapter establishes goals and
policies regarding adequate emergency services and response systems, encompassing both
preventative and proactive practices. It also outlines policies to protect the community from
wildland fire hazards, noise, hazardous materials, adverse effects of climate change, and
geological events.
Key Terms
Each chapter contains goals, policies, and actions crafted to achieve the community’s vision.
A goal is an overall statement of community desires and consists of a broad statement of
purpose or direction. For each goal in the 2045 General Plan, associated and more
definitive policy statements follow.
A policy provides more specific guidance to the City Council, Planning Commission, other
City commissions and boards, and City staff in their review of development proposals and
other actions taken.
Implementation actions further articulate how the City will achieve its goals and policies.
Implementation Categories
The 2045 General Plan is implemented in a variety of ways. Each policy and action include one or
more of the abbreviations below to identify how they will be implemented. Many policies are
implemented through City legislative or regulatory actions, while others require either new
research or community partnerships. This approach of tracking how each policy is implemented
allows City decision-makers and staff, business and property owners, residents, and the entire
Atascadero community to actively monitor General Plan implementation progress.
Development Review [DR]
Many General Plan policies are implemented through regulations based on the City’s “police
power” to protect public health, safety, and welfare. City ordinances also create a development
review process that provides for review of individual project proposals and authorizes the City to
approve, conditionally approve, or deny projects based on their consistency with the General
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-15
Plan. The following plans, ordinances, and procedures are commonly used by the City to
implement the General Plan:
Specific Plans
Zoning Code
Objective Design Standards
Design Guidelines
Subdivision Code
Building Code
Development Review Process
Annexation Requirements
Master Plans [MP]
The City has adopted master plans, strategies, and programs for various City services and
facilities, types of development, and geographic areas. These are prepared to provide more
specific direction for decision-makers, staff, and the public about policy and program decisions in
the future. They are not elements or components of the General Plan; rather, they are tools that
implement the General Plan. Specific General Plan implementation programs call for the annual
or periodic review of many of these master plans, strategies, and programs, in addition to
adoption of new ones.
Financing and Budgeting [FB]
The development, maintenance, and operation of public facilities such as parks and civic buildings
require financial resources derived from various sources. Programming of City capital projects
and their funding, as outlined in the Capital Improvement Projects list, is updated annually. The
following revenue sources used by or available to the City will continue to support the
development, maintenance, and operation of public facilities and services:
Property Tax Revenue
Sales Tax Revenue
User Fees
Development Impact and Linkage Fees
Community Facilities and Special Assessment Districts
Municipal Bonds
Special Taxes
Regional Agency, State, and Federal Grants
Other Regional Agency, State, and Federal Funding
Studies and Reports [SR]
The City conducts studies and produces reports to collect and evaluate information related to
specific issues. These studies and reports are undertaken at the direction of the City Council as
needed or are prepared annually to report on the status and implementation of the General Plan.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-16
Services and Operations [SO]
The City provides a broad range of services to its residents, businesses, and visitors, and manages
and operates its facilities to meet community needs. How the City provides services and carries
out its operations influence the effectiveness of General Plan implementation.
Agency Coordination [AC]
The City must coordinate with numerous local, regional, State, and Federal agencies to implement
the General Plan. These agencies provide services, facilities, or funding, and administer
regulations that directly or indirectly affect many issues addressed in the General Plan. The
following is a partial list of public agencies that may play a role in implementing the General Plan:
Adjacent jurisdictions, including San Luis Obispo County, with which Atascadero shares
certain municipal services and facilities
Local water provider
Regional agencies such as SLO Council of Governments
State agencies such as Caltrans, General Services, State Parks, the State Lands
Commission, The Water Quality Control Board, the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and the California Environmental Protection Agency
Federal agencies such as U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, the U.S. Park Service, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
Partnerships with the Private Sector [PA]
The City may coordinate its activities with private sector efforts to improve public service delivery,
manage public sector assets, or leverage private sector investment. By exploring new
partnerships with the private sector, the City can use its technical, management, and financial
resources in creative ways to achieve the goals of the General Plan.
Public Information and Education [PI]
A critical City function is providing information to residents and the business community about
the policies and programs being carried out to achieve community goals. This is done either
digitally (City website, email blasts, social media) or through physical materials (mailers,
newspaper ads).
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-17
User Groups
The 2045 General Plan is intended for use by a variety of individuals and organizations, including
residents, businesses, developers, City staff, the City Council, and appointed boards and
commissions.
Residents
For Atascadero residents, the General Plan indicates: 1) the overall uses that are permitted in
various Atascadero neighborhoods and districts, 2) the long-range plans and changes that may
affect different areas of the community, 3) the programs and services the City will develop or
refine to improve quality of life, and 4) the policies the City will use to evaluate future
development applications. Sections of the General Plan of most interest to residents include the
Vision and Guiding Principles (see Chapter 2), Land Use and Community Form Element (see
Chapter 3), Mobility Element (see Chapter 6), Recreation and Open Space Element (see Chapter
7), and Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element (see Chapter 9).
Businesses
For Atascadero businesses, the General Plan outlines the actions the City will take in support of
local business and to expand and diversify the local economy. General Plan sections of most
interest to businesses include the Vision and Guiding Principles (see Chapter 2), Land Use and
Community Form Element (see Chapter 3), Economic Development Element (see Chapter 4),
Mobility Element (see Chapter 6), and Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element (see Chapter
9).
Developers
For developers looking to build in and contribute in a positive manner to Atascadero, the General
Plan provides an overview of the Atascadero community, summarizes its vision, and outlines the
overarching policies and expectations for development. Developers should review all elements of
the General Plan to gain an understanding of challenges and opportunities related to land use
and economic development. Other applicable documents, such as specific plans and the Zoning
Ordinance, should also be reviewed to gain a complete perspective on the City’s regulatory
documents and processes.
City Staff
City staff uses the General Plan to make decisions related to programs and services, capital
improvement projects, and land use and development applications. The Plan also provides the
goal and policy framework for City staff to make land use recommendations to the City Council,
Planning Commission, and other boards and commissions. In addition, the General Plan provides
a detailed implementation program that identifies actions to be completed by City staff. The
implementation programs can be used as a guide to establish annual work programs and budgets.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 1-18
City Council, Boards, and Commissions
For the City Council and appointed boards and commissions, the General Plan guides policy and
development decisions and actions on capital improvement projects. Future land use and
development decisions and infrastructure improvements must be consistent with the General
Plan.
563 ft
S
A
N
T
A
L
U
C
I
A
R
A
N
G
E
Cambria
605
CONSTANTINE
ROCK
S
A
N
T
A
L
U
C
I
A
BA
N
K
Salin
a
s
Riv
e
r
CHOLAME
HILLS
BLACK
MOUNTAIN
S
A
N
T
A
L
U
C
I
A
R
A
N
G
E
C
H
O
L
A
M
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
TA
B
LE MOUNTAIN
Lake Nacimiento
Whitley Gardens
Atascadero
Paso Robles
S
a
li
n
a
s
Riv
er
S is qu oc River
Estero
Bay
NIPOMO
MESA
IRISH HILLS
GARCIA MOU
NT
A
I
N
SANT
A
MAR
IA
V
A
LLEY
San Luis
Obispo
Cayucos
Oceano
Nipomo
Morro Bay
Arroyo Grande
San Luis Obispo
Santa Maria
SOLOMON
HILLS
CASMALIA
HILLS Orcutt
2920 ft
C
a
lif
o
r
n
i
a
A
q
u
e
d
u
ct
SUNFLOWER
VALLEY
ANTELOPE
PLAIN
KETTLEMAN
HILLS
ANTE
L
OP
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
TE
M
B
L
O
R
RA
N
G
E
K
E
T
T
L
E
M
A
N
P
L
A
I
N
Lost Hills
4901 ft
Cuyama River
LA PANZA
RANGE
CUYAMA
VALLEY
CA
R
RI
Z
O
P
L
A
I
N
C
AL
I
E
N
TE
R
A
N
G
E
T
E
M
B
L
O
R
R
A
N
G
E
S
I
E
R
R
A
M
A
D
R
E
M
O
U
NT
AIN
S
E
L
K
H
O
R
N
PL
AIN
Derby Acres
SIER
R
A
MADRE MOU
NTAINS
0 4 8 122Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Basemap Features
Atascadero City Limit
San Luis Obispo County
San Luis Obispo County Cities
Highways
Major Roads
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Rivers + Waterbodies
Regional Context
Figure 1-1
\ 7
\L
\ .r
(
\
"
II m
CJ
CJ
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
Central Coast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Planning Area
Figure 1-2
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
a
,
'I
I
Los Padres National Forest
®--=======i---=============i II
CJ
'._ - J
CJ
1111
OUR CITY , OUR PLAN
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 2: General Plan Vision
and Guiding Principles
The Vision Statement and Guiding Principles form the General Plan foundation. The Vision
Statement expresses the collective community philosophy that will shape Atascadero through
2045 and beyond. The vision does not describe an end statement; rather, it defines the framework
for decision making moving forward. The principles further articulate the vision by focusing on
the specific growth, change, and preservation frameworks for decisions. These represent the
highest-level policy direction of this General Plan. All goals, policies, strategies, and actions have
been crafted to be consistent with the Vision Statement and Guiding Principles.
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 2 General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 2-2
Vision Statement
To prioritize goals and actions in the 2045 General Plan, the City developed an overarching Vision
Statement based on extensive community ideas and feedback received during the General Plan
update process. This Vision Statement shown below reflects the ideas, thoughts, and desires
heard from residents, local business and property owners, elected and appointed officials, and
other members of the Atascadero community. The statement expresses a bold vision for
Atascadero, both as a goal and lens through which long-term planning decisions will be made.
2045 General Plan Vision Statement
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.
Guiding Principles
The Guiding Principles are rooted in community voices heard during initial engagement activities
and City Council’s strategic planning initiatives. They will both guide the goals, policies, strategies,
and programs in this General Plan and future decisions the City will make related to
implementation of this plan. These principles, organized into five topical categories, essentially
provide the decision-making lens for City officials, staff, and decision-makers.
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.
Chapter 2 General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 2-3
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.
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 3: Land Use and
Community Form Element
Introduction
Nestled between the Salinas River to the east and oak-covered hillsides of the Santa Lucia
Mountains to the west, Atascadero is a vibrant community with a rich history and rural
community form. While Atascadero’s nascent land use pattern was established by and built to
conform to the 1913 Colony Plan, over 100 years of development, evolving community needs,
and external influences—most notably the 1954 construction of Highway 101 through the middle
of Atascadero—have resulted in a community largely organized around two major corridors: El
Camino Real and Highway 41. Businesses predominate along the corridors, with single-family
residential neighborhoods extending east and west. This Land Use and Community Form Element
accounts for the City’s history of growth and development but is intentionally forward thinking
about how Atascadero can evolve into a more mixed-use and job-rich community, supported by
a range of new housing types, businesses formats, walkable neighborhoods, and a dynamic and
active Downtown.
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-2
Grounded on the community vision (see Chapter 2) this chapter establishes the framework for
short- and long-term decisions about land use and development patterns. The primary objective
is to accommodate moderate growth that respects established neighborhoods, historical assets,
and natural landscapes.
Integral to the vision is preservation of the qualities that distinguish the community. Residents
consistently tout the balance Atascadero achieves between accommodating rural lifestyles and
providing places more suburban in nature. This General Plan continues to implement the Urban
Services Line (see Figure 1-2).
Land Use and Community Form Priorities
To ensure Atascadero has the right mix of land uses, range of housing types, job-rich commercial
and mixed-use districts, a thriving economy, and vibrant Downtown, this General Plan addresses
the following land use and community attributes.
Atascadero’s Authentic Character
Atascadero is a unique place. The community values Atascadero’s special character, with a strong
will to preserve these features when exploring opportunities for growth. The people make
Atascadero the supportive, family-oriented community that it is, and the General Plan needs to
promote areas to gather, recreate, socialize, and conduct business as the community grows and
evolves.
Rural Residential Focus
Atascadero’s predominant land use, in terms of total acreage, consists of large lot homesites with
a rural character, encompassing over 9,000 acres (just over 41 percent of the City). Most of these
homesites lie west of Highway 101, beyond the Urban Services Line, and extend to the northern
and southern edges of the City limits. Terrain and the absence of sewer service will continue to
limit growth west of Highway 101.
Commercial Corridors
Commercial businesses extend over seven miles along El Camino Real and Morro Road south of
El Camino. Industrial uses are concentrated along the northeastern fringe of the City, along Traffic
Way and the Salinas River. No other areas of Atascadero are suitable for business activity based
on topography and infrastructure limitations, so land use decisions will need to account for the
City’s strategic job growth objectives and provide space for desired local businesses.
Housing Affordability
Housing affordability is a continuing concern voiced by the community, both locally and
throughout the region. The type and size of housing has made it challenging for younger residents
and first-time home buyers to find housing that they can afford. Regional desirability and the
increasing ease of remote work resulted in people moving to Atascadero from the Los Angeles
and Bay Area regions, tightening the housing market. Expanding the range of housing types and
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-3
affordability in Atascadero has become more critical to meet the needs of long-time residents.
Higher density, multi-family, and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) projects all represent ways to
increase the supply of affordable housing for the local workforce.
Jobs-Housing Balance
In 2024, Atascadero had a job-to-housing ratio of 0.75, indicating substantially more households
than jobs in the City. Over 10,700 Atascadero residents were employed outside of the City in 2019,
while 6,000 employees traveled to Atascadero for work. The jobs-to-housing imbalance has
persisted over time, with one reason being that the land area available to support large-scale
employment centers is limited. However, evolving technologies and the ways that business is
conducted mean that limited space can be used more efficiently. The City’s economic
development strategy focuses on attracting a greater diversity of businesses that create new jobs
for residents, as well as placemaking to support commercial synergy and vitality. Land use policy
in this element supports this objective.
Strategic, Targeted, and Managed Growth
The City is committed to accommodating and planning for future growth through higher allowed
housing densities and expanded opportunities for job-generating businesses, all within the Urban
Services Line. Areas targeted for change and growth are close to the Downtown and along El
Camino Real and Morro Road, creating a synergy of focused land uses at key nodes along the each
corridor.. This element supports these two key City objectives, and any public infrastructure
improvements needed to support this growth will occur in line with these objectives.
Moving toward a 1.0 jobs/housing ratio, meaning local employment opportunities will
increase. This objective aims to achieve a balance between the number of available jobs
and the number of workforce residents within a community, potentially resulting in
enhanced economic vitality, improved quality of life and affordability, and reduced
commutes and vehicle miles traveled. These initiatives will limit environmental impacts
associated with growth.
Focusing new housing production on the creation of higher-density development, thereby
diversifying the housing stock and accommodating households of all income levels. This
includes a combination of traditional multi-family style development, missing middle style
development, and incremental neighborhood infill development to create a range of
housing types and settings.
Land use policy will allow for approximately 4,800 new jobs and 4,500 new dwelling units relative
to the 2024 baseline. Planned residential density increases could increase Atascadero’s
population by approximately 7,800 people. The forecasted growth included in this General Plan
is shown on Table 3-1.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-4
Table 3-1: General Plan Forecasted Growth
Type Baseline
(2024) General Plan Horizon Year
(2045)
Net Change
(2024 – 2045)
Dwelling Units (total) 11,529 15,976 +4,447
Single-Units 9,594 9,900 +306
Multi-Units 1,935 5,907 +3,972
Population1 30,296 38,112 +7,816
Employees 8,644 13,438 +4,794
Jobs/Housing Ratio2 0.75 0.84 +0.9
1. Population includes group quarters (1,318) at Atascadero State Hospital.
2. Jobs/Housing Ratio is an equation used to determine how many jobs are available in a community relative to the
number of dwelling units (homes). The policy approach assumes that a “balanced community” has a 1.0 ratio (or
1:1), which strives to match the number of local jobs to the number of available housing units. This approach does
not require residents to work in town; rather, it looks to provide the opportunity for residents to have jobs within the
community.
Maintaining the historic Colony land use pattern and rural character of Atascadero is of utmost
importance to residents. This will be achieved using Placetypes to guide and accommodate
Atascadero’s desired growth through 2045. Placetypes, or land use classifications, illustrate the
type, character, and density/intensity of development envisioned. This will ensure compatibility
with Atascadero’s established character while creating a vision for growth.
Placetypes and Land Use Plan
To identify existing and planned land uses throughout the Planning Area, this General Plan uses a
designator system consisting of “Placetypes.” Each Placetype category defines both the primary
uses of land allowed and the character of those uses. Placetypes are broad enough to provide
flexibility in implementation and clear enough to provide sufficient direction to carry out the
General Plan. While most of the Placetypes reflect existing and long-established development
types such as Rural Residential, Commercial, and Industrial, three new Placetypes are established
as part of this General Plan: High Density Multi-Family, Mixed Use, and Innovation/Flex.
Table 3-2 summarizes each Placetype, including generally allowed uses, development intensities,
and corresponding zoning districts. The extent to which properties may be developed or
redeveloped over time is expressed in terms of density (ranges) for residential uses and intensity
(maximums) for nonresidential development.
Density reflects how many units may be built per acre of land (dwelling units per acre). Intensity
is analyzed using a floor-area ratio (FAR) metric, which measures the building square footage on
a property relative to the size of that property. Density and intensity do not control building
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-5
height, setbacks, required open space area, or other development parameters. The Zoning Code
establishes how density and intensity are implemented citywide through development standards
and other provisions.
The General Plan Land Use Plan (see Figure 3-1) illustrates the planned distribution, location, and
extent of future land uses within Atascadero and the sphere of influence. Beyond what is required
by State law, each Placetype is further described to inspire the general character, desired building
types, and streetscape elements.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-6
Table 3-2: Placetypes
Placetype Density and Intensity Primary Use(s) Corresponding
Zoning Districts Character
RURAL RESIDENTIAL
One home on a lot generally one acre
or larger in size, depending on slope
conditions
0.1 – 1 unit
per gross acre Residential
Residential Rural –
2.5-10 acres
Residential
Suburban: 1.5-2.5
acres
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
One home on a lot generally less than
one acre in size
1 – 4 unit
per gross or net acre
(zone district
dependent)
Residential
Residential Single
Family – 1 acre
Residential Single
Family – 0.5 acre
Residential Small
Lot Single Family
LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and
cottage clusters
5 – 12 units
per net acre Residential Low Density Multi-
Family Residential
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-7
Table 3-2: Placetypes
Placetype Density and Intensity Primary Use(s) Corresponding
Zoning Districts Character
MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
cottage clusters, townhomes, and
mobile home parks
13 – 24 units
per net acre Residential
Medium Density
Multi-Family
Residential
HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
Apartments and condominiums
25 – 36 units
per net acre Residential High Density Multi-
Family Residential
MIXED USE
Combined commercial and
residential uses on a project site
20 – 36 units
per net acre
1.0 FAR
Residential
Commercial
Civic and
Institutional
Mixed Use –
Commercial 1
Mixed Use –
Commercial 2
Mixed Use – Office
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-8
Table 3-2: Placetypes
Placetype Density and Intensity Primary Use(s) Corresponding
Zoning Districts Character
DOWNTOWN MIXED USE
Mix of civic, dining, shopping,
recreation, residential,
entertainment, and other pedestrian-
oriented uses
20 – 45 units
per net acre
3.0 FAR
Residential
Commercial
Civic and
Institutional
Downtown
Commercial
Downtown Office
COMMERCIAL
Retail stores, offices, restaurants,
entertainment, and service uses
0.6 FAR Commercial Commercial
Commercial Service
INNOVATION/FLEX
Research and development, light
manufacturing, creative industries,
and dining
0.6 FAR
Commercial
Light Industrial
Commercial
Innovation
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-9
Table 3-2: Placetypes
Placetype Density and Intensity Primary Use(s) Corresponding
Zoning Districts Character
INDUSTRIAL
Manufacturing, materials processing,
assembly, and limited storage
0.8 FAR
Industrial and
Warehousing
Transportation
and Utilities
Industrial
PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC
Government facilities, public schools,
and private utilities
0.8 FAR Civic and
Institutional Public
CONSERVATION/PARKS/OPEN SPACE
Parks and recreation and community-
serving uses, habitat preserves, rivers
and creeks, other protected lands
Not applicable
Conservation
Parks and
Recreation
Open Space
Recreation – Parks
Conservation/
Parks/OS
Conservation/
Parks/OS
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-10
Table 3-2: Placetypes
Placetype Density and Intensity Primary Use(s) Corresponding
Zoning Districts Character
AGRICULTURE
Livestock, crop production, and one
home on a lot one acre or larger in
size, depending on slope conditions
0.1-0.4 units
per gross acre
Agriculture
Residential
Agriculture
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-11
RURAL RESIDENTIAL
General Location
Rural Residential is the prevalent Placetype outside the Urban Services Line. Within the Urban
Services Line, Rural Residential is concentrated west of Highway 101 and east of El Camino Real
north from San Benito Road and east from the Southern Pacific Railroad corridor.
Character and Typical Development
Rural Residential neighborhoods are well established and rural in nature. Development is
characterized by large lots (1.5 to 10+ acres) and large setbacks, single-family detached homes,
vacant land, and livestock.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The road network in Rural Residential areas supports low traffic volumes and is primarily
composed of winding, tree-lined local streets, some of which have no outlet.
Defining Features
Steep topography
Ample private outdoor space
Dependent on onsite wastewater facilities
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-12
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
General Location
Single-Family Residential is the prevalent Placetype within the Urban Services Line, outside the
Downtown core and commercial corridors. This Placetype buffers the Rural Residential Placetype
from other, more intensive residential and commercial uses.
Character and Typical Development
Single-Family Residential neighborhoods are well established and suburban in nature.
Development is characterized by medium to large lots (less than or equal to one acre) occupied
by single-family detached homes. Additional characteristics include irregular block shapes,
curvilinear streets, absence of streetlights, and limited or no sidewalks. The smaller lot size zone
within this designation allow opportunities for missing middle and gentle density style infill
development.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The road network in Single-Family Residential areas supports low traffic volumes and is primarily
composed of narrow local streets. Key connections from Single-Family Residential neighborhoods
to major corridors/destinations include San Anselmo Road, San Jacinto Avenue, Curbaril Avenue,
Portola Road, and Santa Lucia Road.
Defining Features
Private outdoor space
Proximity to nearby parks, recreation opportunities, shopping, and public facilities
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-13
LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
General Location
Low Density Multi-Family neighborhoods are concentrated adjacent to more urban uses,
positioned between the Mixed Use and Single-Family Residential Placetypes.
Character and Typical Development
Low Density Multi-Family neighborhoods continue to grow in Atascadero, providing a mix of
housing types and affordability. Development in this Placetype is urban in nature and
characterized by detached and attached multi-unit development (cottage cluster, duplex, triplex,
fourplex, multiplex with 5+ units). Additional characteristics include irregular block shapes,
streets that run parallel and/or connect to major corridors, streetlights, on-street parking, and
sidewalks.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The road network in Low Density Multi-Family areas supports low traffic volumes and is primarily
composed of local streets. Key connections from Low Density Multi-Family neighborhoods to
major corridors/destinations include San Benito Road, Rosario Avenue, Curbaril Avenue,
Atascadero Avenue, and San Andres Avenue.
Defining Features
Private and/or shared amenities (e.g., entries, outdoor space, driveway, pedestrian path)
Pedestrian and bicycle access to and from nearby parks, recreation opportunities,
shopping, and public facilities
Consolidated or shared parking
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-14
MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
General Location
Medium Density Multi-Family is concentrated along major corridors, including El Camino Real,
Morro Road, and Traffic Way, in addition to adjacent streets. This Placetype acts as a buffer
between nonresidential or mixed-use and lower-density residential uses.
Character and Typical Development
Medium Density Multi-Family neighborhoods continue to grow in Atascadero, providing a mix of
housing types and affordability. Development in this Placetype is urban in nature and
characterized by detached and attached multi-unit development (duplex, triplex, fourplex, and
multiplex with 5+ units). Additional characteristics include irregular block shapes, streets that run
parallel and/or connect to major corridors, streetlights, and sidewalks.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The road network in Medium Density Multi-Family areas supports moderate traffic volumes and
is primarily composed of collector and arterial streets. Key connections from Low Density Multi-
Family neighborhoods to major corridors/destinations include La Linia Avenue, Santa Ysabel
Avenue, Santa Ynez Avenue, Curbaril Avenue, Atascadero Avenue, and San Andres Avenue.
Defining Features
Private and/or shared amenities (e.g., entries, outdoor space, driveway, pedestrian path)
Pedestrian and bicycle access to and from nearby parks, recreation opportunities, and
public facilities
On-street and consolidated or shared parking
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-15
HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
General Location
High Density Multi-Family is concentrated along the southern segment of El Camino Real,
between Paloma Park and Santa Rosa Road. Additional High-Density Multi-Family areas are
located near the Downtown core.
Character and Typical Development
This Placetype is intended to promote high-density residential development to support
commercial nodes and enhance neighborhood vibrancy. This Placetype is characterized by
moderate residential building heights of a more urban character, including apartments and
condominiums with shared entrances and open spaces. Lower-scale structures are typically found
in areas transitioning to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Transitions between Placetypes
are established with development standards in the Zoning Code.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Key connections from High Density Multi-Family neighborhoods to major corridors/destinations
include El Bordo Avenue, Principal Avenue, Santa Lucia Avenue, and Atascadero Avenue. High
Density Multi-Family areas front or back up to El Camino Real.
Defining Features
Private and/or shared amenities (e.g., entries, outdoor space)
Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connectivity to and from Downtown
On-street and consolidated shared parking
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-16
MIXED USE
General Location
Mixed Use is generally concentrated near major intersections, as well as along El Camino Real and
Morro Road between El Camino Real and Atascadero Lake Park.
Character and Typical Development
This Placetype is intended to promote a flexible and compatible mix of residential and commercial
uses in focused areas. A commercial land use dominates the street facing façade or ground floor
of a mixed-use project, while office and residential dominate the upper floors (vertical mixed-use)
or buildings that are set back from a public street (horizontal mixed-use). Each area that includes
the Mixed Use Placetype is unique. The composition and mix of permitted uses are established
by zoning districts in the Zoning Code. Development may allow for a horizontal or vertical mix of
commercial and residential uses, depending on zoning district. This Placetype is characterized by
moderate-scale residential and commercial building heights that promote urban character.
Buildings are oriented toward the street to encourage pedestrian activity.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Mixed Use areas generally abut arterial and collector roads and have direct frontage along these
major corridors. Parking is generally on-site with limited street parking.
Defining Features
Multi-family residential developments, either above or adjacent to commercial uses
Neighborhood-serving retail, office, and services
Employment centers
Active ground-floor uses
High pedestrian and bicycle activity due to streetscape improvements
Focal points of economic investment and activity
Shared and on-street parking
Shared or private amenities
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-17
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-18
DOWNTOWN MIXED USE
General Location
Downtown extends north of Morro Road and south of Rosario Avenue along El Camino Real,
Traffic Way, and adjacent cross streets.
Character and Typical Development
Downtown Mixed Use encourages an eclectic and complementary mix of uses, pedestrian-scale
development, and locally owned retail and restaurant businesses with upper-story residential and
office units. Ground-floor uses should consist of businesses with a weekday, evening, and
weekend presence. The Downtown Mixed Use Placetype is characterized by moderate to high
building heights to promote urban character. This district has the highest density of any district.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The 0.6-mile Downtown corridor extends along El Camino Real from Rosario Avenue to the
intersection of State Route 41. High levels of pedestrian and bicycle use occur throughout the
Downtown core, and this district has the greatest access to transit. A street grid, with consistent
block shapes and sizes, surrounds City Hall. Short walking distances, sidewalks, street trees, street
parking, and access to the Sunken Gardens Park and the Salinas River corridor encourage
pedestrian activity.
Defining Features
Civic center
Vibrant, walkable, town center
Active ground-floor commercial uses, many of which are open during evening hours
and/or weekends
Buildings have consistent orientation with no or shallow front setbacks or with recessed
storefronts for outdoor dining
Minimized on-site parking
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-19
COMMERCIAL
General Location
Commercial Placetypes are concentrated along El Camino Real adjacent to major intersections
with San Ramon, Del Rio, San Anselmo, Morro Road and Santa Rosa Road, particularly where
these intersections have access to Highway 101. This Placetype is generally adjacent to Mixed
Use, Innovation/Flex, and Multi-Family Placetypes.
Character and Typical Development
Commercial uses include regional- and local-serving retail, restaurants, office, tourist, and service
businesses with easy access to and from residential neighborhoods. Development is characterized
by single-use commercial buildings, multi-tenant shopping centers, and office buildings.
Commercial tenants may include businesses targeted toward visitors to Atascadero, such as
breweries, distilleries, and recreation hubs. Uses with outdoor storage are not typically permitted.
Residential and Mixed-Use are adjacent to, but not within, this district to prioritize commercial
activities and reduce conflict between uses.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Commercial areas abut El Camino Real and are in locations with easy access to Highway 101.
Multi-modal access is encouraged as well as on-street parking to supplement on-site parking
areas.
Defining Features
Retail and employment based
Day-to-day needs for residents, visitors, and employees
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-20
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-21
INNOVATION/FLEX
General Location
Innovation/Flex is concentrated along El Camino Real between Santa Cruz Road and San Anselmo
Road, Morro Road and Curbaril, and Palomar and Principal Avenue.
Character and Typical Development
This Placetype is intended to promote opportunities for startup businesses and head-of-
household jobs and provide spaces that can be adaptable to a variety of compatible uses as
workforce trends evolve. This Placetype should attract concentrations of production, design, and
maker-space businesses as well as uses that support those businesses and the people that work
there. Development is characterized by multi-tenant buildings, often with office or retail uses
oriented toward the street and light industrial/manufacturing in the back. Scale varies greatly
dependent upon the surrounding context and character. Innovation/Flex has the potential to
serve as a primary place for employment and commerce in the Central Coast region in support of
emerging technologies and space innovations. Uses with outdoor storage are not permitted
except in appropriate locations and limited quantities, and all subject to discretionary review.
Residential and Mixed-Use are adjacent to, but not within, this district to prioritize commercial
activities and reduce conflict between uses.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Innovation/Flex areas generally abut El Camino Real, with some areas along adjacent collector
roads. Most of the parking is located on-site, but some on-street parking may be provided.
Defining Features
Employment center providing opportunities for a mix of job types/experience
Desired industries and businesses include but are not limited to research and design, labs,
robotics and technology, and artisan business such as microbreweries, and small-scale
wineries and distilleries, as well as artisanal food and craft production
Supportive uses may include restaurants, hotels, and offices
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-22
INDUSTRIAL
General Location
Industrial is limited to two areas within Atascadero: along Traffic Way/Sycamore Road and as part
of the Woodlands Specific Plan (Las Lomas Neighborhood) at Halcon Road/the Southern Pacific
Railroad corridor.
Character and Typical Development
Industrial uses typically include heavy and moderately intense manufacturing, distribution, and
vehicle-related uses. Development consists of varying-sized industrial buildings, either as stand-
alone businesses or as part of an integrated development. These areas are intended to support
industry that contributes to the fiscal health of the City.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Industrial areas abut Sycamore Road, Traffic Way, and Halcon Road. As these areas abut streets
where pedestrian linkage to bordering uses is a priority, streets include pedestrian paths and bike
lanes. Where areas abut the Salinas River, incorporation of trails or landscape setbacks and
buffering to recreational areas is integrated. Parking is concentrated on-site.
Defining Features
Access to Highway 101 and State Route 41
Larger parcels for a mix of tenant uses
Buffers between industrial and surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, open space, large
setbacks, gradual changes in density)
Screening from the public rights-of-way
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-23
PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC
General Location
Public/Quasi-Public parcels are distributed throughout the City based on the location of existing
facilities, mostly within the Urban Services Line.
Character and Typical Development
Public/Quasi-Public parcels are set aside for governmental or semi-public facilities, such as
hospitals, schools, utilities, and government offices/facilities or related uses such as cemeteries.
However, such public facilities may also be allowed in areas with other Placetypes, provided they
comply with applicable Zoning Code standards.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
The road network that connects the Public/Quasi-Public Placetype to surrounding areas is
primarily composed of arterial and collector streets.
Defining Features
Civic buildings, formal public spaces, emergency services, schools, State facilities, and
community centers
Atascadero State Hospital
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-24
CONSERVATION/PARKS/OPEN SPACE
General Location
Most of the land designated Conservation/Parks/Open Space lies along the Salinas River,
Atascadero Creek, and Graves Creek. The Three Bridges Oak Preserve is the largest
Conservation/Open Space area outside the Urban Services Line. Multiple City parks are located
throughout the community to serve adjacent neighborhoods and citywide sports needs. The City
also includes Heilman Park, which is owned and maintained by the County of San Luis Obispo.
Character and Typical Development
The Conservation/Parks/Open Space Placetype applies to lands:
Currently used or planned for parks or recreation purposes, including trail corridors,
sports fields, community gathering spaces, and equestrian facilities
Identified as a park or creek reservation parcel
Established for conservation purposes due to the presence of sensitive wildlife or habitats
Land designated for these uses include both publicly and privately owned land. See Chapter 7 for
additional details, including a summary of park types.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Parks are located throughout the community, with larger scale facilities generally located off
arterials and collector streets and smaller neighborhood serving spaces off local roads. Parking
may be provided on-street or on-site.
Defining Features
Atascadero’s park system (as of 2024) includes regional parks, community parks,
neighborhood parks and special use parks, trails, equestrian facilities, natural areas, and
open space.
City recreation facilities include the Atascadero Lake Pavilion, Central Coast Zoo, and Colony Park
Community Center.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-25
AGRICULTURE
General Location
The Agriculture Placetype applies to two areas in Atascadero: an approximately 44-acre area
adjacent to Graves Creek south of Balboa Road and an approximately 27-acre area along the
Salinas River east of the Las Lomas neighborhood (Woodlands Specific Plan area).
Character and Typical Development
This Placetype designates lands to be used for agricultural activities, including field crops,
orchards, and ranching and livestock raising, with the Zoning Code identifying specific permitted
uses and operational standards. Allowed accessory uses include single-family detached homes
and housing for agriculture employees, as permitted by the Zoning Code. Uses may also allow
opportunities for public facing commercial uses such as event areas and bed and breakfasts.
Major Corridor(s) or Mobility Characteristics
Agricultural areas are largely served by local, rural roads.
Defining Features
Graves Creek
Orchards, cropland, grasslands, ranching and livestock, and undeveloped land
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-26
Land Use and Community Form Goals, Policies, and Actions
The following sections include goals, supporting policies, and implementation actions related to
the following topics:
Citywide Growth and Development
Key Nodes and Corridors
Morro Road (Highway 41)
Industrial Areas
Downtown
Citywide Growth and Development
Atascadero is a collection of wonderfully diverse neighborhoods, commercial centers, streets,
parks, and open space areas, all having their own unique character—and with some needing
focused attention to create more vibrancy and long-term community vitality. The following goals,
policies, and actions look to maintain the qualities that distinguish Atascadero and to further
neighborhood preservation, economic development, resource protection, and overall community
well-being objectives.
Goal LU-1: Growth integrated and compatible with established land use patterns and the
community aesthetic
Policy LU-1.1: Rural Character. Safeguard the rural character of Atascadero including the concept
of “elbow room,” which calls for maintaining larger minimum lot sizes and lower density and
intensity standards proportionate to distance from the Downtown core and major corridors.
Action A: Maintain performance standards for determining minimum residential lot size
in the Rural Residential Placetype.
Action B: Maintain “dark sky” requirements to minimize light pollution.
Action C: Maintain allowances for where livestock may be owned and kept within the
Rural Residential and Agriculture Placetypes.
Action D: Continue to require undergrounding of utilities for new development.
Policy LU-1.2: Urban Services Line (USL). Concentrate new and infill development within the
Urban Services Line in areas where utilities and public services exist or are planned.
Action A: Revisit density and intensity requirements for land use(s) if sewer extends into
new areas.
Action B: Maintain Rural Residential as the predominant use and limit the subdivision of
land beyond the USL.
Action C: Consider future planned density and intensity when repairing infrastructure and
ensure that infrastructure is sized to accommodate future growth.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-27
Policy LU-1.3: Character and Scale. Ensure new and infill development complements the
character and scale of existing neighborhoods, cultural resources, historic structures, and natural
landscapes.
Action A: Maintain design standards that address the transitions between multi-family
and mixed-use development and adjacent lower-density residential zones.
Action B: Provide parking/loading from secondary streets, wherever possible, to maintain
an active frontage along major corridors.
Action C: Create a transition in density of development on large parcels moving back from
El Camino Real.
Action D: Update or replace the Appearance Review Manual for nonresidential
development.
Action E: Undertake a comprehensive Zoning Code update.
Action F: Continue abatement programs to remove unsafe buildings and require the
cleanup of premises and vacant lots with code violations.
Policy LU-1.4: Gentle Density Infill. Allow opportunities for missing middle and gentle density
style infill development surrounding mixed-use and commercial corridors.
Action A: Support the development of multi-family residential, including missing middle
housing, in the neighborhoods adjacent to commercial corridors, including the
neighborhood bordered by Morro Road, Highway 101, and Portola Road, as a way to
increase density and maintain community character.
Policy LU-1.5: Historic Resources. Encourage the conservation and preservation of structures and
houses that have historical and architectural significance.
Action A: Maintain a comprehensive Historic Resources Inventory.
Action B: Continue to implement the California Historical Building Code in review,
approval, and design of projects involving historic resources.
Action C: Utilize the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Properties to assess proposed improvements to historic properties.
Action D: Develop incentives for retaining and rehabilitating Atascadero’s historic
resources, which may include exceptions to development regulations, conservation
districts, staff technical assistance, programs to facilitate relocation instead of demolition,
and Mill’s Act contracts.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-28
Policy LU-1.6: Specific Plans. Adopt, update, and implement specific plans as necessary to
address community needs and changing demographic, economic, and market conditions.
Action A: Require the preparation of a specific plan for single-family subdivision
developments over 100 units to address fiscal and environmental impacts, community
benefits, and neighborhood compatibility.
Action B: Update existing Specific Plans and Overlay Zones to be consistent with the
General Plan.
Action C: Utilize Specific Plans to streamline the development process and incentivize
development through modified development standards.
Policy LU-1.7: Regional Impacts. Coordinate with neighboring cities and community services
districts, the County of San Luis Obispo, and regional transportation agencies to plan for growth
and minimize regional impacts.
Action A: Continue to coordinate with the County to maintain rural land use patterns,
agriculture, and open space uses beyond the City limit.
Action B: Discourage land use changes by the County within the Colony boundary that
would result in more intensive or higher density development, particularly in
unincorporated areas and east of the Salinas River.
Action C: Develop financial agreement(s) with the County to recoup the costs to the City
if development occurs beyond the City limit that would rely on City services or
infrastructure.
Action D: Update the County Memorandum of Understanding requiring City comment on
development proposals in the area between Vineyard Drive and Cuesta Grade, between
the ridges east of the Salinas River, and Cerro Alto Campground.
Policy LU-1.8: Annexations. Ensure that growth beyond the City limit serves community needs,
enhances fiscal stability, and improves quality of life for community members.
Action A: Require annexation proposals align with the Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals,
and Policies included in this General Plan.
Action B: Oppose all development within the sphere of influence the site prior to
annexation.
Action C: Require the approval of a Specific Plan prior to the annexation of the Eagle Ranch
property.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-29
Key Nodes and Corridors
Atascadero is defined by its two major corridors: El Camino Real and Morro Road (Highway 41).
These thoroughfares have been the centers of retail, commercial, and office uses since
Atascadero’s historic Colony founding. They act as the “spines” of the community–connecting
residential neighborhoods to employment centers, schools, civic uses, parks, highways and
freeways, and adjacent cities. To support local and regional commercial, office, and housing
needs, these corridors must be improved, as described in the Mobility Element (see Chapter 6).
They should be enhanced with more pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities; supported by
focused development standards that promote placemaking and a pleasing pedestrian
environment; and encouraged to redevelop to meet the current and future community needs.
Focused and intentional development in Downtown and along the major corridors maintains
Atascadero’s “elbow room” principle, which calls for maintaining larger minimum lot sizes and
lower density and intensity standards proportionate to distance from the Downtown core and
major corridors. Areas of change and growth in this Plan center around the following principles:
Areas that support the growth and community design objectives outlined in the Vision
Statement and Guiding Principles (see Chapter 2).
Areas designated for and developed with commercial, office, mixed use, or industrial uses.
Areas along major corridors and near Highway 101 that have good access to local and
regional road networks, pedestrian and bicycle amenities, and civic destinations.
Areas that have infrastructure available to support new and more intensive commercial
and residential development.
Areas that have the potential to become more walkable and economically viable as new
and more intensive development occurs.
Areas where increased residential density can support intensified commercial activity and
economic vitality.
Underutilized commercial areas where the City can capitalize on redevelopment efforts
and shape development to accommodate uses that support the City’s desire for a more
balanced jobs-housing ratio.
Goal LU-2: Enhanced major corridors that serve regional and local needs by creating
focused, distinct, and economically viable nodes
Policy LU-2.1: Innovation/Flex Areas. Create innovation areas that allow and encourage a mix of
lighter, creative employment uses, entertainment, and services.
Action A: Allow property owners to convert and reuse existing buildings for creative
commercial, light industrial, and office use.
Action B: Maintain and update uses in the Innovation/Flex zone to allow for restaurant
and entertainment uses that are compatible with light industrial and artisan uses.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-30
Action C: Maintain innovation/flex areas for non-residential uses to prioritize commercial
activities without conflict with incompatible uses.
Policy LU-2.2: Commercial Vitality. Maintain key areas for commercial and employment uses that
are incompatible with integrated residential uses.
Action A: Focus commercial retail development at key nodes to create commercial synergy
and destinations for shopping and entertainment.
Action B: Maintain larger parcels of land to accommodate large format uses (e.g., business
headquarters, light manufacturing, accommodation, regional retail, and tourist-serving
uses) at strategic locations along major corridors and key nodes.
Action C: Maintain key commercial nodes for non-residential uses to prioritize commercial
activities without conflict with incompatible uses.
Policy LU-2.3: Mid-block Infill. Promote flexible land use patterns in areas between activity nodes
along El Camino Real and support increased residential densities adjacent to and along
commercial corridors to support commercial business activity and growth
Action A: Encourage infill mixed-use development between commercial nodes along El
Camino Real to support the economic vitality of commercial centers.
Action B: Explore flexibility in standards for mixed-use development on commercially
zoned mid-block infill lots where commercial use potential is limited.
Action C: Increase residential density in areas adjacent to key commercial nodes to
support commercial viability and economic vitality.
Action D: Consider utilizing Development Agreements to allow for mid-block multi-family
development in exchange for commercial development/redevelopment at key locations.
Policy LU-2.4: Mixed-Use Areas. Create mixed-use districts in locations that benefit from the
synergy of commercial and residential uses.
Action A: Focus vertical mixed-use development at key nodes where a ground floor
commercial presence is a priority.
Action B: Provide opportunities for horizontal mixed-use developments on deep or double
frontage lots where ground floor commercial uses are focused along the primary street
frontage.
Action C: Prioritize land uses in mixed-use areas that generate tax revenue, attract
economic activity, create jobs, and cater to residents and short-term visitors.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-31
Policy LU-2.5: Multi-Modal Corridors. Improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities along El Camino
Real and Morro Road. Major corridors should be safe, comfortable, and enjoyable for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and drivers alike.
Action A: Continue to make circulation and safety improvements in coordination and
collaboration with the Public Works Department and consistent with this General Plan
(see Chapter 6).
Action B: Require new development to provide pedestrian, bicycle, and trail alignments
and facilities consistent with the Mobility Element (see Chapter 6).
Action C: Adopt plan lines for new neighborhood streets that allow for and support
orderly development with increased residential density.
Action D: Support Caltrans’ completion of its complete streets plan to include pedestrian
facilities and a safe buffer between the bike lane and travel/parking lanes.
Action E: Improve pedestrian and bicycle safety measures at intersections along major
corridors.
Action F: Enhance entries to Atascadero along El Camino Real with gateway design
elements (e.g., signage, entry monuments, landscaping, lighting, etc.).
Action G: Find locations for safe mid-block crossings on El Camino Real to connect
neighborhoods and commercial centers.
Morro Road (Highway 41)
Goal LU-3: A new professional office, retail, and employment area focused on (but not
limited to) the medical industry, including research and development uses
Policy LU-3.1: Medical/Office Development. Support medical, office, and supporting commercial
uses along the Morro Road corridor.
Action A: Prioritize land uses along the Morro Road corridor that attract medical and
healthcare-related businesses, generate high-quality jobs, and accommodate long- and
short-term workforce needs.
Action B: Incentivize the relocation of existing medical offices and other weekday-only
oriented uses from Downtown to the Morro Road corridor.
Policy LU-3.2: Increased residential density. Increase residential density within and adjacent to
the Morro Rod corridor to support commercial and office viability.
Action A: Support higher density multi-family development between Morro Road and
Atascadero Creek.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-32
Action B: Develop standards for horizontal and vertical mixed use along Morro Road.
Industrial Areas
Goal LU-4: A dedicated, focused area for industrial activity that minimizes impact on nearby
residential neighborhoods and protected open space areas
Policy LU-4.1: Employment Opportunity/Diversity. Protect and enhance viable industrial uses to
retain job employment opportunities and job diversity.
Action A: Provide zoning flexibility for adaptive reuse of heavy industrial buildings.
Action B: Ensure that the properties along Via Ave are developed to maximize spaces for
jobs, industry, and/or commerce. Partner with the property owners to develop a
comprehensive master plan for the area.
Policy LU-4.2: Research and Development. Transition away from heavy industrial and storage
uses in favor of light industrial uses.
Action A: Prohibit future uses solely devoted to outdoor storage in industrial areas.
Action B: Adopt development standards that focus on creating buildings and spaces that
can be adapted over time and respond to changing trends. Consider a form based code
for new development in the Industrial Zone.
Policy LU-4.3: Buffer Industrial Uses. Provide buffers between industrial and residential uses.
Focus heavy industrial sites away from residential uses.
Action A: Establish standards for new industrial uses adjacent to existing residential and
commercial uses, and standards for new residential and commercial uses adjacent to
existing industrial uses.
Action B: Develop standards for the interface between industrial development and
adjacent creeks and rivers. Consider requirements for public trails and access where
appropriate.
Action C: Focus landscaping, including street trees and visual landscape buffers along
Traffic Way and Sycamore Ave to enhance the pedestrian and bike connections between
adjacent commercial and residential neighborhoods as well as adjacent schools.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-33
Downtown
Goal LU-5: A Downtown core celebrated by the community, with places to shop, be
entertained, live, gather outside, learn, and engage in civic discourse
Policy LU-5.1: Community Vibrancy. Intensify the Downtown core with restaurants, community-
serving retail, shopping, and entertainment opportunities for residents and visitors.
Action A: Update the Downtown Revitalization Plan.
Action B: Encourage encroachment into the right-of-way and City plaza spaces for outdoor
dining activities, where feasible and where public access is maintained.
Action C: Encourage new multi-story developments to accommodate office spaces above
the ground floor in the Downtown core.
Action D: Develop standards to incentivize a reduction in surface parking on Downtown
lots and develop a program for alternatives to on-site parking, such as an in-lieu fee
program to consolidate parking within the Downtown core and optimize land use,
increase commercial viability, and enhance the pedestrian experience.
Policy LU-5.2: Highest Density Residential/Mixed Use. Foster a dynamic Downtown environment
by concentrating larger mixed-use projects, higher-density residential development, employment
opportunities, and amenities Downtown.
Action A: Focus the highest density and intensity development within the Downtown
core.
Action B: Create a discretionary review process for increased height and create standards
to ensure that City Hall remains the most prominent structure Downtown.
Action C: Track vacant and underutilized sites. Compile, maintain, and publish an
inventory of publicly owned vacant sites that may be developed to serve community
needs.
Policy LU-5.3: Pedestrian Environment. Prioritize pedestrian safety and circulation Downtown
with sidewalk improvements, street trees, and other streetscape and public realm amenities.
Action A: Update the Appearance Review Manual and the Downtown Design Toolkit to
focus on pedestrian-scale design elements and private outdoor use areas that support a
vibrant and active streetscape.
Action B: Explore the use and/or redevelopment of alleys for increased pedestrian and
community gathering spaces.
Action C: Continue outreach to Downtown business and property owners to facilitate
street tree and frontage maintenance. Seek opportunities for City partnerships to support
these actions.
Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Form Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 3-34
Action D: Periodically review parking needs and continue to provide information on
publicly available parking within and surrounding the Downtown core.
Policy LU-5.4: Civic Center. Promote the centralization of civic uses and functions in the
Downtown core.
Action A: Support a variety of events Downtown year-round, including City-sponsored
events and events that encourage partnerships with local and regional organizations.
Action B: Continue to support the adaptive reuse of the Printery building and the adjacent
Armory site for future civic uses.
Policy LU-5.5: Atascadero Creek. Transform Atascadero Creek in the Downtown core into a
recreation asset, including trails, outdoor plazas, and public gathering spaces.
Action A: Continue to make improvements to the multi-use path along the Atascadero
Creek corridor.
Action B: Consider opportunities for creek-oriented development Downtown.
Action C: Enhance opportunities for public use of Atascadero Creek Reservation Parcels 2
and 3 and develop standards for adjacent businesses to orient toward the creek.
Action D: Partner with the Historic Society to focus future museum and historical resource
operations at their Hotel Park parcel.
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
Central Coast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Placetypes
Rural Residential
Single-Family Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
High Density Multi-Family
Mixed Use
Downtown Mixed Use
Commercial
Industrial
Innovation/Flex
Public/Quasi-Public
Agriculture
Conservation/Parks/Open Space
R.O.W.
Rural Residential (SOI)
Conservation/Parks/Open Space
(SOI)
Land Use Plan
Figure 3-1
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Los Padres
®
I Forest Nation a
CJ
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
CJ
1111
CJ
~/
/~
Working together to serve, build community, and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 4: Economic Development
Element
Introduction
For its compact size, Atascadero has a diverse local economy, with strengths in healthcare,
small-scale manufacturing, and retail sectors, with a growing participation in hospitality and
tourism. Atascadero’s location in the heart of the Central Coast along Highway 101 creates easy
connections north and south, with people from the greater Los Angeles and Bay Area regions
only three hours’ distance to the amenities Atascadero offers. Atascadero serves as a regional
gateway to California’s Central Coast and via Highway 41, provides access to the Central Valley.
Most importantly, however, is Atascadero’s role in providing places where locals can work and
shop, thereby reducing trips to nearby communities and building an economic base that
supports increased investment in City infrastructure and services.
In previous General Plan planning processes, the City addressed its economic development
goals within the context of land use planning. This 2045 General Plan elevates the discussion of
economic development by dedicating a stand-alone element that highlights specific strategies
the City will pursue to support established businesses and further diversify the local economy
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-2
through new business attraction. These goals, policies, and actions can be turned into marketing
materials to demonstrate to desired industries Atascadero’s commitment.
In planning for fiscal sustainability, the City continues to look for ways to increase municipal
revenues, primarily through business diversification. Although the City’s general fund revenues
appeared relatively stable for the first two decades of this century, fund revenues actually
decreased by 10 percent between fiscal years 2007-2008 and 2022-2023 when inflation was
factored in, limiting the City’s ability to expand service levels or invest in infrastructure. Some
voter-approved measures aimed to restore General Fund revenues, such as Measure D-20
(approved in 2020), which to raised sales tax by $0.01, and measure F14 (extended as measure
L-14 in 2024), which allocates a 0.5% sales tax toward repairing and maintaining neighborhood
roads.
One key strategy in the 2045 General Plan is to support and grow the number of jobs in
Atascadero. Historically, the City has been a bedroom community, with many residents
commuting out of the City for work each day. One way to change this dynamic is to encourage
more higher-wage jobs and new industries to locate in Atascadero. While no optimal
jobs/housing balance ratio can be known to strive for (see Chapter 3), the local jobs to housing
“imbalance” that has existed for years reveals a need to increase nonresidential, employment-
generating uses in Atascadero which, on a per-service population basis, could lead to higher net
positive annual general fund revenues. Capturing this demand is a key component of City fiscal
sustainability and will allow the City to appropriately plan for and deliver needed public services
and capital improvements.
In planning for the future, the City’s goal is to focus on finding ways to diversify revenues by
encouraging new types of businesses and industries to locate in Atascadero. In particular, this
includes higher wage and head of household jobs available to local residents. To support the
City’s economic development initiatives, the 2045 General Plan details a new path forward and
addresses these key economic development challenges and opportunities.
City Revenue Sources
The City’s main general fund revenue sources in 2022 were property taxes (36.9 percent), sales
taxes (33.6 percent), and transient occupancy taxes (4.2 percent). Combined, all types of taxes
accounted for roughly 82.6 percent of Atascadero’s estimated revenue in 2023. Of these
revenue sources, transient occupancy taxes (the tax on hotel rooms) were disproportionately
affected by non-resident activity, underscoring the importance of commercial and visitor activity
to the City’s fiscal health.
Long-Term Fiscal Health
Between 2007 and 2023, the City’s overall general fund revenues decreased by 10 percent,
limiting the ability to expand service levels or invest in new/upgraded infrastructure. Creating
long-term fiscal sustainability is a key objective. The lack of growth that outpaces inflation in
general fund revenues will make it difficult for the City to improve public service levels going
forward unless new funding sources are identified. Even maintaining existing service levels
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-3
could be difficult, particularly for higher cost items like salaries and pension obligations that
increase faster than inflation. In planning for fiscal sustainability, the 2045 General Plan
identifies ways to increase revenues primarily through the types and extent of new uses and
businesses and by planning for efficient growth. Efficient growth is particularly important
because it ensures the City is not overcommitted with a sprawling infrastructure network.
Visitor Activity Growth
Visitor activity in Atascadero and surrounding communities, and the general draw of the Central
Coast, contributes to vibrancy and generates overnight hotel stays and restaurant and retail
spending that are critical to the City’s fiscal health. Reported hotel data in 2022 indicated high
occupancy rates and strong upward pressure on achievable room rates, suggesting
opportunities in the market for additional hotel rooms. Moving forward, the City will work to
attract a range of hotel types, allowing for a diversity in price points and the ability to capture
more visitors. This can be paired with initiatives to create places people want to visit and
experience—and for longer time periods. The Central Coast offers unparalleled weather,
scenery, and outdoor recreation opportunities, and those visitors need places to overnight, eat,
and shop.
Business Attraction, Retention, and Growth
Supporting local businesses and attracting desired new businesses are important components of
the General Plan. An increase in employment-supporting uses that draw head-of-household
jobs allows opportunities for more employment that directly serves residents—while also
generally leading to higher annual general fund revenues through increased property taxes,
sales taxes, and business license revenue.
Capital Improvements
An important component of fiscal sustainability is the City’s ability to appropriately plan for and
deliver needed capital improvements. As of 2022, the City was not collecting sufficient revenues
through impact fees (which were subsidized and based on 2006 assumed infrastructure costs)
to cover the cost of needed capital improvements. This requires that the City further subsidize
the improvements with money from the general fund. To be fiscally sustainable, the City will
need to recalibrate impact fees to address contemporary infrastructure costs and market
conditions, while also keeping an eye on sustainable long-term infrastructure maintenance.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-4
Economic Prosperity and Diversity
A healthy, diverse, and growing business mix provides a range of job opportunities for residents
and allows Atascadero to weather economic cycles. The revenues generated by businesses—
such as hotel taxes (transient occupancy taxes), sales and use taxes, and business license fees—
contribute to providing quality services and infrastructure for residents, workers, and visitors.
Higher paying jobs and greater diversity in business options compound direct revenues by
keeping people local and reinvesting in the community. Expanded public services and
infrastructure upgrades will further reinforce Atascadero’s reputation as a highly desirable
location for new businesses, creating a virtuous cycle that benefits the entire community.
Atascadero’s economic development policies must be responsive to larger economic trends in
the region and throughout California. This includes being flexible and nimble enough to address
the changing nature nationally of how people work and shop. Increasing demand for open
format office space, high-quality research and development space, and flexible/blended retail
space will position Atascadero for remaining an attractive and easy place to locate and grow
businesses. Opportunities to expand the business mix in Atascadero provided through new land
use Placetypes and flexible land use policies (see Chapter 3) will accommodate a range of
business sizes and types. As Atascadero does not have the ability to expand the City outward to
capture areas for greenfield development, the focus will be on maximizing potential along
existing commercial corridors and creating spaces that can be flexible and respond to emerging
business needs over time.
The following goal and policies focus on maintaining a diversified economic base by
accommodating a variety of business types, supporting major revenue-generating activities that
support municipal services, and leveraging Atascadero’s competitive advantages.
Goal ED-1: A sound economic base to sustain the City’s unique character through a range of
employment and business opportunities and generation of sufficient revenue to support
adequate levels of public services, as well as environmental and social quality
Policy ED-1.1: Business Attraction. Facilitate establishment of a full range of goods and services
desired by Atascadero residents, workers, and visitors.
Action A: Update and maintain the Zoning Ordinance to promote retail, service, and
grocery stores at designated neighborhood nodes.
Action B: Consider the use of a form based code to guide development in the
Innovation/Flex district to respond to changing business trends over time.
Action C: Ensure that development in commercial and innovation/flex zones is geared to
tax-generating uses and/or provides flexible use spaces for evolving trends that allow
local businesses to capitalize on emerging economic growth sectors.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-5
Action D: Encourage and incentivize office and medical uses to locate or expand along
Morro Road.
Action E: Maintain key commercial sites and nodes that prioritize commercial activities
and provide spaces for larger-scale commercial uses, technical education facilities, and
light-industrial uses.
Policy ED-1.2: Tourism. Expand tourist-oriented uses in key areas to serve the traveling public,
and capitalize on opportunities for tourist destinations that reflect Atascadero’s unique
character.
Action A: Actively recruit tourism and traveler-serving businesses that can take
advantage of accessible and unique areas of the City.
Action B: Encourage hotel, conference, and resort development. Protect potential sites
from adjacent incompatible uses.
Action C: Promote the community's rural character, open spaces, zoo, outdoor
recreation amenities, and oak woodlands as part of the strategy to attract tourists.
Develop tourist destinations based on these features.
Policy ED-1.3: Regional Commercial Centers. Accommodate commercial centers with regional
draws that have visibility from Highway 101.
Action A: Ensure zoning regulations continue to allow regional retail uses (including auto
related and home furnishing).
Policy ED-1.4: Regulatory Updates. Ensure that City regulations, processes, and initiatives
support the City’s economic development goals and new private industry opportunities.
Action A: Regularly review and update the Zoning Ordinance to address any regulatory
impediments to attracting target businesses and to facilitate desired business expansion
and adaptive reuse.
Action B: Prioritize infrastructure upgrades that can provide the service levels needed
and desired by industries the City looks to attract.
Business Retention
The City’s ability to attract and retain businesses, entrepreneurs, and worker talent is heavily
influenced by its land use and economic development policies, infrastructure, and relative
affordability within the Central Coast region.
The policies in this section address the need to focus attention on retention and expansion of
existing businesses in Atascadero. Existing businesses provide a job base and constitute the
most effective starting point from which to grow the local economy. The following goal and
policies support Atascadero’s desire to retain existing businesses, attract new higher-wage
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-6
businesses and industries, and position itself for greater economic growth and resilience
through careful planning, incentives, and investments.
Goal ED-2: Retention and expansion of existing businesses and attraction of new businesses
and industries to increase economic growth, improve the availability of goods and services, and
increase opportunities for higher-wage jobs in Atascadero
Policy ED-2.1: Existing Business Support. Encourage established businesses to continue
providing products and services the community desires.
Action A: Continue to support Chamber of Commerce efforts to market goods and
services available in Atascadero, particularly those produced locally.
Action B: Identify locations with adequate land to accommodate established businesses
looking to expand.
Policy ED-2.2: Local Job Growth. Attract new development and enterprises that provide jobs
and services for current residents and that build the local jobs base of higher-wage positions.
Action A: Update the Municipal Code to provide flexibility for home occupation uses.
Action B: Update the Zoning Ordinance to ensure land use regulations accommodate a
broad range of desired industries and that entitlement processes are more efficient.
Partnerships
The City has a long history of being proactive and supportive of a range of businesses and
economic development activities. With a focus on attracting new business and industry types to
Atascadero, the City will need to develop new partnerships with the private sector. These can
include activities from marketing and branding coordination, industry attraction, industry
clusters, and more formal public-private partnerships. The following goal and policies highlight
Atascadero’s ongoing focus to work with private sector on mutually growing and diversifying
the local economy.
Goal ED-3: Leveraging the impact of the City’s resources and investments in economic
development through effective public-private partnerships
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-7
Policy ED-3.1: Local Business and Organization Partnerships. Continue to coordinate economic
development efforts with local businesses and organizations such as workforce development
organizations and businesses and the Chamber of Commerce.
Action A: Hold regular meetings with the Chamber of Commerce to discuss economic
development goals, activities, and ways to help promote or streamline new businesses
and industries.
Action B: Formulate and/or refine economic development strategies with local service
and utility providers (e.g., broadband internet providers, PG&E, etc.).
Action C: Partner with local employers, co-working spaces, and vocational institutions to
expand workforce training, entrepreneurship, and innovation opportunities.
Policy ED-3.2: Regional Partnerships. Continue economic development activities coordination
with regional partners.
Action A: Promote the location of new industry sectors to Atascadero, including
aerospace, agricultural technology, and biotech.
Action B: Support incubator spaces and small business resources and highlight proximity
to top-tier universities to promote Atascadero as a supportive location for high-tech and
entrepreneurial ecosystems.
Policy ED-3.3: Workforce Development Partnerships. Support and coordinate with educational
and training institutions, including local school districts, universities, and the County Workforce
Development Board to advance workforce training and talent retention.
Action A: Engage with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Cuesta College, and the County office of
Education, and encourage them to expand curriculum to offer education in areas that
would prepare students to work in industries prevalent within Atascadero, such as
hospitality and tourism services, aerospace, agricultural technology, and precision
manufacturing.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-8
Fiscal Health
The long-term and sustainable fiscal health of Atascadero is an overarching objective and a
guiding principle of the 2045 General Plan. Many of the goals, policies, and actions throughout
this General Plan focus on attracting, allowing, and supporting new businesses and industries,
as well as the expansion of established businesses. This includes establishing new Placetypes
that allow for a range of businesses, new incentives (e.g., permitting and regulatory incentives,
job creation incentives such as tax credits, workforce training, etc.), and programs that will help
to create unique and active places coupled with public service enhancements and infrastructure
upgrades that will support these uses. The following goal, policies, and actions build upon these
land use and planning strategies by providing clarity regarding specific economic development
activities the City will undertake to further support its fiscal health.
Goal ED-4: Long-term fiscal strength that reinforces Atascadero’s desire to grow and attract
businesses
Policy ED-4.1: Ongoing Fiscal Health. Continue to take a long-range view of the City’s fiscal
condition, including the possibility of enhancing revenues to maintain and, wherever possible
and desirable, enhance current levels of service.
Action A: Prepare and periodically update an Economic Development Strategic Plan that
frames a comprehensive strategy for current and future City fiscal health so that
projected levels of service can be maintained and enhanced or expanded, as needed.
Action B: Annually adjust long-range revenue and expenditure projections to track
changes in the City’s fiscal situation so that areas of concern and opportunities can be
anticipated and planned for.
Action C: Require new development to pay its share of the costs of providing capital
facilities needed to support it.
Action D: Review development impact fees on a regular basis to ensure they stay in line
with current City expenditures for providing facilities and services.
Action E: Work to minimize the City’s road maintenance responsibilities by establishing
private funding mechanisms for the maintenance of new local streets.
Action F: Regularly review land use regulations to support opportunities for employment
centers, entertainment zones, and tax-generating uses.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 4-9
Policy ED-4.2: Retail/Restaurant Businesses. Maximize development of, and revenues from, the
retail and restaurant business sectors. Improve the local retail restaurant business environment
by undertaking planning, incentivizing, or other means to help align locations of stores and
restaurants with locations of residents and workers.
Action A: Encourage the co-location of retail, dining, and drinking establishments within
retail, flex, experience, and entertainment nodes, particularly in Downtown, to create
engaging and active neighborhood centers.
Action B: Establish policies to ensure new tenant spaces in areas identified as key nodes
contain basic facilities and mechanical space to support restaurant occupancy
requirements.
Policy ED-4.3: Hotel Attraction. Maximize opportunities for tourism growth by maintaining and
expanding locations for transient lodging.
Action A: Continue to evaluate the hotel market in Atascadero, and identify specific
types of lodging that do not currently exist but can be attracted to the City to create a
range of hotel options and price points.
Action B. Research and evaluate incentive options that support older or boutique hotels
and motels to make upgrades to their facilities to attract more visitors.
Policy ED-4.4: Targeted Economic Incentives. Assess the value of alternative incentive concepts
and programs for specific business types.
Action A. Evaluate what competing cities within the region are doing to incentivize and
support local business, along with a thoughtful assessment of actual overall competitive
strength of the community.
Action B. Explore development incentives such as fee deferrals or subsidies,
infrastructure prioritization, and streetscape enhancements that the City can use to
proactively market target businesses and industries to Atascadero.
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
Introduction
Atascadero has over 145 miles of roadways, more than any other city in San Luis Obispo County.
This complex web of streets supports the transportation of people and goods to, through, and
within the City, and includes State highways, streets owned and maintained by the City, and public
streets that are privately maintained. Edward Gardner Lewis’ original Colony plan established the
gridded street network still evident today in downtown, and it envisioned a roadway west to the
coast, realized in 1934 as State Route 41. Much of the early street network in Atascadero was
implemented in 1913, with later extensions serving higher density neighborhoods as they
emerged. In the 1950s, the construction of U.S. Highway 101 through Atascadero bisected the
City, majorly limiting east-west travel to the bridges and underpasses over and under the freeway.
Combined, this complex street system supports a variety of transportation modes, including
freight trucks, vehicles, transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and equestrians. This element focuses on
goals, policies, and actions to create, improve, and maintain a network of safe, accessible, and
multi-modal streets. Although the City recognizes that the automobile will continue to be the
primary means of transportation during the timeframe of this plan, this element also emphasizes
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-2
policies and actions that reduce vehicle use by promoting alternative travel modes. This includes
reflecting the importance of neighborhood quality as well as vehicle, bicyclist, and pedestrian
safety.
As noted, the current circulation network was laid out in the 1913 Atascadero Colony plan. The
network consists of radial routes emanating from the Atascadero Administrative Building,
supported by a series of arterial rings to convey traffic to outlying areas. Farther from the civic
core, the streets follow the topography, resulting in winding, narrow tree-lined streets that have
become a defining part of the City’s character. As noted above, the radial street pattern was
interrupted in 1954 with Highway 101 construction bisecting the civic core and limiting east-west
travel to eight crossings. The Colony plan centralized all civic, social, educational, administrative,
and commercial activities at the Civic Center. Commercial development has since spread along El
Camino Real, and residential neighborhoods extended east of El Camino Real and west of
Highway 101. This has increased demand for travel beyond the original Colony era vision.
Few streets within Atascadero are designed to carry high traffic volumes. Freeway interchanges
create bottlenecks because they are undersized, and many roadways do not accommodate
cyclists and pedestrians. Street patterns, widths, and adjacent topography constrain transit
operations and access. The extent of the roadway network and lack of funding means that
maintenance is an ongoing challenge. A key goal of the Mobility Element is to improve these
connections and capitalize on opportunities for safe and efficient multi-modal use.
The El Camino Real and Morro Road corridors will be the primary growth areas. The Downtown
section has been reinvented for multi-modal travel and economic synergy, including a reduction
in vehicle travel lanes to make room for parking, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and streetscape
improvements. Parking surveys have shown that the peak parking demand in the City core is less
than half the available parking supply. However, many parking spaces are privately controlled,
inefficiently allocated, or located away from key destinations.
The SLO Regional Transit Authority provides fixed-route bus transit along the El Camino Real
corridor, but service is infrequent and stops are largely concentrated in limited areas, restricting
access for residents in western neighborhoods. Additionally, while the local climate and mixed-
use development patterns support cycling, the City’s bicycle commute mode share is lower than
the statewide average due to an incomplete cycling network. The Bicycle Transportation Plan
outlines 18 proposed infrastructure projects to enhance connectivity to key destinations.
Community data indicate that walking is a more common mode of commute in Atascadero when
compared to the State average, but factors such as steep topography, missing sidewalks, and
narrow Highway 101 interchanges are areas of concern for many pedestrians.
Freight movement primarily relies on Union Pacific Railroad’s Coast Line, which runs through the
City but lacks rail stops, limiting rail-based goods delivery. Highway 101 serves as the main
thoroughfare for commercial goods. While Atascadero does not have an airport, it is served by
the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport about 20 miles to the south.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-3
In the 2020s, State laws established a new paradigm for assessing and addressing traffic impacts,
shifting the focus from vehicle delay metrics, which prioritized cars, to vehicle miles traveled
(VMT), which promotes sustainable development practices. The SLOCOG Regional Transportation
Plan encourages growth in mixed-use corridors, with funding allocated for various infrastructure
projects to improve overall transportation efficiency. Strategic planning and investments, bearing
in mind the latest State laws and funding opportunities, will be essential for enhancing mobility
and accessibility in Atascadero.
Mobility Priorities
To support Atascadero’s mobility needs today and well into the future, this General Plan
addresses the following mobility considerations.
Impacts of Highway 101
The freeway bisects Atascadero and limits east-west access. Of the eight freeway interchanges,
most were constructed in the 1960s and are undersized or outdated, creating congestion and
barriers for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Future interchange upgrades will be costly and
will need to be prioritized in consultation with Caltrans.
Transit
Atascadero is served by a fixed-route bus transit service along the El Camino Real corridor through
the SLO Regional Transit Authority (SLO RTA), and Amtrak provides bus services that link to its rail
routes. Bus transit stops are largely concentrated along El Camino Real, with limited access to
western residential neighborhoods, and bus service infrequent, which hinders residents’ ability
to fully rely on transit. SLO RTA also provides dial-a-ride services.
Bicycle Mobility
Atascadero’s climate, eastside topography, and development patterns in mixed-use areas are
conducive to recreational and commute bicycle trips. However, the bicycle commute mode share
in the City is lower than the statewide average (1.6 percent versus 3.1 percent) due to a limited
and incomplete bicycle network. With a growing interest in outdoor recreation and supporting
local and regional emissions reduction goals, the City sees opportunities to expand the bicycle
network and create improved connections to schools, commercial areas, and other destinations.
Pedestrian Mobility
Approximately 4.5 percent of local commute trips are made by walking, substantially higher than
the statewide average of 2.7 percent. The City’s steep topography and low-density land uses on
the west side and east side periphery discourage destination walking, but the higher densities
and mix of uses along and adjacent to the El Camino Real and Morro Road corridors generally
support walking. Walking is hindered in more residential and rural neighborhoods due to
topography, physical constraints, sidewalk gaps, and limited east-west crossings.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-4
Parking
Community members have identified parking as an important issue. Parking surveys show that
the overall peak parking demand in downtown Atascadero is less than half the available parking
supply. However, many parking spaces are privately controlled, inefficiently allocated, or located
away from key destinations. Sufficient and convenient parking will contribute to the economic
success of downtown. Parking management techniques such as limited hours and shared parking
could be used to maximize resources.
Traffic Collisions
Between 2015 and 2019, more than one-third of the collisions in Atascadero resulted from
vehicles traveling at unsafe speeds. Between 2013 and 2023, 145 reported collisions involving
cyclists or pedestrians occurred, the majority along El Camino Real and Morro Road/State Route
41. Residents have highlighted roadway and traffic safety as a major concern.
Street Maintenance
Atascadero has 145 miles of roadways, more than any other city in the County. The City utilizes
several funding sources to maintain its extensive roadway network, including Local, State, and
Federal funding measures (including the City’s general fund), SB-1 (Road Maintenance and
Rehabilitation Program), and SLOCOG’s Local Transportation Funds. Voters approved a one-half
percent sales tax in 2014 (Measure F-14) that the City has used to fund roadway maintenance,
with a 12-year term that has generated over $20 million. Measure L-24 in 2024 extended this
sales tax until it is cancelled by voters and is projected to generate $3 million annually.
Roadway Capacities and Managing Congestion through New Metrics
Few improvements have been made to the City’s road network to increase capacity as growth
has not warranted substantial investments other than the needed, but unrealized, State
investments to improve freeway bridges. Congestion is typically localized near undersized
Highway 101 interchanges and around schools during pick-up and drop-off times. Generally,
congestion is short lived, and most drivers experience low levels of delay outside of peak periods.
Consistent with State law, project transportation impact analyses focus on VMT. Historically, the
City considered level of service, or LOS, to identify road system impacts associated with new
development projects, but this approach focuses on driver delay during a short period of time
and often results in undesirable outcomes for connectivity, fiscal responsibility, commercial
synergy, and land development. Vehicle operations continue to be evaluated for planning
roadway improvements, but multi-modal connectivity and safety are higher priorities than
reducing vehicle delay.
The City requires project applicants to submit traffic information to evaluate vehicle miles
traveled, vehicular LOS and queuing, project trip generation, site access and circulation, bicycle
and pedestrian conditions, access to public transit, and transportation safety. These documents
are critical for understanding how all transportation modes may interact with one another on and
near a proposed development site and ensure that project impacts are mitigated to improve
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-5
connectivity and address safety.
Street Classification System
The Circulation Diagram (see Figure 6-1) classifies roadways based on their intended function and
projected traffic levels, which determines the appropriate type of design and number of lanes for
the route. Table 6-1 describes the different classes of roads.
Table 6-1: Street Classification System
Type Purpose and Function Streets Designated
Freeway Freeways are high-capacity and high-speed limited access
facilities that serve intercity and regional travel.
U.S. 101
Arterial
Streets
Arterial streets provide for circulation between major
activity centers and residential areas within the City and
beyond. They are also the main point of access to
freeways and serve as major corridors supporting
growth. Arterials should be designed to safely move all
modes of travel while efficiently moving vehicles
throughout the City. Access points to arterials should be
minimized to the extent feasible to reduce conflict points
and maintain steady flows. Arterials near schools should
be enhanced to provide Safe Routes to School for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Arterial Street rights-of-way
typically range from 80 to 100 feet.
El Camino Real
Morro Road (SR 41)
Atascadero Avenue
Halcon Road
Portola Road
Santa Barbara Road
Santa Rosa Road
Traffic Way
Portions of:
Curbaril Avenue
Del Rio Road
San Anselmo Road
Santa Cruz Road
Santa Lucia Avenue
Collector
Streets
Collectors channel traffic from residential or commercial
areas to arterials. Residences, offices, commercial uses,
and public activities typically front on to them. They are
usually two-lane streets, with maximum acceptable
volumes often dictated by residents’ concerns about
intrusion rather than traffic capacity considerations.
Collector Streets rights-of-way typically range from 40 to
60 feet.
Collectors are divided into two categories, depending on
the area and type of topography:
Urban collectors serve commercial and higher density
areas. Urban roads generally provide on-street parking,
as well as sidewalks and bike lanes.
See Figure 6-1
(Circulation Plan)
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-6
Table 6-1: Street Classification System
Type Purpose and Function Streets Designated
Rural collectors serve areas that typically have larger
parcels. They are generally narrower in width due to
lower volumes and limited need to accommodate on-
street parking. Rural roadway cross-sections vary
depending on topography but may have walkable
shoulders, bike lanes, and/or multi-use pathways to
provide multi-modal connections to other destinations.
Local
Streets
Local streets provide access to adjoining land uses. All
streets not otherwise depicted on the circulation plan are
local streets. Local streets typically provide narrower
travel lanes and may or may not have dedicated bike
lanes. They typically serve rural residential and single-
family residential land uses. Local Streets rights-of-way
typically range from 36 to 40 feet.
See Figure 6-1
(Circulation Plan)
Mobility Goals, Policies, and Actions
To address mobility challenges and opportunities, the City will continue to find innovative,
creative, and cost-effective solutions for expanding Atascadero’s circulation infrastructure and the
community’s access to multi-modal transportation related to:
Circulation Network
Parking
Freeway Access and Interchanges
Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Equestrian Facilities
Transit and Travel Demand Management
Emerging Mobility Technology
Circulation Network
An efficient, accessible, and safe multimodal transportation network moves people and goods
through the community. Atascadero’s streets serve many functions, including:
Allowing people to move about town
Connecting adjacent communities to businesses, stores, homes, schools, parks, and public
spaces
Supporting adjacent land uses and developments
Providing safe, attractive areas that encourage personal interactions
Promoting human and environmental health by making it easier and safer to travel by
transit, by bicycle, or on foot
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-7
Public rights-of-way (roadways, sidewalks, trails, and paths) cover a significant part of any
community, and the layout and use of these areas influence many aspects of the physical
environment. Street designs affect the safety and independence of people in the community,
especially vulnerable populations such as children, persons with disabilities, and the elderly. A
well-planned and well-designed mobility network is a means to realize the community’s goals for
improved health, economic vitality and growth, quality of life, and fiscal soundness. The
Circulation Diagram (see Figure 6-1) illustrates the existing circulation network for Atascadero and
proposed improvements. The following goals, policies, and actions provide a framework for
ensuring that future changes and improvements to the circulation system are implemented in a
way that improves safety, reduces conflicts, enhances mobility, maintains community character,
and supports a range of transportation modes.
Goal MO-1: A safe, multimodal, interconnected, and efficient circulation system that serves
all community members
Policy MO-1.1: Roadway Improvements. Plan, fund, and implement circulation improvements
consistent with the Mobility Element and Circulation Diagram.
Action A: Maintain an updated Capital Improvement Plan and pursue construction of
circulation system improvements on a prioritized basis.
Action B: Require that right-of-way dedications and road improvements required of new
development be consistent with the approved concept plans, plan line setbacks, and other
adopted circulation studies.
Action C: Enhance all modes of access and travel within the City. Require frontage
improvements consistent with planned facilities when adjacent to new development.
Action D: Preserve options for future transportation facilities in advance of development
by such means as identifying routes, reserving rights-of-way, establishing setbacks to
accommodate future road widths, and limiting direct parcel access along arterials.
Action E: Design future roadway extensions and connections to enable reasonably direct
paths to destinations.
Action F: Update development impact fees to ensure fair share payment toward roadway
improvements from new development. Include periodic review and updates to fees based
on current construction costs.
Action G: Implement Complete Streets projects, including improved travel lanes,
enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and upgraded bus stops on El Camino Real.
Action H: Work with Caltrans to implement Complete Streets projects, including curb,
gutter, and sidewalk improvements, on Highway 41.
Action I: Focus multi-modal improvements, as feasible, on designated connector and
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-8
backbone rights-of-way through rural west and east side neighborhoods to increase
connectivity between rural residential areas and the Downtown core. Connection streets
include Portola Road, Atascadero Avenue, Traffic Way, and Santa Lucia Road.
Action J: Look for opportunities to increase parking and enhance walkability along
commercial and multi-family corridors including road diets, bulb-outs, controlled
crossings, transit enhancements, and other complete streets features.
Action K: Seek funding (e.g., grants, development requirements) for roadway construction
projects that complete unbuilt rights-of-way (e.g., missing roadway gaps), especially those
that will reduce emergency response times and/or provide key evacuation routes.
Policy MO-1.2: Multimodal Options. Increase pedestrian and bicycle connections and safety
between residential areas and commercial areas along major corridors, parks and recreation
opportunities, and neighboring communities.
Action A: Provide for roadway and intersection improvements along major corridors as
outlined in this Mobility Element.
Action B: Increase safety and access across major corridors and Highway 101.
Action C: Continue working with the County, SLOCOG, Caltrans, and local agencies to
create pedestrian and bicycle access between Atascadero and Templeton.
Action D: Work with county and SLOCOG to increase multi-modal connectivity between
Santa Margarita and Atascadero.
Action E: Continue to partner with the County, SLOCOG, and Caltrans to improve
multimodal safety and mobility adjacent to the City limits in a manner that reflects local
priorities.
Action F: Utilize unbuilt rights-of-way in areas where multi-modal pathways could connect
neighborhoods to schools, parks, or commercial activity areas.
Action G: Develop road standards that support pedestrian use on rural roads, especially
on roads that serve as residential connectors to adjacent neighborhoods, schools, and
commercial areas.
Policy MO-1.3: Regional Facilities. Provide regional roadway facilities that minimize through-
traffic intrusion on local streets and mitigate impacts on local traffic.
Action A: Support regional planning efforts to identify improvements and projects that
align with multi-modal and VMT reduction goals, such as the North County US 101 Multi-
Modal Plan, and ensure that plans are geared toward support of grant funding efforts.
Action B: Coordinate transportation planning efforts with local, regional, State, and
Federal agencies to maintain and upgrade State roadways and prioritize improvements to
improve safety and multimodal connectivity.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-9
Action C: Identify key arterial and collector streets and seek funding to provide
multimodal connectivity.
Action D: Balance commercial goods movement with the health and quality of life
priorities of the community by routing heavy truck traffic away from residential zones and
promoting safety at rail crossings.
Action E: Update the City's Capital Facilities Fees consistent with the requirements of AB
1600 and include fair share fees toward Caltrans facilities and multimodal improvements.
Action F: As freeway overcrossings are replaced, work with Caltrans to ensure that bridges
can accommodate turn lanes, sidewalks, and bike facilities.
Action G: Develop concept plans and plan lines for interchange corridors and seek funding
opportunities to construct improvements.
Policy MO-1.4: Congestion Management and Trip Reduction. Encourage mixed-use and jobs
focused infill development that is served by multi-modal facilities to support reductions in
regional and local vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Action A: Streamline transportation analysis requirements for infill projects that are
consistent with the Land Use and Community Form Element (see Chapter 3).
Action B: Consider secondary effects of roadway widening to accommodate multimodal
accessibility and safety.
Action C: Minimize driveways and access points along arterial streets whenever possible
to reduce the number of conflict points and increase pedestrian and cyclist safety.
Action D: Encourage mixed-use development with residential and commercial densities
high enough to support ridesharing and transit.
Action E: Support reduced on-site parking requirements where different uses can share
parking or where easy access to frequent transit and bicycle and pedestrian facilities is
available.
Policy MO-1.5: Hillside Area Street Character. Preserve the winding, tree-lined nature of the City
street system in hillside areas.
Action A: Continue to allow flexible street design standards to allow roads to curve around
hillsides to preserve rural character, limit landform alteration, and control vehicle speed.
Policy MO-1.6: Truck Routes. Ensure the new and existing business that use large trucks as a core
part of their operations, more than just routine delivery, minimize maintenance impacts on City
infrastructure and noise impacts on residents.
Action A: Direct truck routes away from noise- and emissions-sensitive residents.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-10
Action B: Require truck routing plans to describe the operational characteristics of the use
of the facility operator. Require plans to include methods and responsibility of
enforcement for implementing measures that avoid impacts to public streets.
Parking
Atascadero residents and businesses have expressed the need for convenient parking in
Downtown and along commercial corridors, as well as in higher density residential districts.
Parking requirements can disincentivize development by displacing building area, but constrained
parking supply can limit customer access to businesses. Excessive parking worsens multimodal
access and increases impermeable surface areas. Inadequate parking for high-density residential
development can impact nearby neighborhoods. The following goal, policies, and actions look to
find ways to ensure adequate and well-managed, but not excessive, parking in Atascadero.
Goal MO-2: Accessible, right-sized, well-designed, and convenient public and private
parking facilities
Policy MO-2.2: Parking Supply Management. Maintain an adequate and well-designed supply of
off-street parking, particularly in commercial, industrial, and higher-density residential areas.
Action A: Balance parking needs within the public right-of-way with considerations of
safety, street width, visibility, and property access.
Action B: Require all development to provide sufficient and convenient parking areas with
minimal conflict with street traffic.
Action C: Allow new development to provide a parking management plan that utilizes
shared parking with other businesses or accommodates multiple uses with different peak
hour parking usage.
Action D: Encourage shared parking via reciprocal easement(s) in commercial and
industrial areas. Encourage the consolidation of on-site parking, where appropriate, to
eliminate the number of ingress and egress points onto public roads.
Action E: Maintain standards for off-street parking areas to include landscaping,
screening, lighting, maintenance, and shade trees to mitigate adverse visual impacts and
provide comfort for users.
Action F: Periodically review City parking requirements to balance on-site parking demand
with other community goals for accessibility, density, and housing affordability and to
respond to parking trends and land uses.
Action G: Allow parking supply flexibility to account for shared parking, reduce
impermeable surface area, and support higher-density development.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-11
Freeway Access and Interchanges
The construction of Highway 101 introduced a major barrier to east-west connectivity in
Atascadero. Most of the freeway interchanges were designed in the 1950s and 1960s and remain
difficult to cross for cyclists and pedestrians. Also, the bridge widths and underpasses are
undersized and cause peak-hour congestion. This is exacerbated by closely spaced intersections
between freeway ramps and El Camino Real.
Through Atascadero, Highway 101 has six interchanges with overcrossings and two with
underpasses (at SR 41 and Traffic Way). There is also a southbound on-ramp at West Front Road
and an additional ramp at San Diego Road with a northbound off-ramp and southbound on-ramp
with low traffic volumes and no crossing.
The North County US 101 Multi-Modal Plan jointly prepared by the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments, the County, the cities of Atascadero and Paso Robles, and Caltrans evaluates five
operational improvements along Highway 101 in Atascadero. The 2024 study identifies multiple
on- and off-highway improvements as priorities to improve congestion, reduce queuing impacts,
and increase multi-modal travel opportunities.
The following goal, policies, and actions focus on working with Caltrans to improve Highway 101
interchanges so that they are safer, multi-modal, and function better for all users.
Goal MO-3: Rebuilt and/or upgraded Highway 101 interchanges that enhance safety,
improve functionalities for all users, and promote continued economic growth and
prosperity in Atascadero
Policy MO-3.1: Caltrans Information Sharing and Coordination. Prepare and disseminate
pertinent safety, operational, and community information to Caltrans related to the performance
of Highway 101 interchanges to support funding of improvements.
Action A: Provide pedestrian, bicyclist, and vehicle accident information related to
outdated Highway 101 interchange designs to Caltrans District 5 staff.
Action B: Understand emergency response issues related to the current design of the
Highway 101 interchanges, including a mitigation plan that studies scenarios where one
or more interchange(s) are damaged in a catastrophic event.
Action C: Share pertinent community comments, concerns, and ideas related to Highway
101 interchanges gathered during Atascadero community discussions with Caltrans
District 5 staff.
Policy MO-3.2: State Funding Advocacy. Proactively lobby for State funding and project
prioritization of Highway 101 interchange improvements in Atascadero.
Action A: Identify a range of State and Federal funding sources that can be used, in
partnership with SLOCOG, Caltrans, to fund major Highway 101 interchange
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-12
improvements.
Action B: Work with Caltrans to prioritize the Del Rio, San Anselmo, Curbaril, and Santa
Rosa interchange upgrades to accommodate multi-model access, increased housing
density and continued commercial growth in Atascadero.
Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Equestrian Facilities
Atascadero’s climate and topography generally support walking and biking, but the circulation
network has many gaps in facilities for these modes. Infill development, as described in the Land
Use and Community Form Element (see Chapter 3), will improve the proximity of destinations for
many residents and will help fill in gaps in the network. Figure 6-2 (Bicycle and Trail Facilities)
identifies the existing and planned bicycle and trails network in Atascadero. The following goal,
policies, and actions provide specific detail on how the City will continue to expand and improve
the pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian circulation system in Atascadero.
Goal MO-4: Safe, functional, and appealing bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian (in rural
areas) facilities that allow convenient multi-modal mobility
Policy MO-4.1: Coordination and Planning. Provide “backbone” pedestrian, bicycle, and
equestrian systems that link residential, commercial, recreational, and regional areas.
Action A: Require developments to provide pedestrian, bicycle, and trail alignments and
facilities consistent with adopted City plans and policies.
Action B: Adopt and maintain a Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Equestrian Transportation Plan.
Action C: Identify a multi-modal network that provides connections between major
destinations like schools, commercial nodes, community and park facilities, and the
Salinas River. Use creek corridors where feasible to make those connections.
Policy MO-4.2: Pedestrian Mobility. Ensure pedestrian safety, enhance pedestrian comfort, and
promote walking as an alternative to vehicle travel, with priority in retail districts and multi-family
neighborhoods.
Action A: Develop pedestrian-friendly design standards that apply to all higher density
residential and commercial projects and require construction of adequate sidewalks
and/or multi-use pathways in new development.
Action B: Consider pedestrian usage when rehabilitating existing roads.
Action C: Ensure that drainage control does not preclude multimodal opportunities.
Action D: Where limited right-of-way width exists, allow modified street sections that
maintain parking and pedestrian facilities to the greatest extent possible.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-13
Action E: Provide wider sidewalks at commercial nodes and areas of higher pedestrian
use.
Action F: Enhance and maintain streetscapes, especially along commercial and higher
density residential corridors to create an enjoyable, safe, and comfortable experience for
pedestrians.
Action G: Implement walkable shoulders and/or trails, where feasible, in single-family
areas with lot sizes of one-half acre and larger. Develop flexible design standards
appropriate for the varied topography and prioritize streets identified as part of the key
backbone network.
Action H: Provide enhanced pedestrian crossings of El Camino Real, Traffic Way, and other
major corridors where appropriate to support pedestrian safety and non-vehicular
connections within the City.
Policy MO-4.3: Bicycle Mobility. Promote bicycle mobility and increase bicyclist safety with
new/upgraded facilities and amenities.
Action A: Complete Traffic Way bicycle facilities as part of an alternative north-south
connection.
Action B: Support a multi-use path as part of the future Templeton to Atascadero
connector. Work with the lead agency to secure easements or other mechanisms to create
the necessary connections.
Action C: Complete bicycle and pedestrian improvements along El Camino Real and
Highway 41.
Action D: Require adequate and safe bicycle parking in conjunction with new
development within the Urban Services Line.
Action E: Create opportunities to utilize unbuilt rights-of-way for pedestrian and bike
connections.
Policy MO-4.4: Rural Trails. Provide for walkways, bikeways, and horse trails without curbs and
sidewalks in rural areas.
Action A: Work with the Nateional Park service and other interested agencies and
organizations to complete and formalize the De Anza Trail. Prioritize access to and
protection/expansion of the historic trail.
Action B: Review road abandonment requests for their potential as trails.
Action C: Coordinate local bikeway and trail projects with regional projects whenever
possible.
Action D: Develop a Trail Master Plan for Atascadero Creek between Three Bridges Oak
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-14
Preserve and the Salinas River.
Action E: Provide and enhance a system of pedestrian and equestrian trailhead access
points to the Salinas River corridor. Work with the State, SLO County, and Atascadero
Mutual Water Company to provide trailhead access.
Action F: Support trail connections to the nearby communities of Templeton, Paso Robles,
and Santa Margarita.
Policy MO-4.5: School and Park Connections. Provide a comprehensive system of routes to
schools and parks.
Action A: In conjunction with the Safe Routes to School Program, adopt and maintain a
pedestrian and bike system map identifying the locations of connections to key facilities.
The system may consist of continuous routes that connect higher density neighborhoods,
schools, parks, shopping areas, and workplaces and may also include facilities on
identified rural collector streets and adjacent to creeks.
Action B: In conjunction with the Safe Routes to School Program, implement street
improvements connecting and adjacent to schools.
Action C: Evaluate and update school zones to prioritize enhancements that benefit safe
routes to schools.
Transit and Travel Demand Management
Atascadero is served by fixed-route and dial-a-ride transit. Fixed route stops largely are
concentrated along the El Camino Real corridor, with infrequent service common to low-density
areas. Higher land use densities and enhanced multimodal connectivity will improve the viability
of transit, which can lead to improved service. Well-planned transit infrastructure can improve
transportation equity and access for all users to jobs, housing, schools, and other major
destinations. It can also play a role in reducing regional vehicle miles traveled. Figure 6-3 (Transit
Facilities) identifies the transit network and service areas in Atascadero.
Successful Travel Demand Management (TDM) can reduce or postpone the need for roadway
improvements, particularly on commute routes such as Highway 101. TDM measures are
designed to reduce peak-period traffic by increasing use of transit, bicycling, and walking
(particularly for work and school trips), and by promoting flexible working hours, ridesharing, and
land use and circulation management programs.
Goal MO-5: Reliable alternative travel modes that reduce traffic congestion and improve air
quality
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-15
Policy MO-5.1: Single-Occupancy Vehicle Alternatives. Promote alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicle travel, particularly for commute trips.
Action A: Seek funding for programs that promote transit, ridesharing, bicycling and
walking.
Action B: Support efforts to provide rideshare service to Downtown and major shopping
and employment centers.
Policy MO-5.2: Public Transit. Support the evolution of public transit to meet the changing needs
for local and regional access, including fixed route and demand responsive service.
Action A: Work with the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) to encourage
use of local and regional public transit.
Action B: Provide fixed-routed transit with bus shelters along El Camino Real.
Action C: Support and encourage the use and expansion of Park & Ride facilities and other
rideshare infrastructure.
Policy MO-5.3: County TDM Requirements. Seek alternatives that bring Atascadero closer to
compliance with Transportation Demand Management program requirements of the San Luis
Obispo County Clean Air Plan to reduce peak period trip generation.
Action A: Support programs that encourage employers to promote alternatives to driving
alone to work, such as carpooling, walking, biking, transit, and considering slight
adjustments to work schedules to incentivize alternatives.
Emerging Mobility Technology
As mobile technology and artificial intelligence become increasingly common, they are radically
transforming mobility options and transportation systems. As the future of transportation
continues to evolve, the City will remain flexible in accommodating better and more efficient ways
to address transportation. Self-driving cars and trucks, smart street and parking technologies,
adaptive signal controls, parking availability information, and other forms of new technology can
improve many aspects of all modal experiences.
Bike or Scooter Sharing Systems
A bike or scooter-sharing system is a service in which these vehicles are made available for short-
term rentals, often using a dockless system and activated by mobile devices. Popularly used
vehicles include electric-powered devices such as scooters and bicycles. These vehicles can travel
on local roadways, particularly within bike lanes, but are not recommended on sidewalks. While
Atascadero may not be positioned for such systems immediately, evolving technologies and user
interest can shift as the population and housing density increases. The City will stay abreast of
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-16
new personal mobility trends and be prepared to respond to what works well for Atascadero.
On-Demand Rideshare
Ride-sharing services are services that use online-enabled platforms to connect passengers with
local drivers using their personal vehicles. In most cases, these are a comfortable method for
door-to-door transport. As this service continues to expand for rides and delivery services, the
City may consider expanding designated curb-side pick-up/drop-off areas within Downtown,
commercial centers, schools, and other popular activity areas.
Autonomous Vehicles
Self-driving vehicles are cars or trucks in which human drivers are never required to take control
to safely operate the vehicle. Also known as autonomous or “driverless” vehicles, they combine
sensors and software to control, navigate, and drive the vehicle. This is technology the City will
need to monitor and consider how to properly regulate use before it is established or widely
adopted locally. For instance, one approach may be restricting autonomous vehicle use to arterial
and collector roads that have clear striping, signage, and other identification systems.
The deployment of advanced technology can help people more easily move around Atascadero.
However, given that the local roads range from high-capacity arterials to rural local streets, the
City will ensure that deployment of these technologies occurs safely, efficiently, and flexibly. The
following goal and policies identify ways the City will support expanding new mobility technology
while ensuring safe and efficient operations.
Goal MO-6: Anticipating and addressing emerging mobility technology proactively to allow
new systems and industries to operate in Atascadero on the City’s terms
Policy MO-6.1: Changing Mobile Technology. Encourage the use of mobile or other electronic
devices with similar on-demand hailing functions, particularly for seniors, persons with
disabilities, and other mobility challenged people.
Action A: Manage curb space to efficiently balance parking needs, passenger pick-up and
drop-off, commercial goods deliveries, and multimodal access.
Policy MO-6.2: Autonomous Vehicles. Update, when warranted, transportation systems and
policies as autonomous and automated vehicles and their attendant facilities are developed
locally and regionally.
Action A: Develop an Autonomous Vehicles Master Plan that includes operational
requirements, pilot programs, and/or incentives that will allow the technology to be
incrementally deployed in the City while ensuring proper safety measures are in place to
ensure they operate on specific, safe streets.
Chapter 6 Mobility Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 6-17
Policy MO-6.3: Performance Analysis Measures. Utilize technology to create performance
measures to interpret data metrics of vehicles, bicycling, walking, and transit usage within streets,
sidewalks, and public facilities.
Action A: Work with local universities and transportation agencies to capture mobility
user data as part of student research projects.
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Road Classification
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
Local | Privately Maintained
Unincorporated
Mobility Improvements
Interchange Improvement
Intersection Improvement
Circulation Diagram
Figure 6-1
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
(These improvements are based on EIR
Conclusions and not to be considered in the
next 20 years)
a
Los Padres National Forest
® II
CJ
'._ - J
CJ
1111
0
0
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Bicycle and Trail Routes
Multi-Use (Existing)
Multi-Use (Planned)
Class 1 (Existing)
Class 2 (Existing)
Class 2 (Planned)
Trailhead Access
!HT Trailhead
!HT Trailhead Parking
Bicycle and TrailFacilities
Figure 6-2
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
a
®
'
National Forest Los Padres
' "-, \, ......
.... '~
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
1111
, .... ....._.,,,,,,,,,, ..
II
T
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
P
P
P
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
PP
PS
P
P
S
P P
P
P
P
P
P
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
SLO RTA Bus Stop
T Transfer Hub
Bus Stop | Single Dirrection
Bus Stop | Multi-Direction
Timed Stop
SLO RTA Route 9
Daily Route
Limited Service / Express Trips
Dial-A-Ride Service
Fare Zone 1
Fare Zone 2
Public Services
P Public Facility
S School
Transit Facilities
Figure 6-3
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
T
Pine MtnColony Park
Stadium
Park
Sunken
Gardens
El
Ca
m
i
n
o
Re
a
l
Tra
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
Lewi
s
A
v
e
Eas
t
M
a
l
l
Vena
d
o
A
v
e
Santa Ynez
A
v
e
Fresno
A
v
e
So
m
brill
a
Ave
Santa
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
Pal
m
a
A
v
e
ArdillaRd
Ol
m
e
d
a
A
v
e
County
Offices
Atascadero JuniorHigh School
AUSD Fine ArtsAcademy
North County
Christian School
Senior
Center
City Hall
Atascadero
Library
Police
Department
/ EOC
Fire Station 1
Colony Park
Community Center
A-Town Skate Park
41
101
P
S
S
S
P
P
P
P P
P
P
Detail Area
see Detail Area
a
,
f ,
'I
~ ,,
'-
} \ (
l ~ \. I '-, '-I ~ \ ~ I ',, \_ I
~ f ~
~
Los Padres National Forest
®
San Benito Road
__ Elementary School
--~\.
AUSD Oak Hills
fl Continuatio~ High School
'J
) '
',__ _\
er
I
(
II
CJ
~-J
CJ
1111
• 0
(:)
•
0
0
Atascadero
OUR CITY , OUR PLAN
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Road Classification
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
Local | Privately Maintained
Unincorporated
Truck Routes
Truck Routes
Figure 6-4
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
a
Los Padres National Forest
® --======---i:::::::::==========i II
CJ
'._ - J
CJ
1111
Atascadero
OUR CITY , OUR PLAN
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 7: Recreation, Open Space,
and Natural Resources Element
Introduction
The rural nature of Atascadero—with open spaces and oak studded hillsides—are fundamental
components of the City’s character and quality of life. Atascadero is surrounded by natural beauty
and resources, from the coastal mountains to the west and north, and the Salinas River Valley to
the east and south. Varied habitats and environments occur throughout the Planning Area,
including oak woodlands, chaparral, riparian creek corridors, and rangeland.
To help connect the community to nature and opportunities for recreation, the City provides an
array of public parks and recreational opportunities: miles of trails, equestrian amenities,
lakefront picnic areas, and specialized facilities for sports and leisure activities. Atascadero is also
home to the Central Coast Zoo, the only zoo in the region accredited by the Association of Zoos
and Aquariums. In addition, San Luis Obispo County manages regional parks located in the City,
and several private developments include park and recreational amenities for their residents. This
element provides an overview of natural resources and recreation and open space amenities,
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-2
with specific goals, policies, and actions related to the consideration and management of these
resources in response to future community needs.
Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Priorities
To support recreation, open space, and natural resources goals, this General Plan considers these
resources as an integral component of the City’s quality of life strategy, one that invites
placemaking, tourism, and a focus on economic development.
Parks and Open Spaces
As of 2024, the City owns and operates seven public parks (totaling approximately 226 acres) and
several recreational facilities (Colony Park Community Center, Pavilion on the Lake) that provide
space for residents to enjoy passive and active forms of recreation, including opportunities to
hike, bike, and ride horses (see Figure 7-1). The City also owns and operates the five-acre Central
Coast Zoo, allowing visitors to view hundreds of animal species from around the world. While the
overall acreage of parks and open spaces is relatively high, not all Atascadero residents have the
same level of access to park and recreational opportunities, as a majority of the City is rural in
nature with large distances between larger lots and the urban core.
Opportunities to improve existing and create new linkages to parks and recreational amenities
would improve the quality of life for residents and visitors. These may include new or expanded
trails via the Jim Green Trail, Pine Mountain Loop, Stadium Park Trail, Three Bridges Oak Preserve
Trail, and the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail. Also, as new residential development
occurs near the City’s boundaries or along El Camino Real neighborhoods, new small-scale,
neighborhood-oriented parks or plaza spaces may be warranted, along with new multi-modal
connections that connect the community to regional open space areas.
Trails
Atascadero contains approximately 17 miles of public trails (2024) either owned and managed by
the City, San Luis Obispo County, or the Atascadero Land Preservation Society. This trail system is
a community amenity and benefit. The opportunities to enhance pedestrian and bike connections
to existing and new trails would better link residents and visitors to recreational destinations,
including the Salinas River and Atascadero Lake Park. In addition to providing residents with better
access, the City envisions these improvements as a draw for visitors looking to experience
Atascadero’s natural environment.
Oak Woodlands
Atascadero contains a diversity of habitats and ecosystems. At least four types of oak woodlands
are represented in the City, including Blue Oak Woodlands, Coastal Oak Woodlands, Valley Oak
Woodlands, and Blue Oak-Foothill Pines (see Figure 7-2). Oak woodlands provide important
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-3
wildlife habitat and are an integral part of the City’s aesthetic appeal and historic character. The
California Department of Forestry has mapped approximately 10,822 acres of oak woodlands
within the Planning Area. Approximately 7,600 acres of oak woodland habitat occur on parcels
zoned for residential use, largely within the rural areas beyond the Urban Limit Line.
Slope and Topography
Nearly half of Atascadero consists of hilly or steep mountainous topography. Steep slopes, while
providing dramatic views, can also pose development challenges. Typically, hillsides are much
harder to serve with infrastructure due to the need to pump water uphill and build roads on
challenging slopes. Hillside areas also make emergency service support and evacuations from
natural disasters—wildfires, landslides, earthquakes, and floods—more difficult (see Chapter 9).
Creeks, Rivers, and Other Habitat
Atascadero contains approximately 27 miles of creeks and rivers, including Atascadero Creek,
Boulder Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and the Salinas River. In addition, there are over 54
miles of mapped, unidentified “blue-line” drainages that range from simple land depressions to
jurisdictional waterways.
The waterways provide important wildlife corridors connecting the Salinas River to the Santa
Lucia Mountains and are designated critical habitat areas for South-Central California Coast
Steelhead Trout. Additionally, approximately 3,000 acres of critical habitat for California red-
legged frogs include the upper watershed areas of Morro and Atascadero Creeks (see Figure 7-
3). Historically, creeks in Atascadero have sustained degraded habitat quality due to
encroachment from development, sedimentation and erosion, off-road vehicle use, and urban
pollution. Protecting and enhancing the effected watersheds will support the local ecosystem,
help improve water flow to reduce localized flooding risks, and enhance the recreational quality
of the City’s waterways (see Figure 7-4).
The local creeks and rivers also provide recreational opportunities for many residents. The Salinas
River has been recognized by residents as an asset to be protected and bolstered as a regional
attraction for tourism, recreation, and education. Potential amenities and activities include trails,
fishing, interpretative signage, and wildlife observation areas.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-4
Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Goals,
Policies, and Actions
The following sections include goals, supporting policies, and implementation actions, related to
the following topics:
Parks and Recreation
Trails
Open Space Conservation
Biological Resources
Cultural and Historic Resources
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Parks and Recreation
Parks and other public spaces that support recreational pursuits enhance community health and
quality of life. Not only do these spaces promote physical and mental health, but they also serve
as spaces for social, civic, and cultural engagement. With seven parks totaling more than 200
acres and several facilities providing opportunities for a range of activities like hiking, biking, and
horse riding, Atascadero offers recreational opportunities for all community members.
In addition, the County of San Luis Obispo owns, maintains, and operates over 200 acres of parks
and open space land within the City limits, including Chalk Mountain Golf Course and Heilmann
Regional Park.
Goal REC-1: Diverse parks, recreational activities, and leisure experiences for people of all ages
Policy REC-1.1: Park and Recreation Facilities Planning and Operations. Provide adequate park
and recreation facilities to accommodate current community needs and planned future growth.
Action A: Update the comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan to provide for
long-term needs.
Action B: Prepare and maintain individual master plans for major City park facilities that
include a programming component and management requirements.
Action C: Provide diverse recreation opportunities citywide for residents and visitors,
including multi-purpose sports complexes, sports courts, play areas for children,
equestrian trails, bikeways, jogging paths, hiking trails, and community centers.
Action D: Acquire and improve a neighborhood park site in northern Atascadero.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-5
Action E: If future development is approved for the Eagle Ranch property, require the
development of publicly accessible parks, recreational facilities, equestrian facilities, and
trails, including a link towards the Los Padres National Forest land to the west.
Action F: Encourage the acquisition of parkland and open space beyond the Quimby Act
ratio of five acres per 1,000 residents.
Policy REC-1.2: Interagency Coordination. Work with State, regional, and local agencies to plan
for, acquire, and expand park and recreation facilities and amenities in Atascadero.
Action A: Pursue expansion of sports fields in the area to the east of Paloma Park, and/or
execute a long-term agreement with the State to acquire or lease the site. Analyze
potential expansion into a regional sports facility.
Action B: Work with the Atascadero Unified School District to formulate a program for
joint use of facilities to attain a system of school-park complexes, and execute necessary
agreements to allocate maintenance and operation costs for joint use.
Action C: Work with the County and other agencies to acquire and develop parks and
facilities.
Policy REC-1.3: Park and Recreation Financing. Develop a method of financing park and
recreational facilities and services using a variety of revenue sources.
Action A: Acquire parkland through developer dedications, development impact fees, or
other financing mechanisms.
Action B: Work with community partners on maintenance of facilities, parklands, and
trails.
Action C: Use development impact and/or in-lieu fees to fund park and recreation facilities
of all sizes.
Action D: Finance park operations in part through user fees.
Policy REC-1.4: Specialized Recreation. Provide specialized recreation opportunities based on
projected needs and standards identified in Park Master Plan(s).
Action A: Plan for funding on-going operations and maintenance to finance development
of facilities that support specialized recreation.
Action B: Promote the Zoo, Atascadero Lake Park, and other City parks as unique and
valuable attractions.
Action C: Support equestrian staging areas and trail systems, including the De Anza trail
along the Salinas River.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-6
Trails
Atascadero has more than 17 miles of public trails owned and managed by the City, San Luis
Obispo County, and the Atascadero Land Preservation Society. Some follow natural features, like
the Atascadero Lake Park pathway, and some trails have been developed to create new
recreational opportunities. A recurring theme of the 2045 General Plan is enhancing existing
amenities and developing new amenities where feasible. This strategy can improve connectivity
overall to create a system accessible to community members and visitors.
Goal REC-2: A network of public trails that provide opportunities to engage with nature, move
through the City, and connect to key destinations
Policy REC-2.1: Trail Connections and Signage. Provide access to a range of City destinations
through a well-thought-out, safe, and integrated multi-modal system.
Action A: Integrate multi-modal (pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian) and public
transportation facilities with the network of public trails/paths, parks, and recreation
facilities, consistent with the Mobility Element (see Chapter 6).
Action B: Develop a comprehensive signage program for pedestrian walkways, bikeways,
equestrian trails, and recreation trails.
Policy REC-2.2: Public Access to Creeks. Preserve creek reservation parcels for open space and
support opportunities for public access where appropriate.
Action A: Develop parks, trails, and recreational amenities where appropriate on or
adjacent to public creek reservation parcels.
Action B: Require the dedication of trail easements and access points to and along creeks
and the Salinas River as part of subdivision maps or development permits consistent with
the Mobility Element (see Chapter 6) and Subdivision Map Act, as appropriate to the
conditions.
Open Space Conservation
Open space can be defined as any area unencumbered by private development potential. Open
space areas can be set aside for preserving habitat, guarding against natural hazards such as
flooding or wildfire risk, and providing benefits such as groundwater recharge. Some open space
areas can serve multiple benefits. Atascadero’s dramatic mountain vistas, expansive undisturbed
landscape, and tree-lined streets create a link between the more developed parts of the City and
the natural environment, and embody the elements of Atascadero’s rural character. Designating
and maintaining open spaces achieves several community goals: preserving the character of rural
residential neighborhoods, protecting natural resources, creating recreation opportunities, and
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-7
facilitating public access to nature. The following goals, policies, and actions work to preserve and
enhance Atascadero’s natural and scenic resources.
Goal REC-3: Dedicated system of open space that upholds the community’s rural character, local
biodiversity, natural landscape, and enjoyment of recreation
Policy REC-3.1: Open Space System. Prioritize enhancement and acquisition of parks and open
space to meet evolving community needs.
Action A: Seek the acquisition of open space areas that can be managed by community
partners.
Action B: Require that hazard lands be managed to minimize risk to life and property,
including delineating areas as preserved open space.
Action C: Require that areas with special environmental resources be considered and
integrated into development planning.
Policy REC-3.2: New Development. Require that new development and subdivisions blend in with
surrounding topography by minimizing disturbance to the existing natural environment.
Action A: Maintain zoning districts to reduce density as natural topography/slope
increases.
Action B: Require development built on hillsides to conform with the City’s adopted
hillside grading ordinance.
Action C: Maintain requirements that prohibit new lots with slope averaging 30 percent
or greater except where such lots can contain building envelopes with less than 20 percent
average slope.
Action D: Require dedication of open space easements, parklands, and open space as
mitigation for subdivisions and development projects that impact significant slopes,
floodplains, watercourses and wetlands, wooded areas, sensitive areas, historic sites,
cultural sites, and similar areas.
Action E: Require new single-family subdivisions of 20 units or greater to provide on-site
shared greenspace/park amenities.
Policy REC-3.3: Grading. Prevent unnecessary intensive grading of development sites.
Action A: Periodically review, and update as necessary, the hillside grading ordinance to
minimize hillside grading, cuts, fills, and ridgeline disturbance.
Action B: Require a schematic grading plan in compliance with the Municipal Code prior
to any site disturbance, lot line adjustment, parcel map, or tract map proposed on sites
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-8
with slopes greater than 15 percent.
Action C: Maintain thresholds that limit and restrict development based on average slopes
consistent with the Municipal Code.
Biological Resources
Biological resources provide critical ecosystems that support plant species and provide animal
habitat. Natural habitats can provide air and water purification, flood control, pollination for
crops, and temperature regulation The following goals, policies, and actions ensure that
Atascadero’s sensitive biological and watershed resources are considered into the future.
Goal REC-4: Consideration of biological and watershed resources within the urban areas to provide
multiple benefits, with resource areas including oak woodlands, riparian corridors, native trees and
plants, and creeks and rivers
Policy REC-4.1: Natural Resources Protection. Protect natural and sensitive resource areas to the
maximum extent practicable.
Action A: Enforce all provisions of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance.
Action B: Maintain a GIS-based inventory of sensitive habitats and resources, including
native trees, watercourse- and wetland-adjacent areas, archaeological resources, and
historic sites.
Action C: Work with non-profits and community organizations to preserve biologically
sensitive areas to increase community resiliency and public access to recreational areas.
Action D: Require identification of scenic and sensitive lands (creeks, riparian corridors,
wetlands, critical habitats, etc.) on development applications. Develop and work with
applicants to implement avoidance and mitigation measures to minimize impacts.
Action E: Carefully evaluate public and private projects to require the consideration of
trees, watersheds, natural slopes, and other natural features.
Policy REC-4.2: Tree Protection and Replenishment. Protect and replenish street and native
trees.
Action A: Implement and enforce the Native Tree Ordinance to protect and replenish
native tree species.
Action C: Implement a comprehensive street tree planting and maintenance program,
specifically within the Downtown core and along major corridors.
Action D: Require planting of shade trees in new projects, in part to provide shade for
adjacent buildings to conserve energy use.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-9
Action E: Update the Zoning Ordinance to require native trees and plant species be
incorporated into landscaping plans, as appropriate.
Action F: Require lot line adjustments and tentative subdivision maps on sites with 25
percent or greater native tree canopy cover to establish locations of building sites,
driveways, and leach fields that will minimize impacts to oak woodlands.
Policy REC-4.3: Watershed Protection. Ensure that development along Atascadero Creek, Graves
Creeks, the Salinas River, blue line creeks, and natural springs, lakes, and other riparian areas does
not interrupt natural flows or adversely impact riparian ecosystems and water quality.
Action A: Require new development be designed in accordance with all applicable best
management practices to prevent obstruction or diversion of flood and drainage flow to
minimize adverse impacts to riparian vegetation and habitat along or within a
watercourse.
Action B: Maintain waterways in a natural state; prohibit concrete channelization of
creeks.
Action C: Limit development and uses that allow animal keeping, storage of vehicles or
materials, and active recreation uses that result in disturbance of sensitive resource areas.
Action D: Allow flood protection measures (such as selective brush cleaning), low-impact
trail development, streambed maintenance, and bank protection along waterways where
appropriate with necessary permits.
Action E: Preserve creek reservations and the Salinas River for open space and
recreational use. Minimize the impact of recreational uses on the habitat value and open
space qualities of the creeks.
Action F: Protect areas subject to flooding from development, consistent with the City's
flood hazard ordinance requirements.
Action G: In conjunction with the Atascadero Mutual Water Company, maintain
regulations that identify existing and potential well sites and aquifer recharge areas,
including sufficient buffers to protect them from contamination.
Action H: Support the establishment and protection of floodable terraces, wetlands, and
revegetation along creeks and streams.
Policy REC-4.4: Stormwater Control Program. Maintain a stormwater control program consistent
with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
Program (Phase II).
Action A: Continue to implement the Urban Storm Water Quality Management and
Discharge Control ordinance.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-10
Action B: Minimize impervious surfaces and decrease off-site storm flows for new and
modified development.
Action C: Consider incorporating regionally focused improvements into the stormwater
master plan, including shared detention facilities and natural retention and detention
systems.
Action D: Continue to notify project applicants of requirements to inspect sediment and
erosion control mitigation measures each year.
Policy REC-4.5: Agricultural Practices. Allow agricultural practices, including keeping livestock and
farm animals, on parcels designated as Rural Residential and Agriculture, with consideration for
the natural environment and residential character.
Action A: Regulate allowed agricultural practices and the keeping of domestic animals on
rural and agricultural lands consistent with the farm animal regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Policy REC-4.6: Soil Health. Encourage soil conservation by minimizing grading and preventing
erosion.
Action A: Require soil retention and erosion control as conditions of approval for
development projects consistent with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards.
Action B: Periodically review the Municipal Code for consistency with National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System requirements.
Policy REC-4.7: Water Conservation. Support ongoing water conservation efforts.
Action A: Coordinate water conservation programs with the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company.
Action B: Consider implementation of reclaimed water use, as feasible.
Action C: Encourage incorporation of water conservation measures in new development.
Action D: Continue to implement the State of California’s Model Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (MWELO) for new and rehabilitated landscape projects.
Policy REC-4.8: Atascadero Lake Water Quality Improvements. Develop and implement a
program to improve water quality in Atascadero Lake.
Action A: Perform periodic water quality assessments of Atascadero Lake.
Action B: Identify potential pollution sources and incorporate feasible mitigation
strategies into the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-11
Action C: Work with local community groups and organizations to monitor lake water
quality and propose strategies for enhancements.
Action D: Seek additional water supply sources, including recycled water sources, to
maintain Atascadero Lake water levels and quality.
Cultural and Historic Resources
While Atascadero was created as a fully master-planned community in the early 1900s, human
activity in the area dates back millennia. Many Indigenous communities lived and/or traveled
through the area, and preserving their history in parallel with Atascadero’s developed history is
important. In addition, Atascadero has a rich and eclectic mix of historical homes and structures
having significance based on their style, unique events or people associated with them, or other
qualifying factors.
Goal REC-6: Protection and celebration of Atascadero’s rich prehistory and history
Policy REC-6.1: Cultural Resource Protection. Protect prehistoric cultural resources from
disturbance associated with development.
Action A: Maintain a current GIS-based map of generalized areas of known archaeological
resources.
Action B: Continue to implement the City’s archaeologic development standards.
Action C: Require short- and long-term mitigation measures for significant archaeological
resource sites, include avoidance of impacts, burial under sterile fill, and/or monitoring of
earthmoving activities.
Action D: Involve local Tribal governments with any work located within known
archaeological sites where resources are present or likely.
Policy REC-6.2: Historic Structures and Resources. Encourage conservation and preservation of
places and buildings of historical and architectural significance.
Action A: Periodically review, and update as necessary, the historic resources standards in
the zoning ordinance to maintain historic community assets and provide recognition and
consideration of historic resources, districts, and character defining features.
Action B: Create and maintain a list of historic resources in Atascadero, known as the
Historic Resources List, to maintain resources significant to Atascadero’s heritage, such as
Colony homes with character-defining features.
Action C: Utilize the State Historic Building Code to encourage rehabilitation, preservation,
Chapter 7 Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 7-12
restoration, or relocation of historic buildings.
Action D: Utilize the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Properties to assess proposed improvements to historic properties.
Action E: Develop incentives for retaining and rehabilitating Atascadero’s historical
resources, including exceptions to development regulations, conservation districts, staff
technical assistance, programs to facilitate relocation instead of demolition, and Mills’ Act
contracts.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
While greenhouse gas reduction remains a regional and global issue, each jurisdiction in California
is obligated to define and implement strategies to reduce localized greenhouse gas emissions,
with the aim to achieve the statewide reductions established by the Global Warming Solutions
Act of 2006 and related legislation. Atascadero first addressed greenhouse gas emission in its
2014 Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP set a framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions,
and the City has made considerable progress over the years in climate actions and sustainability.
This General Plan has policies and actions that will move Atascadero forward in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and meet updated reduction targets.
Goal REC-7: Improve air quality and reduced health risks
Policy REC-7.1: Clean Air. Support regional efforts to maintain clean air.
Action A: Require dust control and emissions limitations during project construction.
Action B: Adopt circulation policies that encourage vehicle trip reductions consistent with
the Mobility Element (see Chapter 6), and support regional programs to maintain clean
air.
Action C: Concentrate new intensive development at identified nodes and commercial
corridors to help reduce vehicle trips.
Action D: Continue to support the development of Park-and-Ride facilities in appropriate
locations.
!CE
!CE
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Park and Trails System
Parks
Open Space
Trails
Trailhead
Trailhead Parking
!Equestrian Center
Park and TrailsSystem
Figure 7-1
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
a
,
'I
I
Los Padres National Forest
II
CJ
'._ - J
CJ
1111
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
CA Vegetation (CalFire FRAP)
Blue Oak Woodland
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine
Coastal Oak Woodland
Valley Oak Woodland
California Vegetation -Oak Woodlands
Figure 7-2
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Los Padres
®
I Forest Nation a
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Critical Habitat
Steelhead
California Red-Legged Frog
Critical Habitat
Figure 7-3
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
CJ
C_J
CJ
--
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
101
101
41
41Central Coastal
18060006
Salinas
18060005
Atascadero
Lake
Eagle
C
reek
Sa
nt
a
Margarita
Creek
Pa l o m a C reek
HaleCreek
Mor ro Creek
Gra v es Creek
Paso Ro bl e s Creek
Tro
u
t
C
r
e
e
k
Tor
o
C
r
e
e
k
Little
M
orroCreek
Santa Rita C re ek
East
F
o rk Morro
C
r
eek
So ut h Fo rk Sa nta
Ri t a Cree k
SalinasRiver
Atasc aderoCree
k
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
National Hydrology Dataset (NHD)
Connector
Stream/River
Artificial Path
Lake/Pond
Reservoir
National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Riverine
Watershed
Subbasin Boundaries (HUC-8)
Water Resources
Figure 7-5
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Central Coastal
Cuyama
EstrellaSalinas
Sal
i
n
a
s
R
i
v
e
r
Subbasin Watershed Boundaries
OUR CITY ero , OUR PLAN
CJ
1111
• , • ~>-
I ' ~
" ' 1111
1111
,:f"
r,? 1111
1111
1111
~. 1111
1111
Cl
•
..
res Nat· ional F or est ,,,_,.,
•
t \
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 8: Public Services and
Infrastructure Element
Introduction
City residents, institutions, and the business community depend upon reliable, flexible, and cost-
effective public services and infrastructure to ensure that homes and businesses have efficient
utility services and that desired growth can be accommodated. Citywide, the commitment
remains to ensure all residents benefit from high-quality public services and infrastructure suited
to community character and growth objectives. The City’s Public Works Department oversees
many of the local infrastructure and service delivery systems: street maintenance and
rehabilitation, stormwater management and flood control, sewage collection and treatment, and
maintenance of City-owned parks, trails, and municipal buildings (see Chapter 7). The Atascadero
Mutual Water Company, a publicly owned enterprise whose founding dates to the original colony
in 1913, provides water service, drawing supplies from local groundwater sources and distributing
that water to customers through over 250 miles of pipelines.
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-2
City-provided public services include law enforcement, fire prevention and protection,
development review, building permitting, recreation activities, and community events (see
Chapter 9). The San Luis Obispo County Public Libraries system operates the Atascadero Library
in Downtown. The Atascadero Unified School District, an independent government agency,
provides public education services for students in transitional kindergarten through grade 12.
For solid waste collection, disposal, and recycling, the City contracts with a private franchised
waste company. Natural gas is supplied by the Southern California Gas Company, and Pacific Gas
and Electric Company (PG&E) provides electric power transmission and service. Alternative
electric service providers are also expanding into the area. Residents and businesses have access
to several telecommunications service providers, with available companies and services
continually shifting in response to advances in technology.
Public Services and Infrastructure Priorities
To help accommodate future projected growth, prioritize future investments, and deliver high-
quality community amenities, this General Plan addresses the following public services and
infrastructure issues.
Water Supply
The Atascadero Mutual Water Company 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) projected
future groundwater budget period (2020–2042) identifies an average annual increase in
groundwater storage of 800-acre feet per year1. Looking forward, areas for above-ground or
below-ground storage (such as tanks), or groundwater recharge areas, may be identified to
expand water storage. This will address concerns related to future multi-year drought events that
could potentially impact seasonal groundwater capacity.
Wastewater
The City owns, operates, and maintains local sanitary sewer collection facilities and the local
water reclamation facility, which as of 2024, had a treatment capacity of 1.4 million gallons per
day. Approximately 50 percent of properties in Atascadero rely on individual onsite septic systems
and are not connected to the sanitary sewer system, with most of these located outside of the
Urban Services Line (USL). Two factors affect the need for a significant upgrade to the wastewater
treatment plant: (1) compliance with new water quality standards for effluent and (2) demands
associated with planned growth and sewer service expansion within the USL.
Flood Control Facilities
The Salinas River and several creeks traverse the City, providing some measure of natural flood
control. Installed flood control improvements, both private and public, consist of catch basins,
1 An acre-foot of water is 325,821 gallons, or roughly the amount sufficient to meet the needs of a household of four
for one year.
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-3
culverts, and pipes designed to manage runoff. In 2023, a major 100-year storm resulted in
significant flooding citywide, highlighting the need to evaluate opportunities to incorporate flood
control facilities where possible and maintain the capacity of natural creeks and waterways to
respond to potentially significant weather patterns and events in addition to the need to respond
to aging infrastructure conditions.
Infrastructure Undergrounding
Most electric power utility lines extend across the Atascadero via overhead lines. The threat of
extreme wind and heat present wildfire risks associated with sparking from these overhead lines.
Undergrounding utilities for new development can reduce fire risk, offer more reliable electrical
and communications service during and after storms, and reduced visual clutter.
High-Speed Communications Services
Reliable, convenient, and affordable access to high-speed internet and cell phone coverage
throughout the community promotes commerce and connectivity. The eastern side of Atascadero
generally has good access to broadband technology, but the steep terrain and low-intensity
development on Atascadero’s western side pose challenges for providers to offer reliable service.
Provision of reliable, high-speed communications services allows residents to stay connected to
the world and businesses to operate at their optimum.
Public Services and Infrastructure Goals, Policies, and Actions
The following sections include goal sections, with supporting policies and implementation
actions, related to the following topics:
Efficient and Fiscally Sustainable Operations
Water Supply and Delivery
Wastewater Collection and Treatment
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Protection
Solid Waste and Recycling
Energy
Telecommunications
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-4
Efficient and Fiscally Sustainable Operations
The City places a high priority on ensuring quality municipal facilities and services, from fire and
police services to street maintenance, flood control, and well-maintained parks and community
buildings.
Goal PSI-1: Continued reliable public infrastructure and services that support orderly
and desired growth
Policy PSI-1.1: Urban Services Line. Direct growth to areas where services can be provided cost
effectively.
Action A: Maintain lower-density residential Placetypes on non-City maintained streets.
Policy PSI-1.2: Capital Improvements Program. Maintain an updated Capital Improvements
Program (CIP) that forecasts needs at least five years into the future and implements General Plan
policies and programs as feasible.
Action A: Include in the CIP a prioritized list of projects, timing, and cost estimates.
Action B: Apply for grants to assist in the expansion of sewer to priority areas.
Action C: Seek funding to address aging and undersized infrastructure to support existing
and future service needs.
Policy PSI-1.3: Private Utility Service. Ensure that adequate private utility service capacity and
facilities exist prior to approving new development.
Action A: Coordinate with electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications service
providers to identify and ensure adequate service levels for existing and planned
development.
Action B: Require that private utilities development projects conform to City site
improvement standards and applicable ordinances.
Policy PSI-1.4: Capital Facilities Funding. Ensure that new development pays its fair share of
providing and/or installing all capital facilities needed to support it, including the infrastructure
necessary to attract high-tech and professional support businesses.
Action A: Continue to require new development to finance construction of facilities.
Policy PSI-1.5: Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal. Continue to support effective regional
planning for solid and hazardous waste disposal.
Action A: Contract with solid waste collection service providers capable of meeting City
and State goals regarding waste diversion at reasonable cost to residents and businesses.
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-5
Policy PSI-1.6: Public Libraries. Coordinate with the San Luis Obispo Public Libraries to maintain
the local library, with continuing access for all residents to modern, high-quality resources and
programs.
Policy PSI-1.7: Coordination between Agencies. Encourage independent public agencies to
consult and coordinate with the City on their development projects.
Action A: Support expansion of Atascadero State Hospital facilities and functions only
when impacts can be adequately mitigated.
Action B: Support the efforts of public and private K-12 schools, post-high school, and
trades educational facilities to provide diverse and high-quality learning opportunities,
and ensure such facilities integrate well into neighborhoods and districts.
Action C: Work with the school district, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, PG&E, the
State Hospital, and the County, in addition to other independent agencies, to ensure that
frontage and streetscape improvements adjacent to school sites area consistent with City
plans and standards.
Water Supply and Delivery
The Atascadero Mutual Water Company services over 30,000 residents through 10,000 service
connections and a system of groundwater wells, booster pumps, storage tanks, water treatment
facilities, pressure-reducing stations, and fire hydrants. In contrast to other Central Coast cities,
Atascadero (through the water company) enjoys a reliable water source. As required by State law,
the Atascadero Mutual Water Company prepares updates to its water system and water supply
plans to forecast and plan for future needs. The City works with Water Company staff to ensure
the plans reflect General Plan growth capacities.
Given that this General Plan accommodates growth largely within the USL, the Atascadero Mutual
Water Company will need to provide assurances that water system facilities will support the type
and location of new development. Through its master plan, facilities will continue to be defined
to provide needed service levels. Regarding water supply, a continued focus on water
conservation will help moderate demand withdrawals from local groundwater basins.
Goal PSI-2: Continued high-quality water services
Policy PSI-2.1: Water Service Capacity. Ensure that adequate water service capacity and facilities
exist prior to approving new development.
Action A: Coordinate with the Atascadero Mutual Water Company to ensure provision of
facilities and water supplies commensurate with demand and projected need.
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-6
Action B: Require all proposed new projects and new development requiring domestic
water service to obtain a will serve letter from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company.
Wastewater Collection and Treatment
The Public Works Department Wastewater Division manages all sewage collection, treatment,
and disposal services in the City. As of 2024, approximately 5,500 properties are served by City
sewer, with a roughly equal number rural properties served by individual private on-site disposal
systems. All collected sewage either flows or is pumped to the City’s water reclamation facility
located east of Chalk Mountain Golf Course, adjacent to the Salinas River. The plant’s effluent,
after being cleaned to meet State Water Quality Control Board standards, is directed into
percolation ponds which recharge groundwater, with a portion of the reclaimed groundwater
then used to irrigate the adjacent County-owned golf course.
Since the mid-2010s, the treatment plant has strained to meet increased treatment capacity
needs. With initiation of the 2045 General Plan, the City began the process of updating the
wastewater treatment and collection master plans to identify upgrades needed to support
planned growth levels and achieve high water quality for reclaimed water. The updated Water
Reclamation Facility Master Plan addresses long-term development goals. The study also
considered expanded treatment capacity to serve properties less suitable for on-site wastewater
treatment systems within the USL where not currently connected to the sewer system.
Additionally, in 2020, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB)
adopted a new Wastewater Discharge Requirements General Permit (General Permit) that
significantly tightened requirements for wastewater effluent. The new General Permit will require
a new wastewater treatment process to meet these stricter requirements.
Goal PSI-3: A comprehensive wastewater collection system and wastewater treatment plant
capacity that support growth and economic development goals
Policy PSI-3.1: Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan. Ensure the Water Reclamation Facility
Master Plan responds to long-term growth objectives and local water quality goals.
Policy PSI-3.2: Reclamation Facility. Construct and maintain a water reclamation facility with
capacity for forecasted growth that allows for beneficial reuse of treated wastewater.
Policy PSI-3.3: Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. Ensure the municipal sewage
collection system serves the needs of all customers efficiently and cost effectively.
Action A: Establish sewer service fees and adjust to levels that can fund planned
improvements to the water reclamation facility and sanitary sewer collection system.
Action B: Pursue State and Federal funding opportunities to update the current system
and comply with regional regulations.
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-7
Action C: Include provisions in the Sewer Collection System Master Plan to address
providing sewer service to identified areas in the Local Agency Management Program
(LAMP).
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Protection
Four natural watersheds cover Atascadero: Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and
the Salinas River. The Salinas River flows most of the year, whereas the other creeks are more
seasonal in nature. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has identified 100-year
floodplains along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and the Salinas River. While
localized flooding can and does occur during heavy rain events, including the major storms in
January 2023, the potential for major flooding is most likely to occur along Atascadero Creek and
Graves Creek (see additional discussion of flood zones in the Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Element).
The City has developed and maintains an extensive stormwater drainage system to protect
properties from flooding conditions. The system was designed and constructed before much of
the current development and prior to the rise of extreme weather events attributed to climate
change. Historical large storm events, including the large rainstorms of January 2023, have
identified system vulnerabilities. During the 2023 event, storm drains could not accommodate
the rapidly accumulating runoff or became clogged from stream sediment, resulting in flooded
roads, homes, and municipal buildings. Significant sources of stormwater inflow and infiltration
throughout the sewer collection system challenged the ability of the water reclamation facility to
handle loads.
Many of the system’s culverts and catch basins are undersized relative to the volumes of
anticipated runoff or require upgrades due to age. The Public Works Department maintains maps
identifying all stormwater drainage system components and, as part of the Capital Improvement
Plan, itemizes planned improvements to reduce flooding potential or otherwise improve the
drainage system. While the City historically has not prepared a stormwater management system
master plan, having such a plan in place might qualify the City for grants for more comprehensive
system enhancements.
Goal PSI-4: Minimized flood risks via a well-functioning stormwater management system
Policy PSI-4.1: Stormwater Drainage Planning. Plan comprehensively for stormwater drainage,
considering the age of the City’s system and emerging needs based on targeted growth areas and
areas of concern.
Action A: Prepare, implement, and keep current a stormwater drainage master plan.
Identify infrastructure in need of significant improvements or capacity upgrades.
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-8
Action B: Require improvement and ongoing maintenance of private stormwater
drainage and retention areas as a condition of development approval.
Action C: Identify and collect development impact fees needed to pay for mitigation of
regional stormwater drainage impacts for new development.
Action D: Require implementation of best management practices for new development
to reduce discharges of nonpoint-source pollutants to the storm drain system.
Action E: Require implementation of post-construction structural control measures for
new development to mitigate and treat additional stormwater runoff created by new
impervious surfaces.
Action F: Consider adopting watershed management plan(s) and implementation
mechanisms in Downtown to facilitate off-site stormwater management aimed at
maximizing development potential.
Policy PSI-4.2: Stormwater Management. Manage stormwater drainage in a manner that
protects and enhances natural drainage areas as habitat and outdoor places people enjoy.
Action A: Establish guidelines or standards for drainage improvements in natural areas
that respond to applicable Federal and State requirements.
Solid Waste and Recycling
The California legislature has enacted several laws designed to reduce the volumes of solid waste
entering landfills with the overarching goals of producing less waste, protecting land and water
resources, and making people more conscious about their consumption practices. With
consumers increasingly purchasing online and receiving goods at home, the potential exists for
waste volumes to level or increase. Coupled with State programs, local efforts can be targeted to
increase people’s awareness of the negative impacts of diverting waste into landfills and to shift
toward less-impactful behaviors.
The City contracts with a franchise waste hauler for trash pick-up services. That company is
required to provide services consistent with State law regarding separation of recyclable materials
and organic waste (yard clippings, food scraps) from the rest of the trash. In partnership with the
County’s Integrated Waste Management Agency, the City promotes awareness of requirements.
Goal PSI-5: Reduced waste volumes entering regional landfills and increased consumer commitment
to minimizing waste production
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-9
Policy PSI-5.1: Waste Hauler Contracts. Contract with franchise waste haulers whose operations
make it easy for residents and business owners to divert recyclable materials and organics from
the waste stream.
Action A: Continue to encourage the reduction of solid waste through source reduction,
curbside recycling, green waste collection, and recovery in cooperation with the
Integrated Waste Management Board (SLO IWMA).
Action B: Support outreach and education efforts related to waste reduction, recycling,
and organic waste, including statewide programs for the reuse and recycling of boxes and
other packaging materials.
Goal PSI-5.2: Efficient, effective, safe, and orderly waste collection services.
Action A: Work with the waste hauler to identify solutions for consolidated waste
collection and pick-up service in higher density, commercial, and mixed-use areas.
Action B: Review and update, as needed, the municipal code to ensure that waste
collection service does not impede on-street parking, emergency access, or visual
character.
Energy
Electricity and natural gas power the systems that allow residents to enjoy comfortable lifestyles
and businesses to thrive. When they work well, we do not think about them much. If systems fail
or the price we pay for electricity or gas strains our budgets, we think about them a lot. In
Atascadero, private companies—Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)/Central Coast Community Energy
(3CE)—provide electrical services with PG&E owing and maintaining the electrical transmission
infrastructure. Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) provides natural gas services,
however, many residences on larger westside lots use propane gas. PG&E, 3CE, and SoCal Gas
support their customers in efforts to conserve energy and lower their energy bills, including
programs providing financial assistance and rebates/incentives, as well as advice on home solar
energy system installation.
The City does not have the ability to affect private energy operations but can facilitate residents’
and businesses’ efforts to go “off grid” and establish their own onsite electric power systems.
Such efforts can result in clean energy production—meaning less pollution—and lower energy
costs for individuals.
Goal PSI-6: Increased development and use of clean, renewable energy systems
Chapter 8 Public Services and Infrastructure Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 8-10
Policy PSI-6.1: Onsite Renewable Energy. Facilitate the installation of onsite renewable energy
systems for residences and places of business.
Policy PSI-6.2: Energy Efficient Planning and Building Design. Encourage energy-efficient site
planning and building design/construction.
Action A: Implement streamlined building permit review processes for onsite energy
systems.
Action B: Continue to implement the California Green Building Standards.
Telecommunications
Access to available, affordable, and modern telecommunications infrastructure—including
broadband, fiber optic, wireless (WiFi), and emerging technologies—connects Atascadero
residents and businesses to the world and can serve as a major economic development tool,
attracting businesses that require high-speed, reliable telecommunications service. Atascadero
will work to facilitate and support a wide range of innovative telecommunications systems and
services to attract and retain businesses, provide information and communication access for all
residents, and facilitate public education.
Goal PSI-7: Increased access to modern and affordable telecommunications infrastructure and
service throughout Atascadero
Policy PSI-7.1: Telecommunication System Upgrades. Facilitate the installation of and/or
upgrades to private telecommunication systems that better connect Atascadero businesses,
residents, and students to the world.
Action A: Encourage private investment in high-speed broadband telecommunications
infrastructure that serves major commercial, business, and educational corridors.
Action B: Encourage private investment in wireless telecommunications infrastructure
that efficiently and affordably connects rural residential neighborhoods, especially in the
western half of Atascadero.
Action C: Facilitate and support the development of infrastructure necessary for all
residents to use and benefit from new communication technologies.
Action D: Monitor information technology development to ensure compatibility with City
infrastructure.
Action E: Strive to expand opportunities for all citizens to participate in City governance
through use of communication technologies.
Action F: Continue to make essential City documents available for immediate retrieval by
electronic transfer technologies.
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Chapter 9: Safety and Emergency
Preparedness Element
Introduction
In Atascadero, residents, business owners, and visitors experience low crime rates and benefit
from efficient police, fire, and emergency medical services. City leaders and staff work hard to
maintain a safe community. However, the threat of wildfires, flooding, hazardous materials,
seismic and geological hazards, and noise require constant attention to guard against risks to life
and property. Community safety planning reduces risk and creates resilient neighborhoods. This
element establishes goals, policies, and actions that are designed to safeguard the
community, provide for sound emergency preparedness planning, and build in resilience.
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
----
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-2
Safety and Emergency Preparedness Priorities
To help plan for, respond to, and recover from natural and human-caused disasters, this General
Plan addresses the following safety and emergency preparedness issues.
Wildfires
Atascadero has a considerable wildfire risk, with approximately half of the community included
within a Very High or High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, as designated by the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). The region has suffered from high-fire risk, experiencing
several large-scale wildfires recorded between 1985-2025. Additional information about the
history of significant wildfires and the potential for future events can be found in the latest Local
Hazards Mitigation Plan and online with the California Department of Forestry.
Responsibility for fire protective services in the region falls under several agencies. On the local
level, the Atascadero Fire Department is a City-funded department that oversees emergency fire
response within City limits. Cal Fire is responsible for protecting natural resources from fire on
land designated by the State Board of Forestry as State Responsibility Area, which includes most
land directly outside of Atascadero’s boundary. Cal Fire has a Mutual Threat Zone (where wildfires
pose a shared threat to multiple jurisdictions) within City boundaries and provides a full wildland
response. The United States Department of Forestry is responsible for fire protective services on
Federally owned land, such as national forests and parks. Nearby Federal land includes Los Padres
National Forest, which abuts Eacle Ranch and is located about 10 miles to the west of the City
boundary.
Reducing the potential for loss of life and property in the event of a fire requires providing
infrastructure that supports rapid response and reducing flammable materials that fuel wildland
fires. Necessary infrastructure includes sufficient evacuation routes, adequate water supply and
pressure (managed by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company), and strategic placement of new
water tanks/reservoirs. Having more compact development pattern and requiring defensible
space in areas at risk for wildfires can also help better protect new residents and businesses.
The City has adopted the 2025 State Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map (shown on the following
page). Based on local conditions and known fire risks, the City may elect to adopt a more stringent
map to address building and fire code requirements for future developments. The City has
established clear building and defensible space standards in these areas to reduce wildfire risk.
The City has identified fire prevention, mitigation, response, and recovery programs to help make
fire prone areas more resilient to the wildfire threat.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-3
Are Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) In Local Responsibility
Area (LRA), as ldenUfled by the State Are Marshal
-Very High -High Moderate
Fire Hazard Severity Zones In State Responslblllty
Area (SRA), Effective April 1, 2024
Mi 0 I
11m 0
1 ,,
Projection: NAO 83 Califorf1~ Teale Albers
Scale: 1:49,000 at 11• x 17"
c.-.-. ..-J I ncorp:,rated City D Waterbody
2 -½----,
-Very High High Moderate Unzoned LRA Federal Responsibility
Area (FRA)
Go11ernment Code section 51178 requires the State Fire statev.·ide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is and other relevant factors includinjfarees where winds
Marshal to identity areas in the state as moderate, high, expected to p~ail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire have been identified tr; the Offiee of the State Fire Marshal
and very higfi fire hazard severity zones based on consistent hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel load in~ slope, fire weather. as a major cause of wildfire spread.
The Statli' of Call/om a and the Departnwnt ol Forestry and fire Gavin Nel'lwm GO\erno, State ol Cal lorn1a Data Sou•ces
Protection n,a~e no representat ons 01 warrant es regard ng tt,e accurac~ of d.ata vr maps Ne tt,er tt>e State nor ttie Departm('nl shall Vl.l'lde Crowfoct: 5(>('.retary for Natural Resources CA Niltural ResourC>"S AterYy CAL fl REF 1e Hazard Se\et t) Zones ,FHSZSP.A23_3 FHSZLRA_25_1-
be able uncler an,arcumSlance~• 1 an, direct ~pee al ,ncKlental Joe T)ler D1rector/F1reCh•e• CA Dep.artmentol Forestry and F re Pro•ect,on CAL fl RE St.ate "'°,;p□n'>'b I ty Are.as SRA25 l orcon">equ.,.ntal damagPS""1th re5p,?cttoan1c1a m by any uSO?r or
thud party on account of or ai i ng horn the use of data or mapi Daniel Berlanl Slate F re Marshal CA Department ol Forestry and F re Prolecbon c,ry and County boundar esasof 10 '.22/24 1CA Board ol Equal z.at,on
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-4
Flooding
Areas along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and the Salinas River have the
potential to flood and are identified as 100-year flood zones by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Some properties fall within high-risk areas, known as Special Flood
Zone Areas. These areas—largely located adjacent to the creeks and the Salinas river—have at
least a one percent annual chance of flooding. If a property owner has a Federally backed loan
within these areas, Federal regulations dictate that the owner maintain flood insurance. Even
outside of these FEMA-designated zones, smaller drainage channels and culverts can become
clogged or fail, creating the threat of localized flooding.
Flood-prone areas along Atascadero Creek could provide multi-benefit functions such as passive
park space, places to recharge the groundwater basin, and areas to naturally filter urban run-off
pollutants. However, because Atascadero Creek and other creeks transverse private property,
creating dual public benefit uses presents challenges.
Hazardous Materials
Simply defined, a hazardous material is any item or agent (biological, chemical, physical) that has
the potential to cause harm to humans, animals, or the environment, either by itself or through
interaction with other factors. We encounter hazardous materials as part of our everyday lives:
batteries, light bulbs, and household chemicals such as pesticides, motor oil, cleaners, and paints.
The many electrical devices we use contain materials that become “e-waste” when those devices
fail or become obsolete. Almost all commercial and industrial businesses utilize or produce
hazardous materials as part of their processes.
The use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials—including management of contaminated
soils and groundwater—are regulated by a myriad of Federal, State, and local laws. In Atascadero,
the Fire Department has responsibility to ensure businesses properly store hazardous materials
to avoid accidental release and to allow firefighters to respond appropriately if upset occurs. The
San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Services Division oversees reporting and inspections.
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
California sits atop the Pacific Plate, a piece of Earth’s crust that extends from Japan and
Indonesian to the western U.S., and from Alaska south past Hawaii. The earthquakes we
experience locally result from the grinding and shifting of the plate along a myriad of fault lines,
some close by and others quite some distance away. For example, during the 1989 Loma Prieta
earthquake that significantly shook the Bay Area and downed part of the Bay Bridge, Atascadero
residents experienced light shaking.
The fault zones closest to Atascadero are the Rinconada and the Nacimiento faults. According to
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Rinconada fault is considered active, with the potential to
generate a maximum 7.5 magnitude earthquake. An earthquake of this scale would produce
significant ground shaking and could trigger the seismic-related effects including landslides (see
Figure 9-3) and liquefaction (see Figure 9-4). The degree of hazard depends on the location of the
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-5
seismic epicenter, the magnitude and duration of ground shaking, topography, groundwater
conditions, and type of building construction. The Nacimiento fault is considered inactive. Of
regional significance is the San Andreas fault, which extends from San Francisco Bay through
central California to the Gulf of California. A major earthquake along the San Andreas fault would
have the potential to result significant ground shaking and, depending upon the location of the
earthquake, cause catastrophic damage. Table 9-1 identifies fault zones in the vicinity of the
Planning Area.
Table 9-1: Nearby Fault Zones and Ground Shaking Potential
Fault Zone
Distance
(from El Camino
Real/Traffic Way)
Maximum
Credible
Earthquake
Maximum
Probable
Earthquake
Anticipated
Acceleration Range
(in gravity, or g)
Rinconada and Jolon 2 7.5 7.0 0.40 – 0.6
Black Mountain 3 7.5 5.75 0.1
La Panza 9 7.5 Unknown, but 5
assumed 0.1 – 0.4
Los Osos 14 7 Unknown, but 5
assumed 0.1 – 0.2
Hosgri 22 7.5 6.5 – 7.5 0.1 – 0.2
San Andreas 27 8.25 8 0.1 – 0.2
San Simeon 35 Unknown 6.5 Unknown
Noise
Noise typically is defined as unwanted sound. Exposure to excessive noise can impact the health
and quality of life of people who reside in, work in, or visit Atascadero. While people may not
agree as to what constitutes particularly irksome noise, science does show that certain defined
noise levels can cause ill health effects. Excessive noise can cause hearing loss, stress,
hypertension, sleep disturbance, and fatigue. Noise sources within the City include:
• Roadways and freeways are the primary noise sources in the City of Atascadero. Primary
transportation noise sources include vehicular traffic along US-101 and SR-41.
• Freight and Amtrak train traffic along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor result in localized
and intermittent noise events.
• Non-transportation-related noise sources are predominantly associated with industrial
and commercial operations and building mechanical equipment. Other noise sources can
result in intermittent increases in ambient noise levels, such as short-term construction
activities, as well as school and events.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-6
Police Services
The Atascadero Police Department prides itself in safeguarding the community. Part of its stated
mission is “to work toward being the premier law enforcement agency on the central coast.” The
Federal Department of Justice reports the rate of crime in Atascadero to be 23.73 per 1,000
residents during a standard year. The most frequent crimes are drug crimes (5.6 percent),
vandalism (5.4 percent), vehicle theft (3.4 percent), theft (2.8 percent), and assault (1.6 percent).
While Atascadero is a relatively safe community, the realities and perceptions around crime affect
how current and prospective residents and business owners view the community.
New Public Safety Facilities
The City’s Police and Fire Departments have identified needs for critical upgrades to existing
facilities. Fire Station #1 will be rebuilt at its existing site and will include an Emergency Operations
Center. Fire Station #2 will have a complete renovation of the living quarters. The Police
Department will include major renovations and a new dispatch building. All three projects are
expected to be completed in 2027. The Fire Department also envisions a third fire station in the
101/Del Rio region to ensure appropriate response times throughout the City. While capital
projects are expensive and require consideration to the cost of additional staff, the one-time
expense often helps improve efficiencies and reduce other operations and maintenance
expenses.
Relationship to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Under the provisions of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and California Government
Code Sections 8685.9 and 65302.6, local governments can adopt a local hazard mitigation plan
into their safety element. If a community has not done so, the State will only reimburse the
community up to 75 percent of eligible costs associated with emergency response and recovery
from a specific situation. Communities with a hazard mitigation plan incorporated into their safety
element may receive more than 75 percent of eligible costs from the State.
The City of Atascadero coordinates with San Luis Obispo County on preparation of a Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which comprehensively addresses mitigation planning for
all seven cities plus unincorporated County areas. Originally adopted in 2020, the County updates
the regional plan every five years to respond to emerging issues. The Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan is incorporated by reference into this Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Element.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-7
Safety and Emergency Preparedness Goals, Policies, and Actions
The following sections include goal sections, with supporting policies and implementation
actions, related to the following topics:
Wildfire Risks
Flooding
Hazardous Materials
Seismic and Geological Hazards
Noise
Emergency Preparedness and Response
Police Protection
Fire Protection Services and Emergency Medical Response
Wildfire Risks
Wildfires are major concerns of many municipalities. Like most communities in San Luis Obispo
County, Atascadero faces the potential of catastrophic fires even with well-planned risk reduction
(see Figure 9-1). These goals, policies, and actions focus on strategies the City, property owners,
and partner agencies will undertake to reduce the threat of all types of wildfires.
Goal SEP-1: A high level of protection from and minimized risk to life in the event of a fire
Policy SEP-1.1: New Development Risk Reduction. Promote new development in areas of the
community that have lower risk of wildfire hazards and ensure new development in higher risk
areas are consistent with Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) standards.
Action A: Encourage the clustering of lots in higher fire hazard areas surrounded by
defensible open space to minimize fire risk to new rural development.
Action B: Coordinate Fire Department and Atascadero Mutual Water Company review of
subdivision design to ensure adequate fire flows.
Action C: Review new development to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles
and compliance with Fire and Building Codes.
Action D: Monitor and update the Municipal Code so that requirements for new
development within the WUI to meet or exceed the requirements of the California Code
of Regulations, including the California Building Code, the California Fire Code, California
Wildland Urban Interface Code, and sections on SRA Fire Safe Regulations and Fire Hazard
Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations.
Action E: Work with land use applicants to locate development relative to landscape
features that can act as buffers from oncoming wildfires (like agricultural lands and
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-8
maintained parks and greenbelts).
Action F: Ensure at least two evacuation routes for all new residential developments, with
roads wide enough for emergency vehicles.
Action G: Require the installation of all new utilities underground to prevent ignitions from
powerlines.
Action H: Implement development standards to assure adequacy of access for equipment,
water supplies, construction standards, and vegetation clearance.
Action I: Prohibit increased land use densities in WUI areas, such as those allowed by State
laws and density bonus laws, to minimize risk of exposure to persons in the event of
wildfires.
Action J: Require that new essential public facilities be located outside of VHFHSZ to the
maximum extent practicable.
Policy SEP-1.2: Fire Impact Reduction. Implement programs and policies that minimize risks to
life and property posed by fires.
Action A: Coordinate with the Atascadero Municipal Water Company to ensure that fire
flows and anticipated water supply storage capacity is adequate for both short- and long-
term fire prevention and protection.
Action B: Continue to enforce the Building Code for the installation of residential fire
sprinklers on new construction citywide.
Action C: Consider updating the Zoning Code to require conditions on land uses that serve
mobility-limited persons, such as assisted care facilities or small group homes, to prepare
and maintain detailed evacuation plans in the event of wildfires and other catastrophic
events.
Policy SEP-1.3: Wildfire Risk Reduction. Increase wildfire resiliency using required and voluntary
risk reduction regulations and strategies.
Action A: Adhere to State and local regulations and recommendations, including fire-safe
design, of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan that address wildfire risk and
vulnerabilities.
Action B: Pursue becoming a Fire Risk Reduction Community.
Action C: Encourage neighborhoods in becoming a NFPA recognized Firewise USA
Community.
Action D: Identify and implement evacuation procedures in coordination with the City’s
Emergency Plan.
Action E: Support and coordinate with the Air Pollution Control District to allow burning
within the City of Atascadero as a strategy for vegetation reduction.
Action F: Update and maintain regulations that balance the need for defensible areas
around homes with the preservation of native trees, riparian corridors, and sensitive
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-9
habitats.
Action G: Identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two
emergency evacuation routes identified and pursue grant funding opportunities to
construct emergency access roads.
Action H: Update the Community Wildfire Protection Plan every five years to reflect the
needs of the community and the changing risks in WUI areas. Ensure each update to the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan identifies slope stability and wildfire hazard areas and
mitigation strategies to reduce post-wildfire erosion.
Policy SEP-1.5: Vegetation Management Strategies. Implement vegetation management
strategies and enhanced roadway standards in fire-prone areas through the City’s Community
Wildfire Protection Plan.
Action A: Implement the fuels mitigation projects in the Community Wildfire Protection
Plan and establish a monitoring program to track the effectiveness of Community Wildfire
Protection Plan fuel-treatment activities.
Action B: Identify and encourage mitigation of existing non-compliant properties to
current defensible space standards.
Action C: Enhance roadside safety and access for emergency services by implementing
rigorous vegetation clearance.
Action D: Continue to promote the efforts of the Fire Safe Council and continue to identify
locations within the City where fuel mitigation treatments can be implemented to help
slow wildfire spread.
Policy SEP-1.6: Community Outreach and Education. Ensure all community members and
businesses are informed and empowered to address fire hazard vulnerabilities.
Action A: Conduct education and outreach campaigns that assist property owners with
defensible space, fire-safe landscaping, home hardening, and wildfire preparedness.
Action B: Ensure wildfire mitigation, education, and outreach efforts are made to
vulnerable populations.
Action C: Work with local and regional partners that can provide assistance to low-income
households to maintain defensible space around their homes and properties.
Action D: Continue to educate the public about County-wide emergency preparedness
resources.
Action E: Inform homeowners and residents of fire dangers, appropriate responses to fire,
and ways to prevent loss.
Policy SEP-1.7: Redevelopment after Fire. Use lessons learned from major fire events to minimize
future loss of life and property damage within high fire zones.
Action A: Develop a process to evaluate redevelopment after a large fire to meet current
codes.
Action B: Require that any redevelopment in a VHFHSZ after a fire complies with all
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-10
current zoning, building, and fire codes.
Action C: Require that any redevelopment in a VHFHSZ include a fire protection plan.
Flooding
According to the San Luis Obispo County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, the most
common type of flooding event in Atascadero is riverine flooding, also known as overbank
flooding. In addition to riverine flooding, Atascadero is susceptible to flash flooding in smaller
watersheds. The highest risk areas of flooding include properties along the Salinas River,
Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, and Paloma Creek corridors. See Figure 9-2 for
the 100- and 500-year flood zone and dam inundation areas in Atascadero.
Goal SEP-2: Flood prevention and reduction strategies that limit damage to natural areas
while safeguarding property and lives
Policy SEP-2.1: Reduce Flooding Risk. Ensure land use strategies consider flood control and
stormwater management tactics to reduce the adverse impact of potential minor and major
flooding.
Action A: Incorporate flood management strategies into land use analysis and
development review.
Action B: Maintain and update a storm drainage infrastructure inventory.
Action C: Employ flood mitigation strategies in the development of plans and projects
along creeks and waterways.
Action D: Seek funding to replace and/or improve existing aging infrastructure.
Policy SEP-2.2: Open Space for Flood Protection. Promote the enhancement and expansion of
open space areas for flood management and passive recreation where appropriate and safe.
Action A: Protect floodplains by retaining and expanding, as feasible, open space areas
that can retain stormwater, recharge groundwater aquifers, and prevent or reduce
flooding.
Action B: Integrate stormwater features, as appropriate, into pocket parks in new
development where such can provide co-benefits of flood control and passive or active
open space.
Policy SEP-2.3: FEMA Requirements. Comply with all applicable Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) flood-management regulations and requirements.
Action A: Continue to maintain and periodically update flood hazard data, and coordinate
with Federal, State, and local agencies responsible for flood hazard analysis and
management activities.
Action B: Continue to incorporate features into capital projects and appropriate standards
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-11
that reduce flooding hazards.
Action C: Consider impacts to biological resources when performing flood-related
preventive maintenance and repair.
Policy SEP-2.4: Structures in Floodplains. Enforce Federal regulations regarding placement of
structures in floodplains, and maintain appropriate standards for development in flood-prone and
poorly drained areas.
Action A: Require an evaluation of flood hazards and appropriate on-site mitigation
options by a qualified professional for any project in a FEMA designated floodway during
the development review process.
Action B: Discourage modifications to natural floodways, and enforce FEMA’s Conditional
Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) processes if
development occurs within an existing floodway.
Action C: Require the lowest finished floor of new construction in low-lying or other areas
with serious drainage or flooding potential to be a minimum of one foot above the 100-
year water surface elevation.
Action D: Prohibit development that will create new upstream or downstream flooding or
drainage problems.
Policy SEP-2.5: Damage Reduction. Reduce flood damage in areas known to be prone to flooding.
Action A: Augment existing GIS and other data regarding low-lying areas with information
obtained during storms.
Action B: Identify flood mitigation improvements for low-lying, flood-prone areas, and
seek funding for those projects.
Action C: Catalog aging, undersized, or damaged drainage infrastructure and seek funding
for replacement and repair.
Policy SEP-2.6: Flood Response. Prepare the City to respond to flood emergencies.
Action A: Train and adequately equip City personnel to a level appropriate to their
positions and responsibilities to respond to flood emergencies.
Policy SEP-2.7: Dam Failure. Minimize the risk of dam failure.
Action A: Work with State agencies to assist with inspection and maintenance of the
Atascadero Lake dam.
Action B: Coordinate with applicable agencies to ensure Atascadero has the latest
information about impacts and emergency response coordination should failure occur to
Salinas Dam on the Santa Margarita Lake reservoir.
Action C: Maintain a dam failure evacuation plan to guide public officials that includes use
of the emergency alert system to notify the public.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-12
Action D: Maintain, and update as needed, dam failure inundation mapping and
emergency action plan for Atascadero Lake dam.
Hazardous Materials
The City’s interest in maintaining a healthy environment drives policies to keep hazardous
materials out of the air, water, and ground. A parallel interest is minimizing exposure of people to
materials that could adversely affect their health. With land use policies allowing flex commercial
and limited light industrial uses near residential neighborhoods, care will be taken to minimize
risk to nearby residents and to people who work in the businesses.
Goal SEP-3: Reduced potential for harm to individuals and the environment due to the
presence of hazardous materials
Policy SEP-3.1: Hazardous Substance Exposure. Reduce the potential for exposure to humans
and the environment from hazardous substances.
Action A: Coordinate with the County to ensure that hazardous materials used in business
and industry be used, handled, transported, and stored in accordance with Federal, State,
County, and local regulations.
Action B: Work with Caltrans to require all transport of hazardous materials to follow
approved routes.
Action C: Require businesses to maintain access needed for emergency response to spill
incidents.
Action D: Ensure that regional routes for transportation of hazardous materials are
identified and unsafe conditions comprehensively addressed with partner agencies.
Action E: Ensure State regulations and proper City protocols are followed to guard against
failure of the City’s wastewater treatment facility.
Action F: Coordinate with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board to implement
standards that regulate discharge of pollutants into surface waters and groundwater.
Policy SEP-3.2: Pesticide Exposure. Reduce the potential of pesticide exposure to humans and
the environment.
Action A: Ensure that emergency first responders and dispatch operators know to contact
the County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office or State Poison Control for technical
assistance in the event of a pesticide-related emergency.
Action B: Minimize use and continue to train City staff on the safe application and handling
of chemical-based pesticides at City parks and other City facilities.
Policy SEP-3.3: Oil and Gas Spills. Minimize potential hazards and spills from oil and gas pipelines
and underground storage tanks.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-13
Action A: Work with pipeline owners and operators and appropriate County and State
agencies to develop adequate prevention and cleanup strategies.
Action B: Coordinate with property owners and the San Luis Obispo County Environmental
Health Department to abate leaking underground storage tanks and monitor existing
tanks for leakage.
Policy SEP-3.4: Radiation Exposure Reduction. Support San Luis Obispo County efforts to
maintain a high level of radiation emergency preparedness.
Action A: Coordinate with the County and PG&E to review and update information about
emergency preparedness and evacuations.
Action B: Coordinate with the County and PG&E to provide information about the Diablo
Canyon Power Plant.
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
State building codes and careful site planning provide guards against catastrophic loss of life and
damage to property in the event of an earthquake or events such as landslides. Land use policies
address avoiding density in the hillside environments most susceptible to slope failure. The
following goal and policies point to the importance of proactive measures in minimizing risk.
Goal SEP-4: Minimized exposure geologic and seismic hazards and the associated risks to
life and property
Policy SEP-4.1: Risk Reduction. Ensure that the public is informed about the risks of geologic and
seismic hazards and potential mitigation options.
Action A: Provide information to the public to improve awareness of geologic hazards and
seismic safety.
Action B: Continually update information about faults and geologic hazards (including GIS
data and geologic and fault mapping) as new information becomes available.
Action C: Work with property owners of unreinforced masonry buildings to retrofit or
demolish structures consistent with the California Building Code.
Policy SEP-4.2: Structure Design. Ensure that structures are designed and located to withstand
strong ground shaking, liquefaction, and seismic settlement.
Action A: Enforce building code requirements for new development, including addressing
liquefaction potential and preparing geotechnical reports.
Action B: Enforce Building Code provisions pertaining to grading and construction relative
to seismic hazards.
Action C: Update Title 8 of the Municipal Code as necessary to promote seismic safety in
structural designs.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-14
Action D: Require retrofitting and abatement of structural hazards to levels of risk
acceptable to the Building Official.
Action E: Prioritize retrofitting and abatement of City-owned structures, including
buildings, bridges, and other infrastructure, in areas determined to experience strong
ground shaking during an earthquake.
Action F: Work with and support state and local agencies, including public utilities, to
retrofit and harden water storage facilities, wastewater conveyance, electricity
transmission lines, roadways, regional stormwater facilities, levees, and other utilities that
could be negatively affected by earthquakes.
Policy SEP-4.3: Reduced Risk. Minimize development in areas at high risk for geologic hazards.
Action A: Avoid or adequately mitigate any development of critical facilities—hospitals,
fire stations, emergency management headquarters, broadcast services, sewage
treatment plants, and places of large congregations of people—in high-risk geologic
hazard zones (e.g., fault zones, liquefiable soils, areas of slope instability).
Policy SEP-4.4: Erosion Control. Promote erosion control strategies that reduce hazards to
structures, properties, and drainages.
Action A: Identify and require enhanced erosion control measures for properties that
exhibit high erosion potential, are in areas of steep slopes, or have experienced past
erosion problems.
Action B: Require development proposals to mitigate landslide and slope stability
conditions that have the potential to impact adjacent properties, structures, and
infrastructure.
Action C: Enforce Building Code provisions and other applicable ordinances regulating
development on sloping ground.
Action D: Continue to require slope stability assessments by appropriate registered
professionals for developments in areas of known slope instability, landslides, or slopes
steeper than 10 percent.
Action E: Maintain mapping of high landslide risk areas and ensure that structures are
engineered to account for any associated risk.
Noise
Part of Atascadero’s attraction is its quiet neighborhoods, where the topography largely buffers
homes from Highway 101 noise. Residents appreciate being able to hear sounds of nature in the
evening and enjoy the outdoors. Downtown and larger parks are places where a noisier
environment is acceptable, as people gather at these locations for community events and
entertainment. This goal and associated policies and actions respond to varied community noise
environments.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-15
Goal SEP-5: Neighborhoods that maintain a strong quality of life while supporting a vibrant
and thriving economy.
Policy SEP-5.1: Noise Ordinance. Maintain and update the City’s Noise Ordinance to balance the
economic, social, and rural vision of Atascadero.
Action A: Update the Noise Ordinance to incorporate construction best management
practices to minimize construction noise when construction activities would be located
within 1,000 feet of noise-sensitive land uses.
Action B: Update the Noise Ordinance to add conditions that would allow for temporary
increases in noise in certain locations, such as Downtown, mixed-use areas, key
commercail nodes, and parks, to accommodate special events. Encourage and allow these
uses with appropriate noise thresholds.
Action C: Require projects to reduce noise exceeding the City’s maximum allowable
exterior and interior noise standards, unless exceptions are granted.
Policy SEP- 5.2: Land Use Compatibility. Prevent noise-sensitive land uses from encroaching upon
existing or planned noise-producing uses, such as permitted industrial businesses and commercial
activities, to allow businesses enterprises to thrive.
Policy SEP-5.3: Residential Noise Reduction. Preserve the tranquility of rural single-family
residential areas by preventing the encroachment of noise-producing uses.
Policy SEP-5.4: Site Planning. Avoid or reduce noise impacts through site planning, project design,
and implementation of the California Building Code and Health and Safety Code.
Action A: Consider updating the Municipal Code to provide options for new development
to provide buffers other than sound walls when required.
Policy SEP-5.6: Transportation Noise. Reduce the impacts of transportation-related noise.
Action A: Avoid new development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing
or projected future levels of noise from transportation noise sources which exceed the
City’s “normally acceptable” noise standards for land use compatibility unless the project
design includes effective measures to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas and interior
spaces to or below the “conditionally-acceptable levels,” as specified for the given land
use in Table 9-2.
Action B: Work with Caltrans to evaluate and develop traffic noise mitigation programs
along Highway 101 and State Route 41.
Policy SEP-5.7: Stationary Noise. Reduce the impacts of stationary noise sources.
Action A: Avoid new development of noise-sensitive land uses where the noise level due
to existing stationary noise sources will exceed the noise level standards of Table 9-3
unless effective noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-16
development to reduce noise exposure to or below the levels specified in Table 9-3.
Action B: Require mitigation of noise created by new proposed stationary noise sources
or existing stationary noise sources which undergo modifications so such uses do not to
exceed the noise level standards of Table 9-3 on properties designated for noise-sensitive
uses.
Action C: Maintain exceptions for Agricultural activities within the Agricultural land use
designations during reasonable hours.
Action D: Work with private parties to reduce or mitigate noise exceeding allowed levels
from existing industrial and commercial stationary-noise sources that impact nearby
noise-sensitive land uses.
Table 9-2: Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Transportation Noise Sources
Noise Sensitive Land Use
Interior Occupied
Spaces (dBA) Outdoor
Activity
Areas (dBA)1 CNEL Leq6
Residential 454 652,3
Mixed-Use Residential 454 -- --
Convalescent Care Facilities, Hospitals 454 702,3
Transient Lodging 45 652,3
Schools, Libraries, Museums and Places of Worship -- 45 --
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks -- 705
Office Buildings -- 45 703
1. To be applied at outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level
standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use.
2. Where it is not possible to reduce exterior noise levels to 65 dBA CNEL, or less, an exterior noise level of 70 dBA CNEL may be allowed provided that an acoustical analysis has been prepared for the project to identify available exterior noise-reduction measures to be incorporated and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. For multi-family development, the exterior noise standard may be applied at a designated on-site outdoor common-use area in lieu of individual unit patios or balconies.
3. Where outdoor activity areas are not included in the project design, only the interior noise level standard shall apply.
4. In locations where railroad noise is the predominant noise source, the interior noise standard for residential land uses shall be reduced by 5 dB to account for the increased potential for sleep disruption to building occupants.
5. Where quiet is a basis for use.
6. 6. This standard is intended to apply to land uses with operational hours predominantly during the daytime hours. The
interior noise standard applies to a typical worst-case hour during the period of use.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-17
Table 9-3: Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Non-Transportation
Noise Sources
Daytime
7:00 AM to 7:00 PM
Evening
7:00 PM to 10:00 PM
Nighttime
10:00 PM to 7:00 AM
Exterior Noise Standards1,2
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dBA)3,5 55 50 45
Maximum Level (Lmax dBA)4,5 75 70 65
Interior Noise Standards6
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dBA)3,5 45 40 35
Maximum Level (Lmax dBA)4,5 60 55 45
1. As determined at the outdoor activity area of the receiving noise-sensitive land use. Where the location of outdoor
activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land
use. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard the applicable standard
shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
2. Exterior noise standards are to be applied in noise-sensitive outdoor activity areas. Excludes mixed-use residential and
school playgrounds.
3. Leq = Average or “Equivalent” noise level during the worst-case operational hour of use. Sound level measurements
shall be made with slow meter response.
4. Lmax = Highest measured sound level occurring during a given interval of time (e.g., 1 hour). Sound level measurements
shall be made with fast meter response.
5. Where the noise source in question consists of speech or music, or is impulsive in nature, or contains a pure tone, the
noise standards are reduced by 5 dB.
6. As determined within occupied areas of the receiving noise-sensitive structure. In the event the measured ambient
noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the
ambient noise level.
Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response
Community resilience refers to a community’s ability to prepare for, adapt to, and recover from
challenges. Resilient communities are those with public services, health systems, and
infrastructure that will be put into effective action in the event of a hazard or emergency.
Resiliency enables a community to recover more quickly from a disaster. Private businesses,
individual residents, and volunteer organizations play a critical role. Key components of resilience
are effective pre-planning for potential future catastrophic events and efficient response to
disasters once they have occurred.
Goal SEP-6: A community well prepared to respond to and recover from natural and
human-caused disasters
Policy SEP-6.1: Emergency Preparedness and City Response: Train City staff, coordinate with
regional agencies, and implement programs to be prepared for and capable of responding to all
emergency events.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-18
Action A: Maintain and periodically update the City’s Emergency Operations Plan.
Action B: Coordinate with San Luis Obispo County, adjacent cities, special districts, and
unincorporated communities to prepare and regularly update joint emergency response
and disaster response plans.
Action C: Consider hazard mitigation and climate resilience actions and strategies with the
City’s Capital Improvement Program and annual budgeting process.
Action D: Provide required training to ensure the readiness of response teams and
Emergency Operations Center staff.
Action E: Follow statewide Standardized Emergency Management System procedures.
Action F: Consider planned evacuation routes with roadway improvement projects and
incorporate identified elements as feasible.
Action G: Provide ongoing emergency preparedness training for all City staff.
Policy SEP-6.3: Resident Response Programs and Support. Help prepare and organize residents
to respond effectively to disasters.
Action A: Provide educational materials to increase community awareness of hazard
risks/vulnerabilities and strategies that community members and businesses can employ
to mitigate risks/vulnerabilities.
Action B: Support education in the schools that teaches children how to avoid dangers
and behave during an emergency.
Action C: Maintain and update, as needed, the emergency evacuation program for
Atascadero neighborhoods.
Action D: Support disaster education and preparedness education geared towards
residents through programs such as Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) or
other community-based efforts.
Action E: Promote public awareness of the natural hazards and potential effects of
disasters through community and volunteer organizations.
Action F: Incorporate strategies from the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan, and other resilience-building plans into outreach and educational
information.
Policy SEP-6.4: Inter-Agency and Media Coordination. Coordinate with San Luis Obispo County
and State agencies, news media, and others working to reduce the risks of disasters through
effective preparedness, response, and recovery.
Action A: Continue to implement mutual aid, automatic aid, and California’s Mutual
Master Aid System to provide effective emergency response and to support emergency
management.
Action B: Continue to execute agreements with public and private entities to support
community emergency response and management.
Action C: Maintain a Public Information Officer (PIO) to meet with agency and media
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-19
representatives to coordinate communications, activities, and materials.
Action D: Support the efforts of many organizations – government, radio, newspapers and
TV stations, utilities, emergency response providers, the Office of Emergency Services –
that provide outreach and education to the community.
Policy SEP-6.5: Database Maintenance. Expand and update the database of safety-related
information and convey that information to the public and decision makers.
Action A: Maintain an updated City GIS hazard map with information on fire hazard areas,
native plant fuel loads, flood zones, un-reinforced masonry buildings, underground
storage tanks, landslide areas, earthquake faults, pipelines, high voltage electrical
transmission lines, railroads, state highways, and evacuation routes.
Action B: Seek from other government, academic, and private organizations new data that
can be used for emergency preparedness and response.
Action C: Share hazard information with nearby jurisdictions, private and public
organizations, and the public.
Policy SEP-6.6: Evacuation Coordination and Investments. Prioritize investments that expand
and enhance evacuation capacity and capabilities.
Action A: Seek funding to improve existing single-access residential neighborhoods so
they include additional access routes or other provisions to increase evacuation safety.
Action B: Analyze the capacity, viability, and safety of evacuation routes for hazard areas
in Atascadero, and incorporate the results into City emergency operations and disaster
recovery plans.
Policy SEP-6.7: Reduce or Eliminate Long-Term Risk. Perform assessments aimed at reducing or
eliminating long-term risks to improve efficiency and decrease the cost of disaster response and
recovery.
Policy SEP-6.8. Long-Term Recovery. Facilitate long-term recovery following a disaster.
Action A: Assist with public and private rebuilding efforts, provision of housing for
displaced residents, and resumption of service, business and government functions.
Action B: Provide mutual aid and coordination assistance to agencies and organizations
involved in disaster recovery.
Action C: Identify and coordinate with agencies needed to participate in assessing
damage, providing citizens with care and shelter, and repairing critical infrastructure.
Action D: Ensure duplicate storage of essential City records.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-20
Police Services
The quality of Atascadero’s Police Department and its relationship with the community have
a direct impact on the community’s overall safety and security and contribute to the quality-of-
life residents enjoy. The following goal, policies, and actions aim to enhance the services and
operations of the Atascadero Police Department while strengthening community partnerships.
Goal SEP-7: Responsive police services that deter and respond to crime and support a safe
and secure community
Policy SEP-7.1: Equipment and Training. Develop, maintain, and implement a Police Department
Master Plan that guides the provision of equipment, facilities, training, and operations centers.
Action A: Establish internal and operational goals for the Department based on
assessment of needs, as directed by the City Council.
Action B: Produce a Master Plan which includes guiding sections on equipment, facilities,
training, and operations.
Policy SEP-7.2: Staffing Levels. Work to maintain optimal police staffing levels, including sworn
officers and civilian support, necessary to meet projected community needs.
Action A: In conjunction with the Police Department Master Plan, determine an efficient
allocation level to meet projected goals and needs.
Action B: Formulate and enact a staffing strategy to hire additional staff or consolidate the
Department as needed.
Action C: Monitor and assess the allocation of staff to needs on a regular basis.
Policy SEP-7.3: Response Times. Identify, monitor, and achieve appropriate minimum police
response times for all call priority levels.
Action A: Establish goals for police response times based on priority levels.
Action B: Identify and implement strategies and tools needed to monitor police response
times.
Action C: Implement a strategy to improve police response times, if needed, and maintain
an ongoing assessment of response times.
Policy SEP-7.4: Inter-Agency Coordination. Coordinate with local, regional, State, and Federal
criminal justice agencies to promote regional cooperation in the delivery of police services.
Action A: Identify and coordinate with relevant agencies, including both current and
potential future partners.
Action B: Establish and maintain a system for ongoing and case-specific communications.
Chapter 9 Safety and Emergency Preparedness Element
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT 9-21
Fire Protection Services and Emergency Medical Response
Fire prevention and protection services and emergency medical response benefit the community
in many ways. Most critically, loss of life and property can be minimized with quality services and
response to emergency incidents. The City’s Fire Department provides fire and emergency
medical response services to the community. Fire prevention and emergency response planning
are priorities. Minimizing fire risks occurs through education, routine inspections, and requiring
building renovations and new construction to comply with current fire access and building codes.
The following goal, policies, and actions address fire department staffing levels, emergency
response times, training, facilities and equipment, and coordination with ambulance service
providers and local hospitals.
Goal SEP-8: A robust, well-trained, and highly capable fire protection and emergency
response system
Policy SEP-8.1: Facilities and Equipment. Plan for adequate facilities, equipment, and personnel
to meet firefighting demands.
Action A: Develop and maintain a Fire Department strategic plan.
Action B: Continue to plan for future facility, equipment, communication system, and
personnel requirements.
Policy SEP-8.2: Fire Response. Sustain the ability of the Fire Department to respond to
emergencies.
Action A: Prepare, adopt, and maintain standards of coverage for the Fire Department.
Action B: Maintain a fire-related GIS database to assist decision-makers with analyzing
development proposals and to assist with fire response and planning. Update the
database as new fire hazard severity maps become available.
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)
WUI
Local Responsibility Area FHSZ -
Updated March 9, 2025
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
High
Moderate
NonWildland
State Responsibility Area FHSZ - Data
Effective April 1, 2024
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
High
Moderate
Wildfire Risk
Figure 9-1
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Los Padres
®
I Forest Nation a
1111
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
Central Coast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
HeilmannGrove
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
FEMA Flood Zones
100-Year Floodplain (1% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard)
500-Year Floodplain (0.2% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard)
Regulatory Floodway
Dam Inundation Areas
Atascadero Lake (>1 foot)
Eagle Creek
Flood Zones
Figure 9-2
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
r
dillaRd
Santa R o s a R d
Car m elitaAve
S
a
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
CU R B A R I L A V E
Sa
nAndres Ave
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Lew
i
s
A
v
e
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
AtascaderoLake Park
Central Coast Zoo
A-TownSkate Park
Detail Area
see Detail Area
®
7
/
) r
' I r \
r 1'
I r
I ~
\ \ I \
I r
~ ~
'<;~
,./ lr
,
~ A/ :,--\_,/ . ~ [ ..._. '-I , 'i
.... '~
,,,
-~......_,,........_...,, ........
~
' \
;) \
J I~\_
L
,; \~ II
1111
1111
1111
1111
~
Atascadero
OUR CITY , OUR PLAN
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Landslide Susceptibility
Low (0-3)
Moderate (4-6)
High (7-8)
Very High (9-10)
LandslideSusceptibility
Figure 9-3
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
Los Padres
®
I Forest Nation a
,
~ " -,-'
.~.; ....-.:
':_ lll -• .
1111
1111
1111
T E M P L E T O N
C S D
S A N L U I S
O B I S P O C O U N T Y
Ata
sca d ero Creek
Grave
s
C
reek
Paloma Creek
E
agleCreek
PasoR o bles
C
r
e
e
k
Salinas R iver
At
ascader
o
Ave
P
O
R
T
O
L
A
R
D
Syca
moreRd
C u rbarilAve
TRA
F
F
I
CWAY
A
rdillaRd
Halcon R d
SanJacintoAve
Santa R o sa RdCarmelitaAve
Sa
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
San Die
g
o
R
d
CURBARIL AVE
SanAndresAve
El Bord
o
A
v
e
San A nselmoRd
San
G
a
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
San Rafa
e
l
R
d
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Am
a
p
o
a
A
v
e
Palo
m
a
r
A
v
e
Lewis
A
v
e
Santa
Barbar
a
R
d
Santa Lucia R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Sant
a
Luci
a
R
d
Ll
a
n
o
R
d
SantaAna
R
d
Escondido R d
San MarcosRd
Gra
v
es C
reek R
d
San
M
a
rc os Rd
SanFern
an
d
o
Rd
BalboaRd
Monterey
R
d
BalboaRd
S a nta Cruz
R
d
D elRioRd
G
a
r
cia
R
d
DELRIORD
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
Ferr
o
c
a
r
r
i
l
R
d
San B
e
n
i
t
o
R
d
AppleValleyPark
ColonyPark
SunkenGardens
StadiumPark
HeilmannRegional Park
AtascaderoLake Park
PalomaCreek Park
ThreeBridgesOakPreserve
CentralCoast Zoo
PineMountain
A-TownSkate Park
Adobe SpringsNature Preserve
Chalk MountainGolf Course
101
101
41
41
Basemap Features
Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero City Limit
Urban Services Line
Sphere of Influence
Creeks, Drainages, Rivers, and
Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
US Quaternary Faults
Oceanic fault zone
Rinconada fault zone
Liquefaction Risk
Low Potential
Moderate Potential
High Potential
Fault Lines andLiquefaction Risk
Figure 9-4
0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of Atascadero, 2024.
Source(s): Esri, USDA, CADOT, CNRA, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
,
'I
Los Padres National Forest
CJ
'._ - J
CJ
1111
1111
1111
1111
Atascadero
OUR CITY , OUR PLAN
Working together to serve, build community and enhance quality of life.
Glossary
A
Access: A way of approaching or entering a property, including ingress (the right to enter) and
egress (the right to leave).
Accessory Dwelling Unit: A dwelling unit that is subordinate to and on the same lot or parcel of
property as another single dwelling unit, and as governed by State Law.
Acreage, Gross: The total land area in acres within a defined boundary, including any area for
rights-of-way, public streets, and dedications of land for public easements.
Acreage, Net: That portion of gross acreage exclusive of public streets and rights-of-way and
dedications of land for public uses.
Active Transportation: Forms of transportation involving physical activity, such as walking and
cycling.
Adaptive Use/Reuse: The process of converting a building to a use other than that for which it
was originally designed and/or built.
OUR c1f f lldero ' OUR PLAN
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-2
Affordable Housing: Under State and Federal statutes, generally housing that costs no more
than 30 percent of gross household income. Housing costs include rent or mortgage payments,
utilities, taxes, insurance, homeowner association fees, and other related costs.
Air Pollutants: Amounts of foreign and/or natural substances occurring in the atmosphere that
may result in adverse effects on humans, animals, vegetation, and/or materials.
Air Quality Standards: The prescribed (by the Environmental Protection Agency and the
California Air Resources Board) level of pollutants in the outside air that cannot be exceeded
legally during a specified time in a specified geographical area.
Alternate Fuel: Fuels such as methanol, ethanol, natural gas, and liquid gases that are cleaner
burning and help to meet the Air Resources Board’s mobile and stationary emission standards.
Ambient Noise Level: The level of noise that is all-encompassing within a given environment for
which a single source cannot be determined. It is usually a composite of sounds from many and
varied sources near to and far from the receiver.
Annexation: The incorporation of a land area into an existing city with a resulting change in the
boundaries of that city.
Average Daily Trips (ADT): Average daily trips made by vehicles in a 24-hour period.
A-Weighted Decibel (dBA): A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness. The A-
weighted scale reduces the effects of low and high frequencies to simulate human hearing.
B
Bike Lane: A corridor expressly reserved by markings for bicycles existing on a street or roadway
in addition to any lanes for use by motorized vehicles (Class II Bikeway).
Bike Path: A paved route distinct from a street or roadway and expressly reserved for bicycles.
Bike paths may parallel roads but typically are separated from them (Class I Bikeway).
Bike Route: A bicycle facility shared with motorists and identified by signs or pavement marking
symbols. A bike route does not have lane stripes (Class III Bikeway).
Bikeways: A term that encompasses bicycle lanes, bicycle paths, and bicycle routes.
Buffer: Land and/or improvement designated to protect one type of land use from another
where there could be compatibility issues. Where a commercial district or agricultural use abuts
a residential district, for example, additional use, yard, or height restrictions may be imposed to
protect residential properties. The term may also be used to describe any zone that separates
two unlike zones such as a multiunit housing zone between single-unit housing and commercial
uses.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-3
Bulbout: A curb extension intended to slow the speed of traffic and increase driver awareness,
particularly in residential neighborhoods. They also allow pedestrians and vehicle drivers to see
each other when vehicles parked in a parking lane would otherwise block visibility.
C
California Building Code: A standard building code that sets minimum standards for
construction. The California Building Code is outlined in Title 24 of the California Code of
Regulations and includes the Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National
Electric Code, California Fire Code, and the California Energy Code.
California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD): The State department
responsible for administering State-sponsored housing programs and for reviewing housing
elements to determine compliance with State housing law.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): A State law enacted in 1971 that requires
governmental agencies at all levels to consider and publicly disclose the impact proposed
projects have on the environment, including cultural resource impacts.
California Register of Historical Resources: A listing of archaeological and historic resources
that meet the criteria for designation on the State register.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans): California agency whose mission is to
improve mobility across the State. It manages the State highway system and is actively involved
with public transportation systems within the State.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP): A proposed timetable or schedule of future capital
improvements (i.e., government acquisition of real property, major construction project, or
acquisition of long lasting, expensive equipment) to be carried out during a specific period,
together with cost estimates and the anticipated means of financing each project.
Census: An official enumeration of the population, with details as to age, sex, occupation, etc.
conducted by the federal government.
Child Care: Care, control, supervision, or maintenance of a child provided for compensation by
an individual, other than a parent, for fewer than 24 hours in a day.
City: City, with a capital "C," generally refers to the government or administration of the City of
Atascadero. City, with a lower case "c," may mean any city or the general boundaries of
Atascadero.
Climate Change: Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate (such as
temperature, precipitation or wind) lasting for an extended period (decades or longer). Climate
change may result from: 1) natural factors, such as changes in the sun's intensity or slow
changes in the Earth's orbit around the sun, 2) natural processes within the climate system (e.g.,
changes in ocean circulation), or 3) human activities that change the atmosphere's composition
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-4
(e.g., through burning fossil fuels) and the land surface (e.g., deforestation, reforestation,
urbanization and desertification)
Commercial Recreation Use: A privately owned or operated use providing facilities, typically for
indoor recreation activities.
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The noise metric adopted by the State of California
for evaluating airport noise. It represents the average daytime noise level during a 24-hour day,
adjusted to an equivalent level to account for the lower tolerance of people to noise during
evening and nighttime periods relative to the daytime period.
Compatibility: The characteristics of different uses or activities that permit them to be located
near each other in harmony and without conflict. The designation of permitted and
conditionally permitted uses in zoning districts is intended to achieve compatibility within the
district. Some elements affecting compatibility include: intensity of occupancy as measured by
dwelling units per acre; pedestrian or vehicular traffic generated; volume of goods handled; and
such environmental effects as noise, vibration, glare, air pollution, or the presence of hazardous
materials. On the other hand, many aspects of compatibility are based on personal preference
and are much harder to measure quantitatively, at least for regulatory purposes.
Complete Streets: A comprehensive approach to the practice and related policies of mobility
planning. The complete street concept recognizes that transportation corridors have multiple
users with different abilities and mode preferences (e.g., pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders,
and drivers) that need to be accounted for.
Composting: The controlled microbial decomposition of organic matter (such as food scraps and
yard trimmings) in the presence of oxygen into a humus- or soil-like material.
Condominium: An estate in real property consisting of an undivided interest in common in a
portion of a parcel in real property, together with a separate interest in airspace in a residential,
industrial, or commercial building on such real property such as an apartment, office, or store.
Conservation: The management of natural resources to prevent waste, destruction, or neglect.
Corridor: Major commercial or mix-use streets that connect centers and neighborhoods and
have their own identity.
Coverage: The proportion of the area of the footprint of a building in relation to the area of the
lot on which it stands.
D
Day-Night Average Sound Level (Ldn): The A-weighted average sound level for a given area
(measured in decibels) during a 24-hour period with a 10-dB weighting applied to night-time
sound levels. The Ldn is approximately numerically equal to the CNEL for most environmental
settings.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-5
dBA: The “A-weighted” scale for measuring sound in decibels; weighs or reduces the effects of
low and high frequencies to simulate human hearing. Every increase of 10 dBA doubles the
perceived loudness though the noise is actually 10 times more intense.
Decibel (dB): A unit measuring the magnitude of a sound, equal to the logarithm of the ratio of
the intensity of the sound to the intensity of an arbitrarily chosen standard sound, specifically a
sound just barely audible to an unimpaired human ear. For environmental noise from aircraft
and other transportation sources, an A-weighted sound level (abbreviated dBA) is normally
used. The A-weighting scale adjusts the values of different sound frequencies to approximate
the auditory sensitivity of the human ear.
Density: The number of dwelling units per unit of land. The City of Atascadero 2045 General
Plan refers to density in terms of dwelling units per acre (du/ac).
Density Bonus: The allocation of development rights as required by State law that allows a
parcel to be developed at a higher residential density than the maximum for which the parcel is
designated in exchange for the provision of a certain percentage of those units as affordable.
Developer: An individual or business that prepares raw land for the construction of buildings or
causes to be built physical building space for use primarily by others, and in which the
preparation of the land or the creation of the building space is in itself a business and is not
incidental to another business or activity.
Development: Development is generally defined as any human-caused change to improved or
unimproved real estate that requires a permit or approval from the City.
Development Agreement: A contractual agreement between a developer and the City that
clearly establishes the developer's responsibility to provide a certain type of development,
streets, and sewer improvements, and any other mutually agreed to terms and responsibilities
as a precondition for securing the right to develop.
Development Impact Fee: A fee or charge imposed on developers to pay for a jurisdiction's
costs of providing infrastructure for new development.
Director: Otherwise known as Community Development Director. This staff position oversees
the operations and staffing of the Community Development Department and assigned authority
over certain determinations, decisions, and approvals as specified in the Municipal Code,
General Plan, and other state and municipal policies.
Diversity: The variation among a particular group of things or people; for example, various
social and cultural identities among people existing together.
Drought: An extended period of months or years when a region notes a deficiency in its water
supply. Generally, this occurs when a region receives consistently below average precipitation.
Dwelling Unit: A structure or portion of a structure used exclusively for human habitation.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-6
Dwelling Unit per Acre (du/ac): Number of dwelling units per one acre of land; denotes
residential density.
E
Easement: A recorded right or interest in the land that belongs to someone else, and which
entitles the holder to some use, privilege, or benefit out of or over said land.
Ecosystem: A naturally occurring assemblage of organisms (plant, animal, and other living
organisms) living together with their environment, functioning as a loose unit; also referred to
as a biotic community.
Emergency Shelter: A facility that provides temporary overnight shelter for persons with no
permanent housing. Such facilities may offer services to meet basic needs such as food,
clothing, and limited medical care.
Encourage: A less rigid directive to be honored in the absence of compelling or contravening
considerations. Encourage communicates a clear commitment that permits flexibility if
circumstances so dictate.
Endangered Species: A species of animal or plant is considered to be endangered when its
prospects for survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes.
Energy Conservation: Reduction or elimination of unnecessary energy use and waste.
Entitlement: A permit granted to a landowner or other authorized party giving it the right to
establish a land use or improve a property. Such right is usually expressed in terms of a use and
intensity allowed under a development agreement, subdivision or tract map, use permit,
variance, building permit, or other similar permit. For example, an entitlement may specify the
maximum number of residential dwelling units permitted on a site or the maximum square
footage of non-residential development permitted on a site.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR): A report required pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act when environmental impacts are determined to be potentially significant. The
report assesses all the environmental characteristics of an area, determines what effects or
impacts will result if the area is altered or disturbed by a proposed action, and identifies
alternatives or other measures to avoid or reduce those impacts.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): The United States agency charged with setting policy
and guidelines and carrying out legal mandates for the protection of national interests in
environmental resources.
Erosion: The loosening and transportation of rock and soil debris by wind, rain, or running
water; or the gradual wearing away of the upper layers of the Earth.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-7
F
Fair Market Rent (FMR): Freely set rental rates defined by HUD as the median gross rents
charged for available standard units in a county or Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
(SMSA). Fair Market Rents are used for the Section 8 Rental Program and many other HUD
programs and are published annually by HUD.
Fault: A fracture in the Earth's crust forming a boundary between rock masses that have shifted.
Fiber Optic Cable: High-speed data transmission medium that uses cables to transmit digital
data.
Floodplain: A lowland or relatively flat area adjoining the banks of a river or stream which is
subject to a one percent or greater chance or flooding in any given year (i.e., 100-year flood).
G
Gateway: A point along a roadway entering a city or county at which a visitor, resident, or local
worker gains a sense of having left the previous environs and of having entered a new place.
Goal: The ultimate purpose of an effort stated in a way that is general in nature and
immeasurable; a broad statement of intended direction and purpose.
Governance: The persons, boards, commissions, committees, councils, and/or departments
who make up a body for the purpose of administering city government.
Grade: The vertical location of the ground surface.
Grading: Any excavating, filling of land, or combination thereof.
Greenhouse Gases: Gases in the Earth's atmosphere that produce the greenhouse effect.
Changes in the concentration of certain greenhouse gases, due to human activity such as fossil
fuel burning, increase the risk of global climate change. Greenhouse gases include carbon
dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, halogenated fluorocarbons, ozone, perfluorinated carbons, and
hydro fluorocarbons.
Ground Failure: Mudslide, landslide, liquefaction, or the compaction of soils due to ground
shaking from an earthquake.
Ground Shaking: Ground movement resulting from the transmission of seismic waves during an
earthquake.
Groundwater: The supply of fresh water under the ground surface in an aquifer or soil that
forms a natural reservoir.
Groundwater Recharge: The natural process of infiltration and percolation of rainwater from
land areas or streams through permeable soils into water-holding rocks that provide
underground storage (aquifers).
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-8
H
Habitat: The physical location or type of environment in which an organism or biological
population lives or occurs.
Hazardous Materials: An injurious substance, including pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and
chemicals, liquefied gases.
Historic: A historic building or site is one that is noteworthy for its significance in local, State, or
national history or culture, its architecture or design, or its works of art, memorabilia, or
artifacts.
Historic Context: A narrative description of the broad patterns of historical development in a
community or its region that is represented by cultural resources. A historic context statement
is organized by themes such as economic, residential, and commercial development.
Historic District: A district, geographical area, or neighborhood containing a collection of
residential and/or commercial historical buildings which generally represents a significant
aspect of the community’s architectural and/or development history, and has been designated
by the City Council.
Historic Resource: A general term that refers to buildings, areas, districts, streets, sites, places,
structures, outdoor works of art, natural or agricultural features, and other objects having a
special historical, cultural, archaeological, architectural, community, or aesthetic value, and are
usually 50 years of age or older.
Household: According to the U.S. Census, a household is all persons living in a dwelling unit,
whether or not they are related. Both a single person living in an apartment and a family living
in a house are considered households.
Household Income: The total income of all the people living in a household. Households are
usually described as very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate
income for that household size, based on their position relative to the county median income.
Housing Unit: A room or group of rooms used by one or more individuals living separately from
others in the structure, with direct access to the outside or to a public hall and containing
separate toilet and kitchen facilities.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): The United States federal department
that administers federal programs dealing with better housing and urban renewal.
I
Impervious surfaces: Structures or installed surface materials—such as pavements (roads,
sidewalks, driveways and parking lots) that are covered by impenetrable materials.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-9
Implementation: An action, procedure, program, or technique that carries out General Plan
policy.
Improvement: As defined the Atascadero Municipal Code, is any building, structure, place,
parking facility, fence, gate, wall, work of art, or other object constituting a physical betterment
of real property, or any part of such betterment.
Income Category: Four categories are used to classify a household according to income based
on the median income for the county. Under State housing statutes, these categories are
defined as follows: Very Low (0-50% of county median); Low (51-80% of county median);
Moderate (81-120% of county median); and Above Moderate (over 120% of county median).
Industrial: The manufacture, production, and processing of consumer goods. Industrial is often
divided into “heavy industrial” uses, such as construction yards, quarrying, and factories; and
“light industrial” uses, which are generally indoor uses such as research and development and
less intensive warehousing and manufacturing.
Infill Development: Development that occurs on or within an existing urban framework on: 1)
vacant land (usually individual lots or previously passed-over properties) or 2) land that has
been previously developed within areas that are already largely developed.
Infrastructure: The physical systems and services which support development and population,
such as roadways, railroads, water, sewer, natural gas, electrical generation and transmission,
telephone, cable television, storm drainage, and others.
Institutional Uses: Publicly or privately owned and operated activities such as hospitals,
convalescent hospitals, intermediate care facilities, nursing homes, museums, and schools and
colleges; churches and other religious organizations; and other nonprofit activities of a welfare,
educational, or philanthropic nature that cannot be considered residential, commercial, or
industrial
Intensity: A measure of the amount or level of development often expressed as the ratio of
building floor area to lot area (floor area ratio) for commercial, business, and industrial
development, or dwelling units per acre of land for residential development (also called
"density"). For the purposes of this General Plan, the intensity of nonresidential development is
described in terms of floor-area ratio (FAR).
Interagency: Indicates consultation between or among two or more discrete agencies in regard
to a specific program.
Intersection: Where two or more roads cross at grade.
J
Jurisdiction: The territory over which authority to govern is exercised
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-10
K
Reserved
L
Landmark: A site (including significant trees or other significant permanent landscaping located
on a site), place, building, structure, street, improvement, street furniture, sign, work of art,
natural feature, or other object representative of the historical, archaeological, cultural,
architectural, community, aesthetic, or artistic heritage of the city.
Landscaping: Planting, including but not limited to, trees, shrubs, and ground covers which are
suitably designed, selected, installed, and maintained to enhance a site or right-of-way.
Land Use: A description of how land is occupied or used.
Land Use Plan: A plan showing the allowed location, extent, and intensity of development of
land to be used in the future for varying types of residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
recreational, and other public and private purposes or combination of purposes.
Landslide: A general term for a falling or sliding mass of soil or rocks.
Lateral Spread: Refers to landslides that commonly form on gentle slopes and that have rapid
fluid-like flow movement, like water.
Level of Service (LOS) Standard: One standard used by government agencies to measure the
quality or effectiveness of a municipal service such as police, fire, or library, or the performance
of a facility, such as a street or highway.
Light Pollution: Excessive or obtrusive artificial light.
Liquefaction: A process by which water saturated granular soils transform from a solid to a
liquid state due to groundshaking. This phenomenon usually results from shaking from energy
waves released in an earthquake.
Live/Work Unit: A land use that combines residential units with commercial spaces, typically in
which the resident uses the workspace for his or her own business.
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO): A five- or seven- member commission within
each county that reviews and evaluates all proposals for formation of special districts,
incorporation of cities, annexation to special districts or cities, consolidation of districts, and
merger of districts with cities. Each county's LAFCO is empowered to approve, disapprove, or
conditionally approve such proposals.
Local Street: A street providing direct access to properties and not designed for through traffic.
Lot: A legally recognized parcel of land
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-11
Low Impact Development: Development that uses or mimic natural processes that result in the
infiltration, evapotranspiration or use of stormwater to protect water quality and associated
aquatic habitat.
M
Market-Rate Housing: Housing available on the open market without any subsidy. The price for
housing is determined by the market forces of supply and demand and varies by location.
Mass Communication System: A system to impart or exchange information on a large scale to a
wide range of people.
Median Income: The annual income for each household size within a region is defined annually
by HUD. Half of the households in the region have incomes above the median and half have
incomes below the median.
Mitigate: To ameliorate, alleviate, or avoid to the extent reasonably feasible.
Mixed Use: A combination of residential and compatible commercial uses on a site that can be
integrated horizontally or vertically as defined by their specific Placetype and zoning standards.
Mobile Sources: Sources of air pollution such as automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, off-road
vehicles, boats, and airplanes.
Monitor: A commitment to keep track of.
Multi-Generational: Of or relating to several generations.
Multimodal: The utilization of a variety of available modes of travel that enhance the
movement of people and goods, including, but not limited to, highway, transit, nonmotorized,
and demand management strategies including, but not limited to, telecommuting. The
availability and practicality of specific multimodal systems, projects, and strategies may vary by
county and region in accordance with the size and complexity of different urbanized areas.
(Government Code §65088)
Municipal Services: Services traditionally provided by local government, including water and
sewer, roads, parks, schools, and police and fire protection.
Mutual Aid Agreement: An agreement among emergency responders to lend assistance across
jurisdictional boundaries.
N
National Flood Insurance Program: A federal program which authorizes the sale of federally
subsidized flood insurance in communities where such flood insurance is not available privately.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): As authorized by the Clean Water
Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-12
water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United
States. The State Water Resources Control Board issues permits to jurisdictions with the
objectives to attain and protect the beneficial uses of water bodies in the State; reduce
pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable; and to evaluate compliance with
the objectives and requirements contained in the permit.
National Register of Historic Places: The nation’s official list of districts, sites, buildings,
structures, and objects significant in national, regional or local American history, architecture,
archaeology, and culture, maintained by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior.
Neighborhood: A geographically localized community within Atascadero.
Neighborhood Context: The background and surrounding information that enhances
understanding of a particular neighborhood.
Neighborhood Park: City- or county-owned land intended to serve the recreation needs of
people living or working in proximity to the park.
Noise: Sound that is discernible to the human ear. Excessive noise is any sound which exceeds
the appropriate actual or presumed ambient noise level which annoys or tends to disturb
humans, or which causes or tends to cause an adverse psychological or physiological effect on
humans.
Noise Contours: Continuous lines of equal noise level usually drawn around a noise source, such
as an airport or highway. The lines are generally drawn in five-decibel increments so that they
resemble elevation contours in topographic maps.
Nonconforming Use: An established use of a building or land which may have been legally
initiated but which does not conform to the present code because of subsequent changes in
land use regulations.
O
Open Space: Any parcel or area of land or water that is essentially unimproved and devoted to
an open-space use as defined in this section, and that is designated on a local, regional or state
open-space plan as any of the following:
Open space for the preservation of natural resources including, but not limited to, areas
identified for the preservation of plant and animal life, including habitat for fish and
wildlife species.
Open space used for the managed production of resources, including but not limited to,
forest lands, rangeland, agricultural lands and areas of economic importance for the
production of food or fiber; and areas required for recharge of groundwater basins.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-13
Open space for outdoor recreation purposes, and areas which serve as links between
major recreation and open-space reservations.
Open space for public health and safety, including, but not limited to, areas which
require special management or regulation because of hazardous or special conditions
such as earthquake fault zones, unstable soil areas, floodplains, watersheds, areas
presenting high fire risks, areas required for the protection of water quality and water
reservoirs and areas required for the protection and enhancement of air quality.
Optimize: A commitment to make as effective and useful as possible or to plan or carryout with
maximum efficiency.
Ordinance: A law or regulation set forth and adopted by a governmental authority, usually a city
or county.
Outdoor Recreation Use: A privately or publicly owned or operated use providing facilities for
outdoor recreation activities.
Overlay: A land use designation or a zoning designation that modifies the basic underlying
designation in some specific manner.
P
Parcel: The basic unit of land entitlement. A designated area of land established by plat,
subdivision, or otherwise legally defined and permitted to be used or built upon.
Park: Land that is publicly owned or controlled for providing parks, recreation, or open space for
public use.
Parking (public): An open area, excluding a street or other public way, used for the parking of
automobiles and available to the public, whether for free or for compensation.
Parking Management: A system designed and carried out to obtain maximum utilization from a
limited number of parking spaces.
Participate: A directive to take or have a part or share with others in a program or group effort.
Particulate Matter (PM10): Particulate matter less than 10 microns in size. A major air pollutant
consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes and aerosols.
Placetype: A system for classifying and designating the appropriate use of properties.
Planning Area: The Planning Area is the land areas addressed by the General Plan. For a city, the
Planning Area boundary typically coincides with the sphere of influence and encompasses land
both within the City limits and potentially annexable land.
Planning Commission: A decision making body, created by the City in compliance with
California law (Government Code Section 65100 et seq.).
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-14
Policy, General Plan: Statement guiding action and implying clear commitment found within
each element of the General Plan.
Pollution: The presence of matter or energy whose nature, location, or quantity produces
undesired environmental effects.
Pollution, Non-Point: Sources for pollution that are less definable and usually cover broad areas
of land, such as agricultural land with fertilizers that are carried from the land by runoff, or
automobiles.
Pollution, Point: In reference to water quality, a discrete source from which pollution is
generated before it enters receiving waters, such as a sewer outfall, a smokestack, or an
industrial waste pipe.
Potable Water: Water that is of sufficiently high quality so that it can be consumed or used
without risk of immediate or long-term harm.
Private: Of or concerning a particular person or group; not owned by a government body.
Program: A coordinated set of specific measures and actions (e.g., zoning, subdivision
procedures, and capital expenditures) the local government intends to use in carrying out the
policies of the General Plan.
Public: Of the people as a whole, or for the use and benefit of all.
Public and Quasi-Public Facilities: Institutional, academic, governmental and community
service uses, either owned publicly or operated by non-profit organizations, including private
hospitals and cemeteries.
Public Services: See “Municipal Services.”
Public Space: Land or structures that are open to anyone; may include public or private
property; also referred to as “public realm.”
Q
Reserved
R
Recycling: The act of processing used or abandoned materials for use in creating new product.
Recycled Water: Former wastewater (sewage) that has been treated to remove solids and
certain impurities, and then allowed to recharge the aquifer rather than being discharged to
surface water. This recharging is often done by using the treated wastewater for irrigation.
Redevelop: To demolish existing buildings, increase the overall floor area existing on a property,
or both, irrespective of whether a change occurs in land use.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-15
Regional: Pertaining to activities or economies at a scale greater than that of a single
jurisdiction and affecting a broader area.
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): The Regional Housing Needs Allocation is based on
State of California projections of population growth and housing unit demand and assigns a
share of the region's future housing need to each jurisdiction in the State. These housing need
numbers serve as the basis for the update of the housing element in each California city and
county.
Rehabilitation: The upgrading of a building in previously dilapidated or substandard condition
for human habitation or use.
Renewable Energy: The term renewable energy generally refers to electricity supplied from
renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, geothermal, hydropower and various
forms of biomass. These energy sources are considered renewable sources because their fuel
sources are continuously replenished.
Retrofit: To add materials and/or devices to an existing building or system to improve its
operation or efficiency.
Rezoning: An amendment to the map and/or text of a zoning code to effect a change in the
nature, density, or intensity of uses allowed in a zoning district and/or on a designated parcel or
land area.
Right-of-Way: Any place which is dedicated to use by the public for pedestrian and vehicular
travel. A right-of-way may include, but is not limited to, a street, sidewalk, curb, and gutter. A
right-of-way may be a crossing, intersection, parkway, median, highway, alley, lane, mall, court,
way, avenue, boulevard, road, roadway, railway, viaduct, subway, tunnel, bridge, thoroughfare,
park square, or other similar public way.
Riparian: Relating to or living on or located on the bank of bodies or courses of water.
S
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG): A regional planning agency, or any
successor agency, incorporating various local governments in San Luis Obispo County in
California. It deals with regional land use, housing, environmental quality, and economic
development.
Sanitary Sewer: A system of subterranean conduits that carries refuse liquids or waste matter to
a plant where the sewage is treated, as contrasted with storm drainage systems (that carry
surface water) and septic tanks or leach fields (that hold refuse liquids and waste matter on
site).
Scenic Highway/Scenic Route: A highway, road, drive, or street that, in addition to its
transportation function, provides opportunities for the enjoyment of natural and human-made
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-16
scenic resources and access or direct views to areas or scenes of exceptional beauty or historic
or cultural interest.
Seismic: Caused by or subject to earthquakes or Earth vibrations.
Sensitive Species: Includes those plant and animal species considered threatened or
endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the California Department of Fish and
Game, according to Section 3 of the Federal Endangered Species Act.
Setback: The distance from a defined point of line governing the placement of buildings,
structures, parking, or uses on a lot.
Sewer: Any pipe or conduit used to collect and carry away wastewater from the generating
source to a treatment plant or discharge outfall.
Specific Plan: A tool authorized by Government Code Section 65450 et seq. for the systematic
implementation of the General Plan for a defined portion of a community’s planning area. A
specific plan must specify in detail the land uses, public and private facilities needed to support
the land uses, phasing of development and use of natural resources, and a program of
implementation measures, including financing measures.
Soil: Naturally occurring superficial deposits overlying bedrock.
Solar Energy: Energy from the sun that is converted into thermal or electrical energy.
Solid Waste: All solid, semi-solid, and liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper,
rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and
parts thereof, discarded home and industrial appliances, dewatered, treated, or chemically fixed
sewage sludge which is not hazardous waste, manure, vegetable of animal solid and semi-solid
wastes, and other discarded solid and semisolid waste.
Sphere of Influence: The probable physical boundaries and service area of a local government
agency as determined by the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).
Standards: (1) A rule or measure establishing a level of quality or quantity that must be
complied with or satisfied. The California Government Code (Section 65302) requires that
General Plans describe "standards." (2) Requirements in a Zoning Code that govern building and
development as distinguished from use restrictions; for example, site design regulations such as
lot area, height limit, frontage, landscaping, and floor area ratio.
State Historical Building Code (SHBC): State of California, Title 24, Building Standards, Part 8,
which regulates control and allows alternatives to any and all prevailing codes when dealing
with qualified historic buildings and structures.
Stationary Sources: Nonmobile sources such as power plants, refineries, and manufacturing
facilities which emit air pollutants.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-17
Stormwater Runoff: Stormwater from city streets and adjacent domestic or commercial
properties that carries pollutants of various kinds into the sewer systems and receiving waters.
Streetscape: The visual elements of a street, including the road, adjoining buildings, sidewalks,
street furniture, trees and open spaces, etc. that combine to form the street's character.
Structure: Anything constructed or erected that requires location on the ground or attachment
to something having location on the ground, including swimming pools, but excluding
driveways, sidewalks, patios, or parking spaces.
Subdivision: The division of any improved or unimproved legal lot of record
Subsidence: The sinking or downward settling and compaction of soil and other surface
material with little or no horizontal motion. Subsidence may be caused by a variety of human
and natural activity, including earthquakes.
Subsidize: To assist by payment of a sum of money or by the granting of terms or fee reductions
that reduce the need for monetary expenditures.
Substandard Housing: Residential dwellings that, because of their physical condition, do not
provide safe and sanitary housing (i.e., does not provide shelter, endangers the health, safety or
well-being of occupants). Jurisdictions may adopt more stringent local definitions of
substandard housing.
Sustainability: The ability for the city and citizens of Atascadero to meet the needs of the
present economy, society, and environment while preserving the ability of future generations to
meet their needs.
T
Tenure: Refers to the distinction between owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing units.
Topography: Configuration of a surface, including its relief and the position of natural and
human-made features.
Townhouse: A dwelling unit occupying its own lot but which is physically attached to at least
one other dwelling unit.
Traffic Calming: The combination of policies and measures that reduce the negative effects of
motorized vehicle use by improving livability in the surrounding neighborhood. With traffic
calming, accessibility and mobility are not reduced; they are modified to fit needs of
neighborhood. Traffic calming achieves this by modifying the design of streets to serve a broad
range of transportation, social, and environmental purposes.
Transit: A system of regularly scheduled buses and/or trains available to the public on a fee-per-
ride basis. Also called mass transit.
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-18
Transmission Line: An interconnected group of electric lines located on poles or underground
which transfer energy, in bulk, between points of supply and points of delivery.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM): A strategy for reducing demand on the road
system by reducing the number of vehicles using the roadways and/or increasing the number of
persons per vehicle. TDM attempts to reduce the number of persons who drive alone on the
roadway during the commute period and to increase the number in carpools, vanpools, buses
and trains, walking, and biking.
Trees, Street: Trees strategically planted—usually in parkway strips, medians, or along streets-to
enhance the visual quality of a street.
Trip: A one-way journey that proceeds from an origin to a destination via a single mode of
transportation; the smallest unit of movement considered in transportation studies. Each trip
has one "production end" (or origin) and one "attraction end" (destination).
U
Undergrounding Utilities: The process of transferring overhead utilities into underground
facilities
Unincorporated Area: A region of land that is not governed by a local municipality such as a
city, but are under the jurisdiction of the county.
Urban Forest: The community forest includes street trees, open green spaces, undeveloped
land, and parks, along with other public and private spaces within urban areas.
Urban Form: Urban form addresses the relationship between building facades and the public
realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of
streets and blocks.
V
Vacant: Lands or buildings that are not actively used for any purpose.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): The total distance traveled in miles by all motor vehicles of a
specific group within a given area at a given time.
Viewshed: The area within view from a defined observation point.
W
Walkable: A measure of how friendly an area is for pedestrians. Factors affecting walkability
include, but are not limited to, land use mix; street connectivity; residential density (residential
units per area of residential use); "transparency" which includes amount of glass in windows
and doors, as well as orientation and proximity of homes and buildings to watch over the street;
plenty of places to go to near the majority of homes; placemaking, street designs that work for
Authentic Atascadero 2045 General Plan | DRAFT G-19
people, not just cars; and nonresidential floor area ratio. Major infrastructural factors include
access to mass transit, presence and quality walkways, buffers to moving traffic (planter strips,
on-street parking, or bike lanes) and pedestrian crossings, aesthetics, nearby local destinations,
shade or sun in appropriate seasons, street furniture, and traffic volume and speed.
Water Conservation: Using water wisely and efficiently so that it is not wasted.
Water-Efficient Landscaping: Landscaping designed to minimize water use and maximize energy
efficiency.
Water Quality: The physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of water. It is most
frequently used by reference to a set of standards against which compliance can be assessed.
The most common standards used to assess water quality relate to drinking water, safety of
human contact, and for health of ecosystems.
Watershed: The total area above a given point on a watercourse that contributes water to its
flow; the entire region drained by a waterway or watercourse that drains into a lake or reservoir.
Wayfinding: All of the ways in which people orient themselves in physical space and navigate
from place to place, including signage and other graphic communication.
Wetlands: Areas that are saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to
support wetland hydrology.
X
Reserved
Y
Reserved
Z
Zoning: A police power measure, enacted primarily by units of local government, in which the
community is divided into districts or zones within which permitted and special uses are
established as are regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement and other
development standards. Requirements vary from district to district, but they must be uniform
within the same district. The Zoning Code consists of a map and text.
Zoning Map: The officially adopted zoning map of the City specifying the location of zoning
districts within all geographic areas of the city.
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX C
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
A IR Q UALITY &
G REENHOUSE G AS
I MPACT
A NALYSIS
F O R
C ITY OF A TASCADERO
2045 G ENERAL P LAN
U PDATE
MARCH 2026
PREPARED BY:
75 HIGUERA STREET, SUITE 105
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
AIR QUALITY & NOISE CONSULTING
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Proposed City of Atascadero General Plan Update ....................................................................................................... 1
Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Existing Setting .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Impact Analysis........................................................................................................................................................ 16
Greenhouse Gas .......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Existing Setting ........................................................................................................................................................ 30
Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................................ 34
Impact Analysis........................................................................................................................................................ 41 References ...................................................................................................................................................................49
List of Tables
Table 1. Common Pollutants & Adverse Effects ........................................................................................................ 4
Table 2. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near TAC Emission Sources .................................. 7
Table 3. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data ..................................................................................... 9
Table 4. Air Quality Index Summary for Ozone & Related Health Effects ............................................................... 10
Table 5. Air Quality Index Summary for Fine Particulate Matter & Related Health Effects .................................... 11
Table 6. Air Quality Index Annual Historical Summary ............................................................................................ 11
Table 7. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards & Attainment Designations ................................................. 13
Table 8. SLOAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Project-Level Construction Impacts ........................................... 16
Table 9. SLOAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Project-Level Operational Impacts ............................................ 17
Table 10. Consistency with SLOAPCD Clean Air Plan Control Measures ................................................................... 23
Table 11. Global Warming Potential for Greenhouse Gases ..................................................................................... 32
Table 12. Annual Operational GHG Emissions at Buildout ........................................................................................ 45
List of Figures
Figure 1. California GHG Emissions Inventory by Sector & Subsector .................................................................... 32
Figure 2. California Black Carbon Emissions Inventory (Year 2013) ....................................................................... 33
Appendices
Appendix A Emissions Modeling & Supportive Documentation
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
LIST OF COMMON TERMS & ACRONYMS
AB Assembly Bill
AHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act
ARB California Air Resources Board
ATCM Airborne Toxic Control Measure
BACT Best Available Control Technology
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAP Clean Air Plan (Air Quality) also Climate Action Plan (GHG)
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CAMP Construction Activity Management Plan
CBC California Building Code
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCAR California Climate Action Registry
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulation
CH4 Methane
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
DPM Diesel-Exhaust Particulate Matter or Diesel-Exhaust PM
DRRP Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
EMFAC Emission Factor
EO Executive Order
FCAA Federal Clean Air Act
FIP Federal Implementation Plan
GHG Greenhouse Gases
GPU General Plan Update
GWP Global Warming Potential
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
HFC Hydrofluorocarbons
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
LOS Level of Service
MMTCO2e Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
NF2 Nitrogen trifluoride
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NESHAPs National Emission Standards for HAPs
NOx Oxides of Nitrogen
O3 Ozone
Pb Lead
PFC Perfluorocarbons
PM Particulate Matter
PM10 Particulate Matter (less than 10 μm)
PM2.5 Particulate Matter (less than 2.5 μm)
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
ppb Parts per Billion
ppm Parts per Million
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SB Senate Bill
SCCAB South Central Coast Air Basin
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SF6 Sulfur hexafluoride
SLCP Short-Lived Climate Pollutants
SLOAPCD San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
SLOCOG San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
SP Service Population
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
TAC Toxic Air Contaminant
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
U.S. EPA United State Environmental Protection Agency
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
1
INTRODUCTION
This report provides a discussion of existing conditions, applicable regulatory framework, and an analysis
of air quality and greenhouse gas impacts associated with the proposed City of Atascadero 2045 General
Plan Update (2045 GPU/ZCU) and corresponding Zoning Code Update (ZCU).
PROPOSED CITY OF ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
The 2045 GPU/ZCU is a long-range policy document that provides context and establishes guidance for
decision-making, design and development of new projects, conservation of natural resources, promotion
of economic development, improvements to mobility and infrastructure systems, expansion of public
services, and enhancement of community amenities. The 2045 GPU/ZCU identifies year 2045 as a horizon
year; however, the City recognizes that not all initiatives and goals in the 2045 GPU/ZCU may be achieved
by 2045. The Zoning Code implements the General Plan and provides an administrative and development
framework for parcels throughout the City. The Zoning Code will be revised to accommodate new General
Plan Placetypes and will incorporate administrative and process updates aligned with General Plan
policies, existing city processes, and permit streamlining directives.
AIR QUALITY
Existing Setting
The project is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), and within the jurisdiction of the
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). Air quality in the SCCAB is influenced by
a variety of factors, including topography, and local and regional meteorology.
Topography
The City sits on the rolling hills of the eastern side of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range. It is bounded from
the northwest by the Santa Lucia Mountain Range, which extends almost the entire length of the county.
Rising sharply to about 3,000 feet at its northern boundary, the Santa Lucia Range gradually winds
southward away from the coast, finally merging into a mass of rugged features on the north side of
Cuyama Canyon. Point Buchon juts into the Pacific just south of Morro Bay to form the protective harbor
of San Luis Obispo Bay. The Irish Hills are the dominant feature on this knob of land, rising abruptly from
the shore to form steep cliffs and generally complex terrain from the Los Osos/Montana de Oro State Park
area to Pismo Beach. These headlands have a pronounced influence on local wind flow patterns.
Local and Regional Meteorology
The climate of the county can be generally characterized as Mediterranean, with warm, dry summers and
cooler, relatively damp winters. Along the coast, mild temperatures are the rule throughout the year due
to the moderating influence of the Pacific Ocean. This effect is diminished inland in proportion to the
distance from the ocean or by major intervening terrain features, such as the coastal mountain ranges. As
a result, inland areas are characterized by a considerably wider range of temperature conditions.
Maximum summer temperatures average about 70 degrees Fahrenheit near the coast, while inland
valleys are often in the high 90s. Minimum winter temperatures average from the low 30s along the coast
to the low 20s inland (SLOAPCD 2001).
Regional meteorology is largely dominated by a persistent high-pressure area that commonly resides over
the eastern Pacific Ocean. Seasonal variations in the strength and position of this pressure cell cause
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
2
seasonal changes in the weather patterns of the area. The Pacific High remains generally fixed several
hundred miles offshore from May through September, enhancing onshore winds and opposing offshore
winds.
During spring and early summer, as the onshore breezes pass over the cool water of the ocean, fog, and
low clouds often form in the marine air layer along the coast. Surface heating in the interior valleys
dissipates the marine layer as it moves inland (SLOAPCD 2001).
From November through April the Pacific High tends to migrate southward, allowing northern storms to
move across the county. About 90 percent of the total annual rainfall is received during this period. Winter
conditions are usually mild, with intermittent periods of precipitation followed by mostly clear days.
Rainfall amounts can vary considerably among different regions in the county. In the Coastal Plain, annual
rainfall averages 16 to 28 inches, while the Upper Salinas River Valley generally receives about 12 to 20
inches of rain. The Carrizo Plain is the driest area of the county with less than 12 inches of rain in a typical
year (SLOAPCD 2001).
Airflow around the county plays an important role in the movement and dispersion of pollutants. The
speed and direction of local winds are controlled by the location and strength of the Pacific High-pressure
system and other global patterns, by topographical factors, and by circulation patterns resulting from
temperature differences between the land and sea. In spring and summer months, when the Pacific High
attains its greatest strength, onshore winds from the northwest generally prevail during the day. At night,
as the sea breeze dies, weak drainage winds flow down the coastal mountains and valleys to form a light,
easterly land breeze (SLOAPCD 2001).
In the Fall, onshore surface winds decline, and the marine layer grows shallow, allowing an occasional
reversal to a weak offshore flow. This, along with the diurnal alternation of land-sea breeze circulation,
can sometimes produce a "sloshing" effect. Under these conditions, pollutants may accumulate over the
ocean for a period of one or more days and are subsequently carried back onshore with the return of the
sea breeze. Strong inversions can form at this time, "trapping" pollutants near the surface (SLOAPCD
2001).
This effect is intensified when the Pacific High weakens or moves inland to the east. This may produce a
"Santa Ana" condition in which air, often pollutant-laden, is transported into the county from the east and
southeast. This can occur over a period of several days until the high-pressure system returns to its normal
location, breaking the pattern. The breakup of Santa Ana conditions may result in relatively stagnant
conditions and a buildup of pollutants offshore. The onset of the typical daytime sea breeze can bring
these pollutants back onshore, where they combine with local emissions to cause high pollutant
concentrations. Not all occurrences of the "post-Santa Ana" conditions lead to high ambient pollutant
levels, but it does play an important role in the air pollution meteorology of the county (SLOAPCD 2001).
Atmospheric Stability and Dispersion
Air pollutant concentrations are primarily determined by the amount of pollutant emissions in an area
and the degree to which these pollutants are dispersed into the atmosphere. The stability of the
atmosphere is one of the key factors affecting pollutant dispersion. Atmospheric stability regulates the
amount of vertical and horizontal air exchange or mixing that can occur within a given air basin. Restricted
mixing and low wind speeds are generally associated with a high degree of stability in the atmosphere.
These conditions are characteristic of temperature inversions (SLOAPCD 2001).
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
3
In the atmosphere, air temperatures normally decrease as altitude increases. At varying distances above
the earth's surface, however, a reversal of this gradient can occur. This condition termed an inversion, is
simply a warm layer of air above a layer of cooler air, and it has the effect of limiting the vertical dispersion
of pollutants. The height of the inversion determines the size of the mixing volume trapped below.
Inversion strength or intensity is measured by the thickness of the layer and the difference in temperature
between the base and the top of the inversion. The strength of the inversion determines how easily it can
be broken by wind or solar heating (SLOAPCD 2001).
Several types of inversions are common to this area. Weak, surface inversions are caused by radiational
cooling of air in contact with the cold surface of the earth at night. In valleys and low-lying areas, this
condition is intensified by the addition of cold air flowing downslope from the hills and pooling on the
valley floor. Surface inversions are a common occurrence throughout the county during the winter,
particularly on cold mornings when the inversion is strongest. As the morning sun warms the earth and
the air near the ground, the inversion lifts, gradually dissipating as the day progresses. During the late
spring and early summer months, cool air over the ocean can intrude under the relatively warmer air over
land, causing a marine inversion. These inversions can restrict dispersion along the coast, but they are
typically shallow and will dissipate with surface heating (SLOAPCD 2001).
In contrast, in the summertime, the presence of the Pacific high-pressure cell can cause the air mass aloft
to sink. As the air descends, compressional heating warms it to a temperature higher than the air below.
This highly stable atmospheric condition, termed a subsidence inversion, is common to all of coastal
California and can act as a nearly impenetrable lid to the vertical mixing of pollutants. The base of the
inversion typically ranges from 1,000 to 2,500 feet above sea level; however, levels as low as 250 feet,
among the lowest anywhere in the state, have been recorded on the coastal plateau in San Luis Obispo
County. The strength of these inversions makes them difficult to disrupt. Consequently, they can persist
for one or more days, causing air stagnation and the buildup of pollutants. Highest or worst-case ozone
levels are often associated with the presence of this type of inversion (SLOAPCD 2001).
Criteria Air Pollutants
For the protection of public health and welfare, the Clean Air Act (CAA) required that the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for various pollutants. These pollutants are referred to as "criteria" pollutants because the U.S. EPA
publishes criteria documents to justify the choice of standards. These standards define the maximum
amount of an air pollutant that can be present in ambient air without harm to the public’s health. An
ambient air quality standard is generally specified as a concentration averaged over a specific time period,
such as one hour, eight hours, 24 hours, or one year. The different averaging times and concentrations
are meant to protect against different exposure effects. The CAA allows states to adopt additional or more
health-protective standards. The air quality regulatory framework and ambient air quality standards are
discussed in greater detail later in this report.
Human Health & Welfare Effects
Common air pollutants and associated adverse health and welfare effects are summarized in Table 1.
Within the SCCAB, the air pollutants of primary concern, with regard to human health, include ozone,
particulate matter (PM). Health effects commonly associated with criteria air pollutants are summarized
in Table 1. As depicted in Table 1, exposure to increased pollutant concentrations of ozone and PM can
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
4
result in various heart and lung ailments, cardiovascular and nervous system impairment, and premature
death.
Table 1. Common Pollutants & Adverse Effects
Pollutant Human Health & Welfare Effects
Particulate Matter
(PM10 & PM2.5)
Increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty
breathing; aggravated asthma; development of chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal
heart attacks; and premature death in people with heart or lung disease. Impairs visibility (haze).
Ozone
(O3)
Irritates and causes inflammation of the mucous membranes and lung airways; causes wheezing,
coughing, and pain when inhaling deeply; decreases lung capacity; aggravates lung and heart
problems. Damages plants; reduces crop yield. Damages rubber, some textiles, and dyes.
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
Respiratory irritant. Aggravates lung and heart problems. In the presence of moisture and oxygen,
sulfur dioxide converts to sulfuric acid which can damage marble, iron, and steel; damage crops
and natural vegetation. Impairs visibility. A precursor to acid rain.
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Reduces the ability of blood to deliver oxygen to vital tissues, effecting the cardiovascular and
nervous system. Impairs vision, causes dizziness, and can lead to unconsciousness or death.
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Respiratory irritant; aggravates lung and heart problems. A precursor to ozone and acid rain.
Contributes to global warming, and nutrient overloading which deteriorates water quality. Causes
brown discoloration of the atmosphere.
Lead
(Pb)
Anemia, high blood pressure, brain and kidney damage, neurological disorders, cancer, lowered
IQ. Affects animals, plants, and aquatic ecosystems.
Source: ARB 2018
Ozone is a secondary pollutant, which is formed by the combination of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and
reactive organic gases (ROG), also commonly referred to as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Ozone is
not a directly emitted pollutant. NOX and ROG are not criteria air pollutants but, when in the presence of
sunlight, they can form ozone and also contribute to the formation of secondary PM2.5. Because ozone is
not a directly emitted pollutant and is created under specific meteorological conditions over a wide
transport area, ozone concentrations are typically evaluated at a regional level using complex
photochemical models. These models are capable of predicting concentrations that take into account
variations in amounts of precursor emissions (e.g., ROG, NOX), temperature, inversions, sunlight, hourly
variations, ambient conditions, and wind flow over long distances (e.g., miles). At the project level of
analysis, evaluation of ozone concentrations is “not practicable and not likely [to] yield valid information”
(SJVAPCD 2015).
It is important to note that the health effects of criteria air pollutants are taken into consideration when
the U.S. EPA establishes the NAAQS for individual pollutants. The health effects of a particular pollutant
are analyzed on a regional basis based on the area’s attainment of the NAAQS. As discussed later in this
report, the Air Quality Index (AQI) is one common method of evaluating public health impacts for criteria
air pollutants of primary concern. In addition, local air districts establish significance thresholds that are
based on the evaluation of an individual project’s contribution to regional air quality conditions and
associated health effects.
Odors
Typically, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However,
manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (i.e. irritation, anger, or
anxiety) to physiological, including circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
5
Neither the state nor the federal governments have adopted rules or regulations for the control of odor
sources. The SLOAPCD does not have an individual rule or regulation that specifically addresses odors;
however, odors would be applicable to SLOAPCD’s Rule 402, Nuisance. Any actions related to odors would
be based on citizen complaints to local governments and the SLOAPCD. The SLOAPCD recommends that
odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative manner. Such analysis shall determine if the project results in
excessive nuisance odors, as defined under the California Code of Regulations, Health & Safety Code
Section 41700, air quality public nuisance.
Existing Sources of Odors
Land uses that typically produce objectionable odors with the potential of affecting a substantial number
of people include landfills, rendering plants, chemical plants, agricultural uses, wastewater treatment
plants, refineries, fast food restaurants, bakeries, and coffee roasting facilities. Within the City of
Atascadero, major sources of potential odors include the Atascadero Water Reclamation Facility, located
east of the Chalk Mountain Golf Course; as well as, fast food restaurants, bakeries, and coffee roasting
facilities.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality
or serious illness, or which may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute
quantities in the ambient air, but due to their high toxicity, they may pose a threat to public health even
at very low concentrations. Because there is no threshold level below which adverse health impacts are
not expected to occur, TACs differ from criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be
determined and for which state and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards. TACs,
therefore, are not considered “criteria pollutants” under either the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) or the
California Clean Air Act (CCAA) and are thus not subject to National or State ambient air quality standards
(AAQS). TACs are not considered criteria pollutants in that the FCAA and CCAA do not address them
specifically through the setting of National or State AAQS. Instead, the U.S. EPA and California Air
Resources Board (ARB) regulate Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) and TACs, respectively, through statutes
and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum or best available control technology to
limit emissions. In conjunction with District rules, these federal and state statutes and regulations
establish the regulatory framework for TACs. At the national level, the U.S. EPA has established National
Emission Standards for HAPs (NESHAPs), in accordance with the requirements of the FCAA and
subsequent amendments. These are technology-based source-specific regulations that limit allowable
emissions of HAPs.
Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act [Assembly Bill (AB) 1807]
and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). The Tanner Act sets forth
a formal procedure for ARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation,
and scientific peer review before ARB designates a substance as a TAC. Existing sources of TACs that are
subject to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act are required to: (1) prepare a toxic
emissions inventory; (2) prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant; (3) notify the public of
significant risk levels; and (4) prepare and implement risk reduction measures.
At the state level, the ARB has authority for the regulation of emissions from motor vehicles, fuels, and
consumer products. Most recently, diesel-exhaust particulate matter (DPM) was added to the ARB list of
TACs. DPM is the primary TACs of concern for mobile sources. Of all controlled TACs, emissions of DPM
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
6
are estimated to be responsible for about 70 percent of the total ambient TAC risk. The ARB has made the
reduction of the public’s exposure to DPM one of its highest priorities, with an aggressive plan to require
cleaner diesel fuel and cleaner diesel engines and vehicles (ARB 2005).
At the local level, air districts have authority over stationary or industrial sources. All projects that require
air quality permits from the SLOAPCD are evaluated for TAC emissions. The SLOAPCD limits emissions and
public exposure to TACs through a number of programs. The SLOAPCD prioritizes TAC-emitting stationary
sources, based on the quantity and toxicity of the TAC emissions and the proximity of the facilities to
sensitive receptors. The SLOAPCD requires a comprehensive health risk assessment for facilities that are
classified in the significant-risk category, pursuant to AB 2588.
Sources of TACs generally include, major freeways and high-traffic roadways, large distribution centers
involving the use of diesel-fueled heavy-duty trucks, railroad yards, ports, refineries, chrome platers, dry
cleaners using perchloroethylene, and gasoline dispensing facilities (ARB 2005). In the State of California,
the use of Perchloroethylne in dry cleaning operations was phased out in 2023.
Existing Sources of TACs
Within the City of Atascadero and surrounding areas, major sources of TACs are largely associated with
on-road motor vehicles traveling along State Route 101 (SR-101) and SR-41. No major TAC-emitting
facilities were identified in the City of Atascadero or surrounding areas (ARB 2026). To a lesser extent,
stationary sources permitted by SLOAPCD, such as emergency-use generators and gasoline dispensing
facilities, may also result in emissions of TACs. However, these stationary sources would be subject to
SLOAPCD emissions limitations and permitting requirements.
Land Use Compatibility with TAC Emission Sources
The ARB published an informational guide entitled: Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community
Health Perspective (Handbook) in 2005. The purpose of this guide is to provide information to aid local
jurisdictions in addressing issues and concerns related to the placement of sensitive land uses near major
sources of air pollution. The ARB’s Handbook includes recommended separation distances for various land
uses that are based on relatively conservative estimations of emissions based on source-specific
information. However, these recommendations are not site specific and should not be interpreted as
defined “buffer zones”. It is also important to note that the recommendations of the Handbook are
advisory and need to be balanced with other State and local policies (ARB 2005). Depending on site and
project-specific conditions, an assessment of potential increases in exposure to TACs may be warranted
for proposed development projects located within the distances identified. ARB-recommended
separation distances for various sources of emissions are summarized in Table 2.
Naturally-Occurring Asbestos
Asbestos is the common name for a group of naturally-occurring fibrous silicate minerals that can separate
into thin but strong and durable fibers. Naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA), which was identified as a TAC
in 1986 by ARB, is located in many parts of California and is commonly associated with ultramafic rock.
The western and southern areas of the City of Atascadero have been identified as having a potential for
naturally-occurring ultramafic rock and serpentine soils (SLOAPCD 2018). Refer to Appendix A for a map
depicting areas having a potential for naturally-occurring asbestos.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
7
Table 2. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses
Near TAC Emission Sources
Source
Category
Advisory
Recommendations
Freeways and
High-Traffic Roads
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000
vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.
Distribution
Centers
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates
more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units
(TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week).
• Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences
and other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.
Rail Yards • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard.
• Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.
Ports
• Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily
impacted zones. Consult local air districts or the ARB on the status of pending analyses of health
risks.
Refineries • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with
local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation.
Chrome Platers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.
Dry Cleaners Using
Perchloroethylene1
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry cleaning operation. For operations
with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with 3 or more machines, consult
with the local air district.
• Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perchloroethylene dry cleaning
operations.
Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with
a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50 foot separation is recommended for
typical gas dispensing facilities.
Recommendations are advisory, are not site specific, and may not fully account for future (post year 2005) reductions in emissions, including
those resulting from compliance with existing/future regulatory requirements.
1. Withing the State of California, the use of perchloroethylene was phased out in 2023.
Source: ARB 2005
Asbestos-Containing Materials
Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACMs) are regulated under the federal National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulation. The NESHAP regulation requires a thorough inspection of
regulated structures for the identification of NOAs prior to demolition or renovation. Notification
requirements may also apply. Regulated structures include institutional, commercial, and industrial
buildings; as well as, residential buildings that are demolished or renovated as part of a commercial or
public project (SLOAPCD 2026).
Within San Luis Obispo County, the SLOAPCD implements the asbestos NESHAP regulation. ACMs are
typically more prevalent in older structures, generally considered to be 1970’s era and earlier. However,
it is important to note that the use of asbestos in building materials has not been banned and may also
be present, to some extent, in newer construction. As a result, for structures subject to NESHAP
requirements, a thorough inspection is required prior to demolition or renovation (SLOAPCD 2026).
Sensitive Receptors
One of the most important reasons for air quality standards is the protection of those members of the
population who are most sensitive to the adverse health effects of air pollution, termed "sensitive
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
8
receptors." The term “sensitive receptors” refers to specific population groups, as well as the land uses
where individuals would reside for long periods. Commonly identified sensitive population groups are
children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill. Commonly identified sensitive land uses would
include facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are
especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Residential dwellings, schools, parks, playgrounds,
childcare centers, assisted living facilities, and hospitals are examples of sensitive land uses.
Existing Sensitive Land Uses
Sensitive land uses within the City of Atascadero and surrounding areas consist predominantly of
residential land uses; as well as, schools, daycare facilities, assisted living facilities, and the Atascadero
State Hospital.
Ambient Air Quality
Air pollutant concentrations are measured at several monitoring stations in the SCCAB. The Atascadero-
Lift Station #5 monitoring station is the closest representative monitoring station with sufficient data to
meet U.S. EPA and/or ARB criteria for quality assurance. Ambient monitoring data was obtained for the
last three years of available measurement data (i.e., 2022 through 2024) and is summarized in Table 3. As
depicted, the national and state PM2.5 standards were exceeded on multiple days over the last three years
of available data. Measured 24-hour PM10, 8-hour ozone, 1-hour ozone, and NO2 concentrations did not
exceed the state and federal ambient air quality standards during the last three years of available data
(ARB 2026b).
Air Quality Index
The health effects of ambient air pollutant concentrations can be evaluated and presented in various
ways. The most common method is the use of the Air Quality Index (AQI). The U.S. EPA developed the AQI
as an easy-to-understand measure of health impacts based on measured ambient air quality in
comparison to established ambient air quality standards. Tables 4 and 5 present a summary of the health
impacts for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5), respectively, based on the U.S. EPA’s AQI.
A summary of the annual air quality index for San Luis Obispo County for the last three years of available
data is provided in Table 6. As depicted in Table 6, the County typically experiences "good” air quality with
the total number of days ranging from 117 to 207 days per year. Days classified as “moderate” AQI ranged
from 152 to 245 days per year. Over the last three years of available data, the County has experienced a
total of 19 days classified as “Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups”. Over the past three years, the County has
not experienced air quality conditions within the “Unhealthy”, “Very Unhealthy” or “Hazardous” range
(U.S. EPA 2026).
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
9
Table 3. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data
Pollutant Monitoring Year
2022 2023 2024
Ozone (O3)
Maximum concentration (1-hour/8-hour average; ppm) 0.069/0.060 0.073/0.059 0.071/0.062
Number of days state/national 1-hour standard exceeded 0/0 0/0 0/0
Number of days state/national 8-hour standard exceeded 0/0 0/0 0/0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Maximum 1-hour concentration (state/national; ppb) 26/26.0 50/50.7 32/32.4
Number of days state/national standard exceeded 0/0 0/0 0/0
Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Maximum 24-hour concentration (national/state; μg/m3) 19.1/19.1 24.3/24.3 28.7/28.7
Number of days national standard exceeded (measured/calculated)(3) 0/0 0/0 0/0
Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)
Maximum 24-hour concentration (national/state; μg/m3) 39.7/38.8 49.5/48.7 39.3/39.3
Number of days state standard exceeded (measured/calculated)(3) 0/NA 0/NA 0/NA
Number of days national standard exceeded (measured/calculated)(3) 0/0 0/0 0/0
ppm = parts per million by volume, μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter, NA=Not Available
Based on ambient concentrations obtained from the Atascadero-Lift Station #5 Monitoring Station.
Measured days are those days that an actual measurement was greater than the standard. Calculated days are estimated days that
measurement would have exceeded the standard had measurements been collected every day.
Source: ARB 2026b
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
10
Table 4. Air Quality Index Summary for Ozone & Related Health Effects
Air Quality Index / 8-hour Ozone
Concentration Health Effects Description
AQI 51-100: Moderate
Ambient Ozone Concentrations: 55-70 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups at most
risk.
Health Effects Statements: Unusually sensitive individuals may experience
respiratory symptoms.
Cautionary Statements: Unusually sensitive people should consider
limiting prolonged outdoor exertion.
AQI 101-150: Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups
Ambient Ozone Concentrations: 71-85 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups at most
risk.
Health Effects Statements: Increasing likelihood of respiratory symptoms
and breathing discomfort in active children and adults and people with
respiratory disease, such as asthma.
Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with
respiratory disease, such as asthma, should limit prolonged outdoor
exertion.
AQI 151–200: Unhealthy
Ambient Ozone Concentrations: 86-105 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups at most
risk.
Health Effects Statements: Greater likelihood of respiratory symptoms
and breathing difficulty in active children and adults and people with
respiratory disease, such as asthma; possible respiratory effects in general
population.
Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with
respiratory disease, such as asthma, should limit prolonged outdoor
exertion; everyone else, especially children, should limit prolonged
outdoor exertion.
AQI 201-300: Very Unhealthy
Ambient Ozone Concentrations: 106-200 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups at most
risk.
Health Effects Statements: Increasingly severe symptoms and impaired
breathing likely in active children and adults and people with respiratory
disease, such as asthma; increasing likelihood of respiratory effects in
general population.
Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with
respiratory disease, such as asthma, should avoid outdoor exertion;
everyone else, especially children, should limit outdoor exertion.
An AQI of 50 and below is categorized as “Good” and air quality is satisfactory, and poses little or no risk. An AQI of 301 or higher is categorized
as “Hazardous” having a health warning of emergency conditions: everyone is more likely to be affected. Outdoor activities should be avoided
for all individuals.
AQI = Air quality index, ppb = parts per billion
Source: ARB 2018
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
11
Table 5. Air Quality Index Summary for Fine Particulate Matter & Related Health Effects
Air Quality Index / 8-hour Ozone
Concentration
Health Effects Description
AQI 51-100: Moderate
Ambient Concentrations: 12.1-35.4 µg/m3
Sensitive Groups: Some people who may be unusually sensitive to
particulate.
Health Effects Statements: Unusually sensitive people should consider
reducing prolonged or heavy exertion.
Cautionary Statements: Unusually sensitive people: Consider reducing
prolonged or heavy exertion. Watch for symptoms such as coughing or
shortness of breath. These are signs to take it easier.
AQI 101-150: Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups
Ambient Concentrations: 35.5-55.4 µg/m3
Sensitive Groups: People with heart or lung disease, older adults, children,
and teenagers.
Health Effects Statements: Increasing likelihood of respiratory symptoms for
sensitive individuals, aggravation of heart or lung disease, and premature
mortality in persons with cardiopulmonary disease, and the elderly.
Cautionary Statements: If you have heart disease: Symptoms such as
palpations, shortness of breath, or unusual fatigue may indicate a serious
problem. If you have any of these, contact a health care provider.
AQI 151–200: Unhealthy
Ambient Concentrations: 55.5-150.4 µg/m3
Sensitive Groups: Everyone.
Health Effects Statements: Increased aggravation of heart or lung disease
and premature mortality in persons with cardiopulmonary disease, and the
elderly; increased respiratory effects in general population.
Cautionary Statements: Sensitive groups: Avoid prolonged or heavy exertion.
Consider moving activities indoors or rescheduling. Everyone else: Reduce
prolonged or heavy exertion. Take more breaks during outdoor activities.
AQI 201-300: Very Unhealthy
Ambient Concentrations: 150.5-250.4 µg/m3
Sensitive Groups: Everyone.
Health Effects Statements: Significant aggravation of heart or lung disease
and premature mortality in persons with cardiopulmonary disease, and the
elderly; significant increase in respiratory effects in general population.
Cautionary Statements: Sensitive groups: Avoid all physical activity outdoors.
Move activities indoors or reschedule to a time when air quality is better.
Everyone else: Avoid prolonged or heavy exertion. Consider moving activities
indoors or reschedule to a time when air quality is better.
An AQI of 50 and below is categorized as “Good” and air quality is satisfactory and poses little or no risk. An AQI of 301 or higher is categorized
as “Hazardous” having a health warning of emergency conditions: everyone is more likely to be affected. Outdoor activities should be avoided
for all individuals.
AQI = Air quality index, µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Source: ARB 2018
Table 6. Air Quality Index Annual Historical Summary
Year
Air Quality Index (AQI) - Number of Days
Good Moderate
Unhealthy for
Sensitive Groups Unhealthy
Very
Unhealthy Hazardous
2024 193 163 10 0 0 0
2023 207 152 6 0 0 0
2022 117 245 3 0 0 0
Represents overall air quality taking into account all criteria pollutants measured.
Source: U.S, EPA 2026
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
12
Regulatory Framework
Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions including the U.S. EPA, ARB, and the
SLOAPCD. Each of these jurisdictions develops rules, regulations, and policies to attain the goals or
directives imposed upon them through legislation.
Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
At the federal level, the U.S. EPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The
U.S. EPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the FCAA, which was signed into law in 1970.
Congress substantially amended the FCAA in 1977 and again in 1990.
Federal Clean Air Act
The FCAA required the U.S. EPA to establish NAAQS or National AAQS, and set deadlines for their
attainment. Two types of NAAQS have been established: primary standards, which protect public health,
and secondary standards, which protect public welfare from non-health-related adverse effects, such as
visibility restrictions. NAAQS are summarized in Table 7.
State
California Air Resources Board
The ARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control
programs in California and for implementing the CCAA of 1988. Other ARB duties include monitoring air
quality (in conjunction with air monitoring networks maintained by air pollution control districts and air
quality management districts, establishing California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), which in
many cases are more stringent than the NAAQS, and setting emissions standards for new motor vehicles.
The CAAQS are summarized in Table 7. The emission standards established for motor vehicles differ
depending on various factors including the model year, and the type of vehicle, fuel, and engine used.
California Clean Air Act
The CCAA requires that all air districts in the state endeavor to achieve and maintain CAAQS for ozone,
CO, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) by the earliest practicable date. The CCAA specifies
that districts focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide
emission sources, and the act provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district
plan is required to either (1) achieve a five percent annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year
periods, in district-wide emissions of each non-attainment pollutant or its precursors, or (2) to provide for
the implementation of all feasible measures to reduce emissions. Any planning effort for air quality
attainment would thus need to consider both state and federal planning requirements.
Assembly Bills 1807 & 2588 - Toxic Air Contaminants
Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through AB 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air
Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal
procedure for ARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and
scientific peer review before ARB designates a substance as a TAC. Existing sources of TACs that are subject
to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act are required to: (1) prepare a toxic emissions
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
13
inventory; (2) prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant; (3) notify the public of significant risk
levels; and (4) prepare and implement risk reduction measures.
Table 7. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards & Attainment Designations
Source: SLOAPCD 2025
San Luis Obispo County Attainment Status
California Standards' Federal Standardst
Pollutant Averaging Time Attainment Concentration Status Primary Secondary Attainment Status
1 Hour 0.09 ppm -Non-Attainment
Ozone (03) Non-Same as Primary Eastern SLO County•
8 Hour 0.070 ppm Attainment 0.070 ppm Standard Attainment Western
SlO Countvl
Respirable 24 Hour 50 µglm~ Non-150 µglm3 Same as Primary Particulate Uncl'assified
Matter (PM10) Annual 20 µg/m3 Attainment Standard
Arithmetic Mean -
Fine 24 Hour No State 35 µgiml Same as Primary Unclassified/
Particulate Standard Attainment Standard Attainment
Matter Annual No Attainment (PM2.S) Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m3 9.0 µglm3 15.0 µglm3 lnfonnation§
Carbon 8 Hour 9.0 ppm 9 ppm -Unclassified! Monoxide Attainment Attainment (CO) 1 Hour 20 ppm 35ppm -
Annual 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm Nitrogen Arithmetic Mean -Unclassified/ Attainment Dioxide (NOi) 1 Hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb Same as Primary Attainment
Standard
Annual 0.030 ppm Arithmetic Mean --
Sulfur 24 Hour 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm -Unclassified/ Dioxide Attainment Attainment fSO2) 3 Hour --0.5 ppm
1 Hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb -
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m'.l -.
Lead Calendar Quarter -Attainment 1.5 µg/m3 Unclassified/
Same as Primary Attainment Rolling 3-Month -0.15 µglm3 Standard
Averaae•
Ex:hnctlon coefficieru of
0.23 per kllomo1er -
Visibility W:liblitv of ten mile-! □r
Reducing 8 Hour more (0.07-30 mlles a-U nclasslfied mere fr:,, Lale Tah□e) No Particles due ro particle'!:! when
relatl,..e .humidity I& less:
than 70 pen::ent. Federal
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Attainment
Hydrogen 1 Hour Sulfide 0.03 ppm Attainment Standards
Vinyl 24 Hour 0.01 ppm No Attainment
Chloride• lnfonnalion
• For more Information on CaBfornia standards v,sit: tmps1/ww2.artJ.ca.qovlmsourC1!s!cai>fomla•ambJont-alr:<1ua111v-s1andardg
'For more lnfom1allon on Federal standards visit'. bllps llw""" eoa goyle11Joda•alc•QOl11!1ants
•san Luis Obls))O County has been designated non..attalnment east of Ule-120.4 deg Longitude llna ,In areas of SLO Counly lhal
arn soulh of lautude 35.45 degrees, and east of the -120.3 degrees longitude line ln areas of SLO County that are north of latitude
35.45 degrees. Map at noo-attalnment aroa Is avallabl<> upon request from lhe APCD.
t on February 7. 2024. lh8 nalional annual PM,.. primaty standard was lowered from 12..0 µg1m'to 9.0 µglm'. The existing national
24-hour PM2,stancla.rds (pnmary and secondary] were retained at 35 !Jglm'. as was the annuaJ secondary standard of 15.0 µglm'.
The existing 24-hoor PM1 D standards {primary and secondary) of 15D µglm' also wero retained. Aroa designations for the new
s1andard are expocted to be promulgated Feb. 2026. The county ls deslgr\ated as Ui1classlflable/Attainment for tl'le 2012 Annual
P¼, standard of 12.0 ~glm3.
Revised January 13. 2025
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
14
In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation
On July 26, 2007, the ARB adopted a regulation to reduce DPM and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions
from in-use (existing) off-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California. The regulation applies to self-
propelled diesel-fueled vehicles that cannot be registered and licensed to drive on-road, as well as two-
engine vehicles that drive on road, with the limited exception of two-engine sweepers. Examples include
loaders, crawler tractors, skid steers, backhoes, forklifts, airport ground support equipment, water well
drilling rigs, and two-engine cranes. Such vehicles are used in construction, mining, and industrial
operations. The regulation does not apply to stationary equipment or portable equipment such as
generators. The off-road vehicle regulation establishes emissions performance requirements, reporting,
disclosure, and labeling requirements for off-road vehicles, and limits unnecessary idling.
California Building Code
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties,
performance, or types of materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or
rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real property. The CBC is adopted every three years
by the Building Standards Commission (BSC). In the interim, the BSC also adopts annual updates to make
necessary mid-term corrections. The CBC standards apply statewide; however, a local jurisdiction may
amend a CBC standard if it makes a finding that the amendment is reasonably necessary due to local
climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
Green Building Standards
In essence, green buildings standards are indistinguishable from any other building standards. Both
standards are contained in the CBC and regulate the construction of new buildings and improvements.
The only practical distinction between the two is that whereas the focus of traditional building standards
has been protecting public health and safety, the focus of green building standards is to improve
environmental performance.
The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2019 Standards), adopted in May 2018, addressed four
key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat
transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation
requirements, and non-residential lighting requirements. The 2019 Standards required new residential
and non-residential construction; as well as major alterations to existing structures, to include EV-capable
parking spaces which have electrical panel capacity and conduit to accommodate future installation. In
addition, the 2019 Standards also required the installation of PV systems for low-rise residential dwellings,
defined as single-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings up to three stories in height. These
requirements are based on various factors, including the floor area of the home, sun exposure, and
climate zone. Under the 2019 standards, nonresidential buildings will use about 30 percent less energy
due mainly to lighting upgrades (CEC 2019).
The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2022 Standards), which were approved in December 2021,
encourage efficient electric heat pumps, establish electric-ready requirements when natural gas is
installed, support the future installation of battery storage, further expand solar photovoltaic and battery
storage standards. The 2022 Standards extend solar PV system requirements, as well as battery storage
capabilities for select land uses, including high-rise multi-family and non-residential land uses, such as
office buildings, schools, restaurants, warehouses, theaters, grocery stores, and more. Depending on the
land use and other factors, solar systems should be sized to meet targets of up to 60 percent of the
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
15
structure’s loads. These solar requirements became effective on January 1, 2023, and contribute to
California’s goal of reaching a net-zero carbon footprint by 2045 (CEC 2022).
The most current standards are the 2025 Standards, which became effective January 1, 2026. The 2025
Standards build upon the previous standards by expanding the use of heat pumps in newly constructed
residential buildings, encouraging electric-readiness, strengthens ventilation standards, and more (CEC
2026).
Local
County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District
The SLOAPCD is the agency primarily responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not exceeded
and that air quality conditions within the region are maintained. Responsibilities of the SLOAPCD include
but are not limited to, preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and
enforcing rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuing permits for stationary sources
of air pollution, inspecting stationary sources of air pollution and responding to citizen complaints,
monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing programs and
regulations required by the FCAA and the CCAA.
City of Atascadero General Plan 2025
The City’s General Plan 2025 includes numerous policies related to transportation intended to minimize
transportation impacts, reduce vehicle trip generation and vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and promote
alternative means of transportation. These policies would have the added benefit of reducing local and
regional air quality impacts. These policies include, but are not limited to, the following (City of Atascadero
2002):
Policy 1.3: Maintain LOS C or better as the standard at all intersections and on all arterial and
collector roads. Upon City Council approval, accept LOS D where residences are not directly
impacted and improvements to meet the City’s standard would be prohibitively costly or
disruptive.
Policy 2.1: Provide for a comprehensive system of creekside trails, roadside pathways, equestrian
trails, multi-use trails and bikeways to connect neighborhoods, schools, commercial, and
recreation areas, in accordance with the Bikeway and Trail Plan.
Policy 2.2: Accommodate bicycles at major destinations including downtown, bus stops, schools,
and other public facilities.
Policy 2.3: Promote walking as an alternative to vehicle travel in retail district and multi-family
areas.
Policy 3.1: Promote alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle travel, particularly for commute trips.
Policy 3.2: Encourage expansion of public transit as needed to meet the changing needs of the
area for local and regional access, including fixed route and demand response where appropriate.
Policy 3.3: Comply with the Transportation Demand Management program requirements of the
San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan to reduce peak period trip generation.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
16
Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, air quality
impacts associated with the proposed project would be considered significant if it would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
b) 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.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people.
To assist in the evaluation of air quality impacts, the SLOAPCD has developed recommended project-level
significance thresholds, which are contained in the SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (2012).
However, at a programmatic level of environmental review, such as for the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU, a
quantitative project-level emissions analysis is not required. At the program-level of analysis, a finding of
significant impact would be determined qualitatively by comparing consistency of the project with the
Transportation and Land Use Planning Strategies outlined in the SLOAPCD's Clean Air Plan (CAP). Projects
determined to be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD’s CAP would be considered to have a potentially
significant impact. Although not always applicable at a programmatic level, some project-level significance
thresholds, such as exposure to odorous emissions, can be used to help inform of potentially significant
impacts at a programmatic level of analysis. The SLOAPCD’s project-level significance thresholds are
identified as follows:
Construction Impacts
The threshold criteria established by the SLOAPCD to determine the significance and appropriate
mitigation level for a project’s short-term construction emissions are presented in Table 8 and discussed,
as follows (SLOAPCD 2012):
Table 8. SLOAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Project-Level Construction Impacts
Pollutant
Threshold(1)
Daily (lbs/day) Quarterly Tier 1
(tons)
Quarterly Tier 2
(tons)
Ozone Precursors (ROG + NOX) 137 2.5 6.3
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 7 0.13 0.32
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust(2) -- 2.5 --
1. Daily and quarterly emissions thresholds are based on the California Health & Safety Code and the ARB Carl Moyer Guidelines.
2. Any project with a grading area greater than 4.0 acres of a worked area can exceed the 2.5 tons PM10 quarterly threshold.
Source: SLOAPCD 2012
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
17
ROG and NOx Emissions
Daily: For construction projects exceeding the 137 lbs/day threshold require Standard Mitigation
Measures.
Quarterly – Tier 1: For construction projects exceeding the 2.5 tons/quarter threshold, require Standard
Mitigation Measures and Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for construction equipment. Off-site
mitigation may be required if feasible mitigation measures are not implemented, or if no mitigation
measures are feasible for the project.
Quarterly – Tier 2: For construction projects exceeding the 6.3 tons/quarter threshold, Standard
Mitigation Measures, BACT, implementation of a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP), and
off-site mitigation are required.
DPM Emissions
Daily: For construction projects exceeding the 7 lbs/day threshold, require Standard Mitigation Measures.
Quarterly - Tier 1: For construction projects lasting more than one quarter, exceedance of the 0.13
tons/quarter threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures, BACT for construction equipment; and,
Quarterly - Tier 2: For construction projects exceeding the 0.32 tons/quarter threshold, require Standard
Mitigation Measures, BACT, implementation of a CAMP, and off-site mitigation.
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust Emissions
Quarterly- Tier 1: For construction projects exceeding the 2.5 tons/quarter threshold require Fugitive PM10
dust Mitigation Measures and may require the implementation of a CAMP.
Operational Impacts
Criteria Air Pollutants
The threshold criteria established by the SLOAPCD to determine the significance and appropriate
mitigation level for long-term operational emissions from a project are presented in Table 9.
Table 9. SLOAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Project-Level Operational Impacts
Pollutant Threshold(1)
Daily (lbs/day) Annual (tons/year)
Ozone Precursors [reactive organic gas (ROG) + oxides of
nitrogen (NOX)] 25 25
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM)(2) 1.25 --
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust 25 25
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 --
1. Daily and annual emissions thresholds are based on the California Health & Safety Code Division 26, Part 3, Chapter 10, Section 40918
and the ARB Carl Moyer Guidelines for DPM.
2. Applies to on-site emissions. DPM is seldom emitted from individual projects in quantities which lead to local or regional air quality
attainment violations.
Source: SLOAPCD 2012
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
18
For projects exceeding the 25 lbs/day operational ozone precursor threshold but not the corresponding
25 tons/year annual threshold, the project shall implement all applicable SLOAPCD-recommended
mitigation measures. Off-site mitigation may be required for projects (exceeding the 25 lbs/day threshold)
if all applicable SLOAPCD-recommended mitigation measures are not implemented, or if no mitigation
measures are feasible for the project. Off-site mitigation is required for projects exceeding the 25
tons/year threshold (SLOAPCD 2017).
Toxic Air Contaminants
If a project has the potential to emit toxic or hazardous air pollutants or is located in close proximity to
sensitive receptors, impacts may be considered significant due to increased cancer risk for the affected
population, even at a very low level of emissions. For the evaluation of new proposed land use projects
that generate TACs, such as diesel-fueled engines, the SLOAPCD has defined the excess cancer risk
significance threshold at 10 in a million.
Localized CO Concentrations
Localized CO concentrations associated with the proposed project would be considered a less-than-
significant impact if: (1) Traffic generated by the proposed project would not result in deterioration of
signalized intersection level of service (LOS) to LOS E or F; or (2) the project would not contribute
additional traffic to a signalized intersection that already operates at LOS of E or F (Caltrans 1996).
Odors
Screening of potential odor impacts is typically recommended for the following two situations:
Projects that would potentially generate odorous emissions proposed to locate near existing
sensitive receptors or other land uses where people may congregate; and
Residential or other sensitive receptor projects or other projects that may attract people locating
near existing odor sources.
If the proposed project would locate receptors and known odor sources within one mile of each other, a
full analysis of odor impacts is recommended. Known odor sources of primary concern, as identified by
the SLOAPCD include landfills, transfer stations, asphalt batch plants, rendering plants, petroleum
refineries, and painting/coating operations, as well as, composting, food processing, wastewater
treatment, chemical manufacturing, and feedlot/dairy facilities.
Methodology
Short-term emissions associated with construction activities are largely dependent on the type of
development proposed, area of ground disturbance, number of buildings to be demolished, equipment
required, and construction schedules. Long-term operational emissions are typically associated with the
operational of mobile sources, stationary sources (e.g., boilers, generators), and area sources (e.g.,
landscape maintenance, and energy use. However, because much of this information for specific future
development projects and the timing of such development is unknown at this time, net increases in future
construction and operational emissions and associated air quality impacts were qualitatively discussed.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
19
Relevant Proposed GPU Goals and Policies
The 2045 General Plan includes numerous goals and policies that would reduce air contaminant emissions.
Some of the most relevant of these goals and policies include, but are not limited to, the following:
Goal PSI-6: Increased development and use of clean, renewable energy systems
Policy PSI-6.1: Onsite Renewable Energy. Facilitate the installation of onsite renewable energy
systems for residences and places of business.
Policy PSI-6.2: Energy Efficient Planning and Building Design. Encourage energy-efficient site
planning and building design/construction.
Action A: Implement streamlined building permit review processes for onsite energy
systems.
Action B: Continue to implement the California Green Building Standards.
Goal REC-7: Improve air quality and reduced health risks
Policy REC-7.1: Clean Air. Support regional efforts to maintain clean air.
Action A: Require dust control and emissions limitations during project construction.
Action B: Adopt circulation policies that encourage vehicle trip reductions consistent with the
Mobility Element, and support regional programs to maintain clean air.
Action C: Concentrate new intensive development at identified nodes and commercial corridors
to help reduce vehicle trips.
Action D: Continue to support the development of Park-and-Ride facilities in appropriate
locations.
Goal MO-1: A safe, multimodal, interconnected, and efficient circulation system that serves all community
members
Policy MO-1.2: Multimodal Options. Increase pedestrian and bicycle connections and safety between
residential areas and commercial areas along major corridors, parks and recreation opportunities,
and neighboring communities.
Policy MO-1.3: Regional Facilities. Provide regional roadway facilities that minimize through-traffic
intrusion on local streets and mitigate impacts on local traffic.
Policy MO-1.4: Congestion Management and Trip Reduction. Encourage mixed-use and jobs focused
infill development that is served by multi-modal facilities to support reductions in regional and local
vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Policy MO-1.6: Truck Routes. Ensure the new and existing business that use large trucks as a core
part of their operations, more than just routine delivery, minimize maintenance impacts on City
infrastructure and noise impacts on residents.
Goal MO-4: Safe, functional, and appealing bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian (in rural areas) facilities
that allow convenient multi-modal mobility
Policy MO-4.1: Coordination and Planning. Provide “backbone” pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian
systems that link residential, commercial, recreational, and regional areas.
Policy MO-4.2: Pedestrian Mobility. Ensure pedestrian safety, enhance pedestrian comfort, and
promote walking as an alternative to vehicle travel, with priority in retail districts and multi-family
neighborhoods.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
20
Policy MO-4.3: Bicycle Mobility. Promote bicycle mobility and increase bicyclist safety with
new/upgraded facilities and amenities.
Policy MO-4.4: Rural Trails. Provide for walkways, bikeways, and horse trails without curbs and
sidewalks in rural areas.
Policy MO-4.5: School and Park Connections. Provide a comprehensive system of routes to schools
and parks.
Goal MO-5: Reliable alternative travel modes that reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.
Policy MO-5.1: Single-Occupancy Vehicle Alternatives. Promote alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicle travel, particularly for commute trips.
Policy MO-5.2: Public Transit. Support the evolution of public transit to meet the changing needs for
local and regional access, including fixed route and demand responsive service.
Policy MO-5.3: County TDM Requirements. Seek alternatives that bring Atascadero closer to
compliance with Transportation Demand Management program requirements of the San Luis Obispo
County Clean Air Plan to reduce peak period trip generation.
Goal MO-6: Anticipating and addressing emerging mobility technology proactively to allow new systems
and industries to operate in Atascadero on the City’s terms.
Policy MO-6.1: Changing Mobile Technology. Encourage the use of mobile or other electronic devices
with similar on-demand hailing functions, particularly for seniors, persons with disabilities, and other
mobility challenged people.
Policy MO-6.2: Autonomous Vehicles. Update, when warranted, transportation systems and policies
as autonomous and automated vehicles and their attendant facilities are developed locally and
regionally.
Goal LU-4: A dedicated, focused area for industrial activity that minimizes impact on nearby residential
neighborhoods and protected open space areas
Policy LU-4.3: Buffer Industrial Uses. Provide buffers between industrial and residential uses. Focus
heavy industrial sites away from residential uses.
Goal REC-3: Dedicated system of open space that upholds the community’s rural character, local
biodiversity, natural landscape, and enjoyment of recreation
Policy REC-3.3: Grading. Prevent unnecessary intensive grading of development sites.
Goal LU-2: Enhanced major corridors that serve regional focused, distinct, and economically viable nodes.
Policy LU-2.3: Mid-block Infill. Promote flexible land use patterns in areas between activity nodes
along El Camino Real and support increased residential densities adjacent to and along commercial
corridors to support commercial business activity and growth.
Policy LU-2.4: Mixed-Use Areas. Create mixed-use districts in locations that benefit from the synergy
of commercial and residential uses.
Policy LU-2.5: Multi-Modal Corridors. Improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities along El Camino Real
and Morro Road. Major corridors should be safe, comfortable, and enjoyable for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and drivers alike.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
21
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact AQ-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
SLOAPCD Clean Air Plan
As part of the CCAA, the SLOAPCD is required to develop a plan to achieve and maintain the state ozone
standard by the earliest practicable date. The CAP was adopted by SLOAPCD on March 26, 2002. The
SLOAPCD’s 2001 CAP addresses the attainment and maintenance of state and federal ambient air quality
standards. The SLOAPCD’s CAP outlines the District's strategies to reduce ozone-precursor pollutants [i.e.,
reactive organic gas (ROG) and NOX] from a wide variety of sources. The SLOAPCD’s CAP includes a
stationary-source control program, which includes control measures for permitted stationary sources; as
well as transportation and land use management strategies to reduce motor vehicle emissions and use.
The stationary-source control program is administered by SLOAPCD. Transportation and land use control
measures are implemented at the local or regional level, by promoting and facilitating the use of
alternative transportation options, increased pedestrian access and accessibility to community services
and local destinations, reductions in VMT, and promotion of congestion management efforts. In addition,
local jurisdictions also prepare population forecasts, which are used by SLOAPCD to forecast population-
related emissions and air quality attainment, including those contained in the SLOAPCD’s CAP. The 2001
CAP emissions forecasts and control strategies were built using regional growth assumptions, specifically
the population, housing, and employment projections provided by SLOCOG. Therefore, if a project is
consistent with current SLOCOG growth forecasts, it is generally considered part of the expected growth
scenario that the air quality plan anticipated. For these reasons, consistency with the CAP has been
evaluated based on the following questions:
1. Are the population and employment projections attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU equal to or
less than those identified in the most recent growth forecasts adopted by SLOCOG and would
implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU result in an improved jobs/housing ratio?
2. Is projected VMT growth attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU equal to or less than the
corresponding projected rate of population growth?
3. Is the 2045 GPU/ZCU consistent with the land use and transportation control measures (TCMs)
identified in the CAP?
4. Is projected VMT growth attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU equal to or less than applicable VMT
thresholds established by the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) for the evaluation of
VMT impacts associated with land use plans?
If the answer to all of the above questions is yes, then the 2045 GPU/ZCU would be considered to be
consistent with the CAP. If the answer to any one of the above questions is no, then the emissions
reductions projected in the CAP may not be achieved, which could delay or preclude attainment of the
state ozone standard and the 2045 GPU/ZCU would be considered inconsistent with the CAP.
Projected Population & Employment Growth
The 2045 GPU/ZCU is anticipated to guide sustainable population growth throughout the planning period
and includes City population and employment growth projections based on land capacity, ability to
expand infrastructure, and anticipated growth rates for both residential and commercial sectors. The
City’s forecasted population for the 2045 GPU/ZCU is 37,279. In comparison to year 2024 conditions, the
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
22
proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would increase the City’s population by 6,596 residents, an approximate 21.5
percent increase. Employment is expected to increase from 9,729 jobs in 2024 to 12,914 jobs in 2045,
improving the City’s jobs/housing ratio from 0.77 to 0.83.
According to the SLOCOG 2060 Regional Growth Forecast, the population of the City of Atascadero is
projected to increase to 31,841 residents by 2040 and to 32,342 residents by 2050. Employment is
projected to increase to 12,307 jobs in 2040 and 12,988 jobs in 2050 (SLOCOG 2025). Overall, the
anticipated growth in the City through 2045 is similar to the SLOCOG growth projections for the City.
However, projected increases in population attributable to the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU (i.e., 37,279)
would be higher than the SLOCOG’s projections of 31,841 residents by 2040 and to 32,342 residents by
2050 (SLOCOG 2025).
According to SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the City has more housing units than
jobs, indicative of a “jobs-poor” community. The City’s jobs-to-housing ratio is estimated to worsen from
a year 2015 ratio of 0.77 to a 0.71 jobs-housing ratio by the year 2030 (SLOCOG 2019). With
implementation of the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU, the number of housing units would total approximately
15,550 and the number of jobs would total approximately 12,914, which would result in a jobs/housing
ratio of 0.83 for year 2045. Although the 2045 GPU/ZCU would result in increased development,
population, and employment, the jobs/housing ratio for the City would be projected to improve with
implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU.
VMT Growth
The 2045 GPU/ZCU would be more VMT-efficient on a regional basis than the current General Plan as it
would focus growth in areas with a mix of uses, more travel options, and at levels that are more supportive
of transit use. The City’s large geographic area and existing low-density development patterns require
longer vehicle trips and reduce non-auto travel options. The 2045 GPU/ZCU focuses growth in more VMT-
efficient areas at higher densities and with more travel options. In addition, projected improvements in
the jobs/housing ratio with implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU would help to further reduce VMT by
providing more jobs locally, thereby, reducing VMT travel and to out-of-City locations. As a result, the
2045 GPU/ZCU would produce less VMT per capita and per employee than the current General Plan (CCTC
2025).
Daily VMT within the City’s sphere of influence is projected to increase from 556,552 daily miles in year
2024 to 602,702 daily miles in 2045, an approximate 8.3 percent increase in VMT. As noted above, the
proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would increase the City’s population by approximate 21.5 percent in 2045. The
percent increase in VMT attributable to the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU (8.3 percent) would not exceed the
percent increase in population (21.5 percent).
Transportation and Land Use Control Measures
The SLOAPCD’s CAP includes multiple transportation and land use control measures intended to reduce
emissions through reductions in VMT and the promotion of alternative forms of transportation. A
summary of the more relevant control measures and the 2045 GPU/ZCU’s consistency with these
measures is provided in Table 10. As noted in Table 10, the 2045 GPU/ZCU uses a designator system
consisting of “Placetypes.” Each Placetype category defines both the primary uses of land allowed and the
character of those uses. For instance, the Mixed Use Placetype is intended to promote a flexible and
compatible mix of residential and commercial uses in focused areas. The Downtown Mixed Use Placetype
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
23
encourages an eclectic and complementary mix of uses, pedestrian-scale development, and locally owned
retail and restaurant businesses with upper-story residential and office units. The 2045 GPU/ZCU is
expected to result in reductions in vehicle trips/ trip lengths, improved accessibility to alternative means
of transportation (e.g., transit), and overall reductions in VMT. In addition, the City’s jobs-housing ratio
would improve from 0.75 to 0.84. Numerous other goals and policies have been included in the 2045
GPU/ZCU that would support regional air quality and transportation planning efforts, including policies to
improve accessibility to transit, bicycle and public transit improvements, park and ride lots, traffic flow
improvements, and various other policies intended to reduce vehicle use. However, even with
implementation of the proposed goals and policies, the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would generate
residential and employment-based VMT at levels that are above OPR’s recommended thresholds (CCTC
2025). As a result, increases in VMT attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU would be inconsistent with regional
planning efforts, such as the Regional Transportation Plan. Increases in VMT may result in long-term
increases of mobile-source air pollutants not accounted for in the CAP. As a result, long-term increases of
regional pollutants and consistency with the SLOAPCD’s CAP would be considered a potentially significant
impact.
Table 10. Consistency with SLOAPCD Clean Air Plan Control Measures
SLOAPCD’s Clean Air Plan Control Measures 2045 GPU/ZCU Goals & Policies
L-1 Planning Compact Communities. Dwelling units for those who prefer
higher density living should be clustered in urban core areas and village
centers, thus creating a market for convenience retailing and services that
contribute to the richness of an urban life-style. As commercial facilities
become integrated into residential areas in a mixed-use development
pattern, the need to use an automobile for routine trips diminishes.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU uses a
designator system consisting of “Placetypes.”
Each Placetype category defines both the
primary uses of land allowed and the character
of those uses. For instance, the Mixed Use
Placetype is intended to promote a flexible and
compatible mix of residential and commercial
uses in focused areas. The Downtown Mixed
Use Placetype encourages a mix of uses,
pedestrian-scale development, and locally
owned retail and restaurant businesses. In
comparison to the existing General Plan, the
2045 GPU/ZCU would result in reductions in
vehicle trips/ trip lengths, improved
accessibility to alternative means of
transportation (e.g., transit), and overall
reductions in VMT on a per capita basis.
L-2 Providing for Mixed Land Use. The mixing of compatible commercial
and residential land uses should be encouraged when it will reduce
dependence on the automobile, or it improves the balance between jobs
and housing.
L-3 Balancing Jobs and Housing. An imbalance between jobs and housing
results in longer travel distances between home and work and,
consequently, more air pollution from cars.
Consistent. With implementation of the 2045
GPU/ZCU, the City’s jobs-housing ratio would
improve from 0.75 to 0.84.
L-4 Circulation Management. The primary goal of the recommended
Circulation Management Policies and Programs is to encourage the design
and construction of the county’s transportation system in a manner that
supports alternative travel modes and decreases reliance on single
occupant motor vehicles. To this end, improving accessibility for all
travelers, not just drivers, is the primary transportation objective.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional
transportation planning and management
efforts, including numerous measures intended
to encourage the design and construction of
alternative travel modes. Such policies include,
but not limited to: Policies MO-1.1 – MO-1.6,
MO-3.1, MO-3.2, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5, and MO-
5.1 – MO-5.3,
L-5 Communication, Coordination and Monitoring. Changes in land use
and circulation planning will be necessary to maintain clean air in the
county over the long term. These same changes, however, will also provide
benefits in reduced traffic congestion. It is very important to the long-term
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional air
quality and transportation planning efforts,
including policies to maintain and improve
coordination with other regional agencies. Such
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
24
SLOAPCD’s Clean Air Plan Control Measures 2045 GPU/ZCU Goals & Policies
success of the Clean Air Plan that local and regional jurisdictions and the
District work together to achieve these mutual goals.
policies include, but not limited to: Policies MO-
1.1, MO-1.2, MO-1.3, MO-3.1, MO-3.2, MO-4.1,
MO-4.3, MO-4.4, MO-5.2, MO-5.3, and MO-6.3.
T-2A Local Transit System Improvements. The focus of this measure is on
improving local transit service and infrastructure to increase ridership by
enhancing the convenience and overall viability of the system. Key
elements of the measure include an ongoing improvements to bus
boarding areas, development of multi-modal centers, service expansion,
and replacement of older diesel transit buses with new diesel-powered
vehicles meeting ARB’s October 31, 2002 emission certification standards
or CNG vehicles meeting one of ARB’s optional emission credit standards.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional air
quality and transportation planning efforts,
including policies to improve accessibility to
transit, bicycle and public transit
improvements, park and ride lots, traffic flow
improvements, and various other policies
intended to reduce vehicle use. Such policies
include, but not limited to: Policies MO-1.1 –
MO-1.5, and MO-5.1 – MO-5.3.
T-2B Regional Public Transit Improvements. The focus of this measure is
to improve regional transit service and infrastructure with the goal of
increasing ridership rates in excess of countywide population growth rates.
CCAT’s ridership has risen by over 95% from 143,871 in 1991 to 281,504 in
2000.
T-3 Bicycling and Bikeway Enhancements. The goal of this measure is to
achieve a county-wide average bicycle mode share of 5% by 2005.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional air
quality and transportation planning efforts,
including policies to improve accessibility to
transit, bicycle and public transit
improvements, park and ride lots, traffic flow
improvements, and various other policies
intended to reduce vehicle use. Such policies
include, but not limited to: Policies REC-7.1,
MO-1.1 – MO-1.6, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5, MO-5.1,
MO-5.3, and LU-2.5.
T-4 Park and Ride Lots. Park and Ride (P&R) lots provide a staging area for
ridesharing activities. The most common use of P&R lots in San Luis Obispo
County is as a meeting point for car- and vanpoolers. Transit connections
are available at some lots within a short walk, and bike lockers are available
at most lots; however, the primary use is for automobile parking. In San Luis
Obispo County, P&R lots are administered by Caltrans and SLOCOG.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional air
quality and transportation planning efforts,
including policies to improve accessibility to
park and ride lots. Such policies include, but not
limited to: Policies MO-5.1 – MO-5.3.
Specifically, Policy 5.2 includes “Action C,
Support and encourage the use and expansion
of Park & Ride facilities and other rideshare
infrastructure.”
T-6 Traffic Flow Improvements. This control measure focuses on traffic
flow improvements and “traffic-calming” to improve the flow of all
transportation modes. Traffic-calming refers to a full range of methods
designed to improve the flow of nonmotorized transportation by slowing
down the speed of motorized traffic. Traffic-calming is generally used in
residential areas on non-arterial local streets and roads. The goal of this
measure is to improve the road system and infrastructure in a way that
increases its efficiency, reduces emissions, and supports the other
Transportation Control Measures in this Plan.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
numerous policies to improve accessibility
traffic flow to increase efficiency, reduce
emissions, and support other measures, such as
the use of alternative means of transportation.
Such policies include, but not limited to: Policies
MO-1.1 – MO-1.6, MO-2.2, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5,
MO-5.1 – MO-5.3, MO-6.1, MO-6.2, MO-6.3,
and LU-2.3 – LU-2.5.
T-8 Teleworking, Teleconferencing, and Telelearning. Rapid advances in
personal computer capability and the advent of video and on-line services
have made these technologies ideal trip reduction strategies.
Consistent. The 2045 GPU/ZCU incorporates
various goals and policies to support regional air
quality and transportation planning efforts,
including policies to support emerging mobile
technology. Such policies include, but not
limited to: Policies MO-6.1 – MO-6.3, and LU-
5.3.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
25
Proposed GPU Policies that Provide Mitigation
The proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU includes numerous goals and policies that would help to reduce criteria
pollutant emissions, energy demands, and vehicle miles traveled. Some of the more relevant GPU policies
include Policy REC-7.1,a, PSI-6.1, PSI-6.2, MO-1.2 – MO-1.6, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5, MO-5.1 – MO-5.3, MO-6.1,
MO-6.2, and LU-2.3 – LU-2.5.
Mitigation Measures
No additional measures have been identified that would further reduce this impact.
Significance after Mitigation
It is important to recognize that the 2045 GPU/ZCU focuses growth in more VMT-efficient areas at higher
densities and with more travel options, so it produces less VMT per capita and per employee than the
existing General Plan. However, even with this focus on VMT-reducing development and implementation
of 2045 GPU/ZCU policies, estimated increases in VMT would exceed OPR’s recommended thresholds
(CCTC 2025). In accordance with SLOAPCD-recommended guidance, future development projects would
be evaluated for consistency with the SLOAPCD’s CAP, which may result in reductions in project-related
VMT and associated emissions. However, no additional policy-oriented mitigation measures have been
identified that would further reduce this impact. As a result, this impact would be considered significant
and unavoidable.
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?
Long-term Operational Emissions
As noted above, the 2045 GPU/ZCU includes various goals and policies that would reduce long-term
operational emissions, including measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled, and promote alternative
means of transportation. The promotion of alternatives to automotive transportation can help to reduce
local and regional mobile-source emissions and energy consumption. Refer to Impact AQ-1 for a
discussion of consistency with the SLOAPCD’s CAP and long-term air quality impacts attributable to the
2045 GPU/ZCU.
Short-term Construction Emissions
In comparison to existing conditions, the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would result in a net increase of
approximately 205 single-family dwelling units, 2,688 multi-family dwelling units, 481,454 square feet of
commercial retail use, 595,666 square feet of commercial office use, and 467,501 square feet of industrial
use. Construction activity associated with these land uses would cause temporary emissions of various air
pollutants associated with project construction, such as demolition, grading, construction worker travel,
hauling of construction supplies, fuel combustion by equipment, and architectural coating would generate
pollutant emissions. These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants. The extent of daily emissions, particularly ROGs and NOX
emissions, generated by construction equipment, would depend on the equipment used and the hours of
operation for each project. The extent of PM2.5 and PM10 emissions would depend upon the amount of
disturbed soils, the length of disturbance time, whether existing structures are demolished, whether
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
26
excavation is involved, and whether transporting excavated materials offsite is necessary. Dust emissions
can lead to both nuisance and health impacts.
The SLOAPCD has not established plan-level significance thresholds for construction air pollutant
emissions. At this time, most projects facilitated by the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU do not have sufficient
detail to allow project-level analysis. As a result, short-term air quality impacts would be considered
potentially significant.
Proposed GPU Policies that Provide Mitigation
The 2045 GPU/ZCU includes numerous goals and policies that would help to reduce criteria pollutant
emissions commonly associated with construction and operational activities. Some of the more relevant
GPU policies include Policy REC-7.1,a, PSI-6.1, PSI-6.2, MO-1.2 – MO-1.6, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5, MO-5.1 – MO-
5.3, MO-6.1, MO-6.2, and LU-2.3 – LU-2.5.
Mitigation Measures
No additional measures have been identified that would further reduce this impact.
Significance After Mitigation
The City of Atascadero development review process requires a review of consistency with local and state
policies, including SLOAPCD regulations and CEQA. Current 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 considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact AQ-3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Sensitive receptors include, but are not limited to, schools, parks and playgrounds, day care facilities,
nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling unit(s). The 2045 GPU/ZCU would include the
development of land uses considered to be sensitive receptors, as well as new development near existing
sensitive receptors. Activities associated with implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU could potentially
include short-term, construction sources of TACs and long-term, operational sources of TACs, including
stationary and mobile sources. As noted earlier in this report, TACs are a defined set of airborne pollutants
that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health and PM2.5 can cause a wide range of health
effects.
Short-Term Construction Emissions
Construction projects can result in short-term increases of TACs, as well as emissions of airborne fugitive
dust. Emissions of DPM emitted from construction vehicles is of particular concern. Exposure to DPM
results in a greater incidence of chronic non-cancer health effects, such as cough, labored breathing, chest
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
27
tightness, wheezing, and bronchitis. However, various other TACs from diesel exhaust also contribute to
both cancer and non-cancer health risks. Construction-generated emissions of PM2.5 can also contribute
to significant health impacts, particularly among the more sensitive population groups (i.e., children,
elderly, etc.).
In addition to emissions of DPM, other pollutants of potential localized concern include, but are not
limited to, fugitive dust, airborne asbestos; as well as, airborne coccidioides fungus spores, which may
contribute to increased occurrences of Valley Fever (also called coccidioidomycosis or “cocci”). Emissions
of fugitive dust are largely dependent on the area of potential disturbance and environmental conditions
at the site, such as wind speeds, wind direction, soil moisture content. Airborne concentrations of
asbestos can occur during demolition of older structures that contain asbestos-containing materials; as
well as, the disturbance of asbestos-containing soils. Some areas identified by the SLOAPCD as having a
potential to contain naturally-occurring asbestos have been generally identified within the western areas
of the City. A map depicting areas having a potential for naturally-occurring asbestos is included in
Appendix A. Valley Fever is a disease caused by the coccidioides fungus that grows in the soil and dirt in
some areas of California and tends to be more prevalent in drier, previously undisturbed soils. The
disturbance of such soils may result in increases in occurrences of Valley Fever.
The amount of emissions generated during construction of individual projects and potential to result in
increased exposure of individuals to airborne pollutants would vary depending on numerous factors,
including the size of the development, the type, age and number of pieces of equipment required, and
hours of use, site conditions, and environmental conditions. Furthermore, it is anticipated that multiple
construction projects could occur simultaneously within a given year and within a given area. Without
detailed construction information (i.e., construction schedules, demolition, grading, excavation, and
construction requirements), construction-generated emissions of TACs and other airborne pollutants of
local concern associated with individual development projects cannot be quantified at this time. As a
result, exposure of sensitive receptors to short-term construction emissions would be considered
potentially significant.
Long-Term Operational Emissions
Toxic Air Contaminants
Development of future land uses may include potential stationary sources of TACs, such as diesel-powered
emergency-use power generators. The type and level of TAC emissions emitted would depend upon the
nature of the land use and the specific methods and operations that involve toxic air emissions. Pursuant
to SLOAPCD rules and regulations, such as SLOAPCD Rule 219 (Toxics New Source Review Rule), new and
modified stationary sources of emissions are required to mitigate emissions using best available control
technology and to offset emissions when above thresholds
In addition to the long-term exposure to stationary emission sources, new land uses may also be exposed
to emissions from mobile sources. Major roadways of potential concern with regard to mobile-source
TACs typically include roadways with average-daily traffic (ADT) volumes of 100,000 or more. Within the
planning area, U.S. Highway 101 (US-101) is considered the primary source of mobile-source TAC
emissions. Average-daily traffic volumes along US-101 located within the city range from approximately
55,000 to approximately 65,000 (CCTC 2025).
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
28
The proposed General Plan could include opportunities for new development and redevelopment near
sources of TACs, including US-101, industrial land uses, or dry cleaners. In addition, depending on the type
of future development, some projects contribute substantially to existing vehicle traffic on area roadways,
particularly diesel-fueled heavy-duty trucks associated with industrial development. Such development
could result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to mobile-sources of TACs. Given that future
development could potentially result in increased long-term exposure of sensitive land uses to TACs, this
impact would be considered potentially significant.
Mobile-Source Carbon Monoxide
Buildout of the 2045 GPU/ZCU would result in new development or redevelopment that would generate
additional vehicle trips on area roadways. Areas with high vehicle density, such as congested intersections,
have the potential to create concentrations of CO (“CO hotspots”) and could potentially expose sensitive
receptors to harmful levels of pollution.
Localized CO concentrations are the result of the volume of cars along a road and the level of emissions
generated by vehicles, rather than the flow of traffic. Vehicle CO emissions have declined over time due
to stringent State standards for vehicle emissions and would continue to decline as more stringent
standards are put in place. However, CO hotspots can occur if large numbers of vehicles are concentrated
on a roadway. This becomes a concern when the LOS of a given roadway is negatively affected by a project.
Of particular concern are major signalized intersections that operate at unacceptable levels of service (i.e.,
LOS E, or worse). According to the traffic analysis, the signalized intersection of El Camino Real/San
Anselmo Road is projected to operate at LOS F under future cumulative conditions. Therefore, long-term
exposure to localized CO concentrations would be considered potentially significant.
Proposed GPU Policies that Provide Mitigation
Relevant GPU policies pertaining to short-term and long-term exposure to localize pollutant
concentrations include Policy REC-7.1,a, LU-4.3, and REC-3.3.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
No additional measures have been identified that would further reduce this impact.
Significance After Mitigation
The 2045 GPU/ZCU policies REC-7.1,a and REC-3.3 would help to minimize construction-generated fugitive
dust associated with future land use development projects. In addition, Policy LU-4.3 would provide buffer
areas between industrial and residential land uses that would help to minimize potential exposure to
operational TACs. In accordance with SLOAPCD’s guidance, future development projects would be
evaluated for potential short-term; as well as, long-term exposure to localized pollutants, including
construction-generated emissions, emissions of TACs, as well as, other airborne pollutants, such as
asbestos, CO, and coccidioides fungus spores. However, even with compliance with all State and local
regulations, it is conceivable that some development projects may be large enough or close enough to a
sensitive receptor that applicable project-level significance thresholds would be exceeded. In the event
that a significant impact is identified for an individual project, SLOAPCD-recommended mitigation
measures 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
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
29
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.
Impact AQ-4: Would the General Plan result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depends on numerous factors, including the nature,
frequency, and intensity of the source, wind speed and direction, and the sensitivity of the receptors.
While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to
considerable distress among the public and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and
regulatory agencies. Projects with the potential to frequently expose members of the public to
objectionable odors would be deemed to have a significant impact.
Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence the potential for
an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, there are no quantitative or formulaic methodologies to
determine if potential odors would have a significant impact. Project-specific analysis would be assessed
for new development planned for in the 2045 GPU/ZCU.
The intensity of an odor source’s operations and its proximity to sensitive receptors influences the
potential significance of odor emissions. Land uses that typically produce objectionable odors with the
potential to affect a substantial number of people include landfills, rendering plants, chemical plants,
agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, refineries, fast food restaurants, bakeries, and coffee
roasting facilities. 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. As a result, with compliance with SLOAPCD Rule 402, the 2045 GPU/ZCU would not
result in the exposure of a substantial number of people to objectionable odors. This impact would be
considered less than significant.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
30
GREENHOUSE GAS
Existing Setting
To fully understand global climate change, it is important to recognize the naturally occurring “greenhouse
effect” and to define the greenhouse gases (GHGs) that contribute to this phenomenon. Various gases in
the earth’s atmosphere, classified as atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s
surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space and a portion of the
radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface. The earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the
properties of the radiation change from high-frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared
radiation. Greenhouse gases, which are transparent to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared
radiation. As a result, this radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained,
resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Among
the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. Primary GHGs attributed to global climate
change, are discussed, as follows:
Carbon Dioxide. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of
ways, both naturally and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is
the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial
facilities, and other sources. Several specialized industrial production processes and product uses
such as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum-based products can also
lead to CO2 emissions. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily exchanged
in the atmosphere (U.S. EPA 2018).
Methane. Methane (CH4) is a colorless, odorless gas that is not flammable under most
circumstances. CH4 is the major component of natural gas, about 87 percent by volume. It is also
formed and released into the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic
environments. Methane is emitted from a variety of both human-related and natural sources.
Human-related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry (enteric fermentation in
livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass burning, and waste management.
These activities release significant quantities of methane into the atmosphere. Natural sources of
methane include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, non-
wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. Methane’s atmospheric lifetime is about 12 years
(U.S. EPA 2018).
Nitrous Oxide. Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. N2O is
produced by both natural and human-related sources. Primary human-related sources of N2O are
agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and
stationary combustion of fossil fuels, acid production, and nitric acid production. N2O is also
produced naturally from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial
action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 114 years (U.S. EPA
2018).
Hydrofluorocarbons. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are man-made chemicals, many of which have
been developed as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances for industrial, commercial, and
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
31
consumer products. The only significant emissions of HFCs before 1990 were of the chemical HFC-
23, which is generated as a byproduct of the production of HCFC-22 (or Freon 22, used in air
conditioning applications). The atmospheric lifetime for HFCs varies from just over a year for HFC-
152a to 270 years for HFC-23. Most of the commercially used HFCs have atmospheric lifetimes of
less than 15 years (e.g., HFC-134a, which is used in automobile air conditioning and refrigeration,
has an atmospheric life of 14 years) (U.S. EPA 2018).
Perfluorocarbons. Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are colorless, highly dense, chemically inert, and non-
toxic. There are seven PFC gases: perfluoromethane (CF4), perfluoroethane (C2F6), perfluoropropane
(C3F8), perfluorobutane (C4F10), perfluorocyclobutane (C4F8), perfluoropentane (C5F12), and
perfluorohexane (C6F14). Natural geological emissions have been responsible for the PFCs that have
accumulated in the atmosphere in the past; however, the largest current source is aluminum
production, which releases CF4 and C2F6 as byproducts. The estimated atmospheric lifetimes for
PFCs range from 2,600 to 50,000 years (U.S. EPA 2018).
Nitrogen Trifluoride. Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is an inorganic, colorless, odorless, toxic,
nonflammable gas used as an etchant in microelectronics. Nitrogen trifluoride is predominantly
employed in the cleaning of the plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition chambers in the
production of liquid crystal displays and silicon-based thin film solar cells. It has a global warming
potential of 16,100 carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). While NF3 may have a lower global warming
potential than other chemical etchants, it is still a potent GHG. In 2009, NF3 was listed by California
as a high global warming potential GHG to be listed and regulated under Assembly Bill (AB) 32
(Section 38505 Health and Safety Code).
Sulfur Hexafluoride. Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic compound that is colorless, odorless,
non-toxic, and generally non-flammable. SF6 is primarily used as an electrical insulator in high-
voltage equipment. The electric power industry uses roughly 80 percent of all SF6 produced
worldwide. Leaks of SF6 occur from aging equipment and during equipment maintenance and
servicing. SF6 has an atmospheric life of 3,200 years (U.S. EPA 2018).
Black Carbon. Black carbon is the strongest light-absorbing component of particulate matter (PM)
emitted from burning fuels such as coal, diesel, and biomass. Black carbon contributes to climate
change both directly by absorbing sunlight and indirectly by depositing on snow and by interacting
with clouds and affecting cloud formation. Black carbon is considered a short-lived species, which
can vary spatially and, consequently, it is very difficult to quantify associated global-warming
potentials. The main sources of black carbon in California are wildfires, off-road vehicles
(locomotives, marine vessels, tractors, excavators, dozers, etc.), on-road vehicles (cars, trucks, and
buses), fireplaces, agricultural waste burning, and prescribed burning (planned burns of forest or
wildlands) (U.S. EPA 2018).
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of
the gas molecule. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in CO2e, which relates each gas by its
global warming potential (GWP). Expressing GHG emissions in CO2e takes the contribution of all GHG
emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would
occur if only CO2 were being emitted. Table 11 provides a summary of the GWP for GHG emissions of
typical concern with regard to community development projects, based on a 100-year time horizon. As
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
32
indicated, CH4 traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O absorbs roughly 298 times
more heat per molecule than CO2. Additional GHGs with high GWP include Nitrogen trifluoride, Sulfur
hexafluoride, Perfluorocarbons, and black carbon.
Table 11. Global Warming Potential for Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Gas Global Warming Potential (100-year)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 1
Methane (CH4) 25
Nitrous Dioxide (N2O) 298
*Based on IPCC GWP values for 100-year time horizon
Source: IPCC 2007
Statewide GHG Emissions
In 2023, GHG emissions within California totaled 360.4 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e. GHG emissions,
by sector, are summarized in Figure 1. Within California, the transportation sector is the largest
contributor, accounting for approximately 38 percent of the total state-wide GHG emissions. Emissions
associated with industrial uses are the second-largest contributor, totaling roughly 22 percent. Electricity
generation totaled roughly 16 percent. Other major emission sources included commercial uses,
residential uses, agriculture, and refrigerants (ARB 2026a).
Figure 1. California GHG Emissions Inventory by Sector & Subsector
Source: ARB 2026a
22% • Industrial
12% • Electricity
IN STATE
4% • Electricity
IMPORTS
~ 8% • Agriculture
7% • Commercial
10% • Residential
38% • Transportation
360.4 MMT C02e
2023 TOTAL CA EMISSIONS
Graphic: California's greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 broken out by economic sector
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
33
Short-Lived Climate Pollutants
Short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs), such as black carbon, fluorinated gases, and CH4 also have a
dramatic effect on climate change. Though short-lived, these pollutants create a warming influence on
the climate that is many times more potent than that of carbon dioxide.
As part of the ARB’s efforts to address SLCPs, the ARB has developed a statewide emission inventory for
black carbon. The black carbon inventory will help support the implementation of the SLCP Strategy, but
it is not part of the State’s GHG Inventory that tracks progress toward the State’s climate targets. The
most recent inventory for year 2013 conditions is depicted in Figure 2. As depicted, off-road mobile
sources account for a majority of black carbon emissions totaling roughly 36 percent of the inventory.
Other major anthropogenic sources of black carbon include on-road transportation, residential wood
burning, fuel combustion, and industrial processes (ARB 2026b).
Figure 2. California Black Carbon Emissions Inventory (Year 2013)
Source: ARB 2026b
Effects of Global Climate Change
There are uncertainties as to exactly what the climate changes will be in various local areas of the earth.
There are also uncertainties associated with the magnitude and timing of other consequences of a warmer
planet: sea-level rise, spread of certain diseases out of their usual geographic range, the effect on
agricultural production, water supply, sustainability of ecosystems, increased strength and frequency of
storms, extreme heat events, increased air pollution episodes, and the consequence of these effects on
the economy.
Within California, climate changes would likely alter the ecological characteristics of many ecosystems
throughout the state. Such alterations would likely include increases in surface temperatures and changes
in the form, timing, and intensity of the precipitation. For instance, historical records are depicting an
increasing trend toward earlier snowmelt in the Sierra Nevada. This snowpack is a principal supply of
water for the state, providing roughly 50 percent of the state’s annual runoff. If this trend continues, some
areas of the state may experience an increased danger of floods during the winter months and possible
exhaustion of the snowpack during spring and summer months. Earlier snowmelt would also impact the
State’s energy resources. Currently, approximately 20 percent of California's electricity comes from
18% On-Road Diesel
' 36% Off-Road Mobile
15% Fireplaces & Woodstoves
14% Fuel Combustion/Industrial
6% Miscelaneous
... ...._:.--4% Commercial Cooking
¼ Agricultural Burning
\ o On-Road Brake & Tire
4% On-Road Gasoline
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
34
hydropower. Early exhaustion of the Sierra snowpack may force electricity producers to switch to more
costly or non-renewable forms of electricity generation during the spring and summer months. A changing
climate may also impact agricultural crop yields, coastal structures, and biodiversity. As a result, changes
in climate will likely have detrimental effects on some of California’s largest industries, including
agriculture, wine, tourism, skiing, recreational and commercial fishing, and forestry.
Regulatory Framework
Federal
2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding
The 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding, issued by the U.S. EPA on December 7, 2009,
determined that six key greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6)
threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. It established that emissions
from new motor vehicles contribute to this pollution. This finding, rooted in the Massachusetts v.
EPA (2007) ruling, required the EPA to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Act. The 2009 Greenhouse Gas
Endangerment Finding served as a prerequisite for regulating emissions from new motor vehicles and new
motor vehicle engines. This finding provided authority for the U.S. EPA to prescribe standards for GHG
emissions.
On February 12, 2026, the U.S. EPA finalized its rescission of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment
Finding, which served as a prerequisite for regulating emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor
vehicle engines; as well as, all subsequent federal GHG emissions standards promulgated pursuant to the
Endangerment Finding. Absent this finding, EPA lacks statutory authority under Section 202(a) of the
Clean Air Act to prescribe standards for GHG emissions. This final action is only related to GHG emissions
and does not affect vehicle regulations related to traditional criteria air pollutants (U.S. EPA 2026).
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975
In accordance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (as amended), the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) establish minimum efficiency standards for a wide range of appliances and equipment used
in residential and commercial buildings. Currently, DOE efficiency standards cover more than sixty
categories of appliances and equipment. DOE’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program is part of a
suite of programs under the Building Technologies Office that work in concert to help reduce building
energy consumption (EESI 2026).
State
Assembly Bill (AB) 1279
AB 1279 establishes the policy of the state to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later
than 2045; to maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter; and to ensure that by 2045 statewide
anthropogenic GHG emissions are reduced at least 85 percent below 1990 levels. The bill requires ARB to
ensure that Scoping Plan updates identify and recommend measures to achieve carbon neutrality, and to
identify and implement policies and strategies that enable CO2 removal solutions and carbon capture,
utilization, and storage technologies.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
35
Senate Bill (SB) 1020
SB 1020 adds interim renewable energy and zero carbon energy retail sales of electricity targets to
California end-use customers set at 90 percent in 2035 and 95 percent in 2040. It accelerates the timeline
required to have 100 percent renewable energy and zero carbon energy procured to serve state agencies
from the original target year of 2045 to 2035. This bill requires each state agency to individually achieve
the 100 percent goal by 2035 with specified requirements.
Executive Order (EO) N-79-20
Governor Newsom signed EO N-79-20 in September 2020 to establish targets for the transportation sector
to support the state in its goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The targets established in this
Executive Order are:
• 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks will be zero-emission by 2035.
• 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles will be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations
where feasible, and by 2035 for drayage trucks.
• 100 percent of off-road vehicles and equipment will be zero-emission by 2035 where feasible.
EO B-55-18
Governor Brown signed EO B-55-18 in September 2018 to establish a statewide goal to achieve carbon
neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative emissions
thereafter.
EO No. S-3-05
EO S-3-05 (State of California) proclaims that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. It
declares that increased temperatures could reduce the Sierra’s snowpack, further exacerbate California’s
air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea levels. To combat those concerns, the Executive
Order established total GHG emission targets. Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 2000 level
by 2010, to the 1990 level by 2020, and to 80 percent below the 1990 level by 2050.
The EO directed the secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to coordinate a
multi-agency effort to reduce GHG emissions to the target levels. The secretary will also submit biannual
reports to the governor and state legislature describing (1) progress made toward reaching the emission
targets, (2) impacts of global warming on California’s resources, and (3) mitigation and adaptation plans
to combat these impacts. To comply with the EO, the secretary of CalEPA created a Climate Action Team
made up of members from various state agencies and commissions. The Climate Action Team released its
first report in March 2006 and continues to release periodic reports on progress. The report proposed to
achieve the targets by building on voluntary actions of California businesses, local government, and
community actions, as well as through state incentives and regulatory programs.
AB 32 - California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
AB 32 (Health and Safety Code Sections 38500, 38501, 28510, 38530, 38550, 38560, 38561–38565, 38570,
38571, 38574, 38580, 38590, 38592–38599) requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990
levels by the year 2020. The gases that are regulated by AB 32 include CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, NF3, and
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
36
SF6. The reduction to 1990 levels will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG
emissions that will be phased in starting in 2012. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs ARB to
develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources. AB 32
specifies that regulations adopted in response to AB 1493 should be used to address GHG emissions from
vehicles. However, AB 32 also includes language stating that if the AB 1493 regulations cannot be
implemented, then ARB should develop new regulations to control vehicle GHG emissions under the
authorization of AB 32.
AB 32 requires that ARB adopt a quantified cap on GHG emissions representing 1990 emissions levels and
disclose how it arrives at the cap, institute a schedule to meet the emissions cap, and develop tracking,
reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the state achieves reductions in GHG emissions
necessary to meet the cap. AB 32 also includes guidance to institute emissions reductions in an
economically efficient manner and conditions to ensure that businesses and consumers are not unfairly
affected by the reductions.
Climate Change Scoping Plan
In October 2008, ARB published its Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan, which is the State’s plan to
achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32. This initial Scoping Plan contained the main
strategies to be implemented in order to achieve the target emission levels identified in AB 32. The
Scoping Plan included ARB-recommended GHG reductions for each emissions sector of the state’s GHG
inventory. The largest proposed GHG reduction recommendations were associated with improving
emissions standards for light-duty vehicles, implementing the Low Carbon Fuel Standard program,
implementing energy efficiency measures in buildings and appliances, the widespread development of
combined heat and power systems, and developing a renewable portfolio standard for electricity
production.
The Scoping Plan states that land use planning and urban growth decisions will play important roles in the
state’s GHG reductions because local governments have primary authority to plan, zone, approve, and
permit how land is developed to accommodate population growth and the changing needs of their
jurisdictions. ARB further acknowledges that decisions on how land is used will have large impacts on the
GHG emissions that will result from the transportation, housing, industry, forestry, water, agriculture,
electricity, and natural gas emissions sectors. With regard to land use planning, the Scoping Plan expects
approximately 5.0 MMT CO2e will be achieved associated with the implementation of SB 375, which is
discussed further below.
The initial Scoping Plan was first approved by ARB on December 11, 2008, and is updated every five years.
The first update of the Scoping Plan was approved by the ARB on May 22, 2014, which looked past 2020
to set mid-term goals (2030-2035) on the road to reaching the 2050 goals. The 2017 Climate Change
Scoping Plan was released in November 2017. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan incorporates
strategies for achieving the 2030 GHG-reduction target established in SB 32 and EO B-30-15. Most notably,
the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan encourages zero net increases in GHG emissions. However, the
2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan recognizes that achieving net zero increases in GHG emissions may not
be possible or appropriate for all projects and that the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions
to zero would not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant
environmental impact of climate change under CEQA.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
37
On November 16, 2022, the ARB approved the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. The
2022 Scoping Plan continues the path to achieve the SB 32 2030 target and expands upon earlier plans by
targeting an 85 percent reduction in GHG below 1990 levels by 2045 (ARB 2022).
SB 1078 and Governor’s Order S-14-08
SB 1078 (Public Utilities Code Sections 387, 390.1, 399.25, and Article 16) addresses electricity supply and
requires that retail sellers of electricity, including investor-owned utilities and community choice
aggregators, provide a minimum of 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. This
Senate Bill will affect statewide GHG emissions associated with electricity generation. In 2008, Governor
Schwarzenegger signed EO S-14-08, which set the Renewables Portfolio Standard target to 33 percent by
2020. It directed state government agencies and retail sellers of electricity to take all appropriate actions
to implement this target. EO S-14-08 was later superseded by EO S-21-09 on September 15, 2009. EO S-
21-09 directed the ARB to adopt regulations requiring 33 percent of electricity sold in the State to come
from renewable energy by 2020. Statute SB X1-2 superseded this EO in 2011, which obligated all California
electricity providers, including investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities, to obtain at least 33
percent of their energy from renewable electrical generation facilities by 2020.
ARB is required by current law, AB 32 of 2006, to regulate sources of GHGs to meet a state goal of reducing
GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and an 80 percent reduction of 1990 levels by 2050. The California
Energy Commission and California Public Utilities Commission serve in advisory roles to help ARB develop
the regulations to administer the 33 percent by 2020 requirement. ARB is also authorized to increase the
target and accelerate and expand the time frame.
Mandatory Reporting of GHG Emissions
The California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32, 2006) requires the reporting of GHGs by major
sources to the ARB. Major sources required to report GHG emissions include industrial facilities, suppliers
of transportation fuels, natural gas, natural gas liquids, liquefied petroleum gas, and CO2, operators of
petroleum and natural gas systems, and electricity retail providers and marketers.
Cap-and-Trade Regulation
The cap-and-trade regulation is a key element in California’s climate plan. It sets a statewide limit on
sources responsible for 85 percent of California’s GHG emissions and establishes a price signal needed to
drive long-term investment in cleaner fuels and more efficient use of energy. The cap-and-trade rules
came into effect on January 1, 2013, and apply to large electric power plants and large industrial plants.
In 2015, fuel distributors, including distributors of heating and transportation fuels, also became subject
to the cap-and-trade rules. At that stage, the program will encompass around 360 businesses throughout
California and nearly 85 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions.
Under the cap-and-trade regulation, companies must hold enough emission allowances to cover their
emissions and are free to buy and sell allowances on the open market. California held its first auction of
GHG allowances on November 14, 2012. California’s GHG cap-and-trade system is projected to reduce
GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 and would achieve an approximate 80 percent reduction
from 1990 levels by 2050.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
38
SB 32
SB 32 was signed by Governor Brown on September 8, 2016. SB 32 effectively extends California’s GHG
emission-reduction goals from year 2020 to year 2030. This new emission-reduction target of 40 percent
below 1990 levels by 2030 is intended to promote further GHG-reductions in support of the State’s
ultimate goal of reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. SB 32 also directs the
ARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to address this interim 2030 emission-reduction target.
SB 97
SB 97 was enacted in 2007. SB 97 required the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop, and the
Natural Resources Agency to adopt, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines addressing the analysis and
mitigation of GHG emissions. Those CEQA Guidelines amendments clarified several points, including the
following:
Lead agencies must analyze the GHG emissions of proposed projects and must reach a conclusion
regarding the significance of those emissions.
When a project’s GHG emissions may be significant, lead agencies must consider a range of
potential mitigation measures to reduce those emissions.
Lead agencies must analyze potentially significant impacts associated with placing projects in
hazardous locations, including locations potentially affected by climate change.
Lead agencies may significantly streamline the analysis of GHGs on a project level by using a
programmatic GHG emissions reduction plan meeting certain criteria.
CEQA mandates analysis of a proposed project’s potential energy use (including transportation-
related energy), sources of energy supply, and ways to reduce energy demand, including through
the use of efficient transportation alternatives.
As part of the administrative rulemaking process, the California Natural Resources Agency developed a
Final Statement of Reasons explaining the legal and factual bases, intent, and purpose of the CEQA
Guidelines amendments. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 97 became effective
on March 18, 2010.
SB 100
SB 100 was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on September 10, 2018. SB 100 sets a goal of phasing out all
fossil fuels from the state’s electricity sector by 2045. SB 100 increases to 60 percent, from 50 percent,
how much of California’s electricity portfolio must come from renewables by 2030. It establishes a further
goal to have an electric grid that is entirely powered by clean energy by 2045, which could include other
carbon-free sources, like nuclear power, that are not renewable.
SB 375
SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy
(SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that will address land-use allocation in that MPOs regional
transportation plan. ARB, in consultation with MPOs, establishes regional reduction targets for GHGs
emitted by passenger cars and light trucks for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be
updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies
affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. ARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s SCS
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
39
or APS for consistency with its assigned targets. If MPOs do not meet the GHG reduction targets, funding
for transportation projects may be withheld. In 2018, ARB adopted updated SB 375 targets.
SB 1383 & SB 1206
SB 1383 requires California to reduce hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) emissions associated with the use of
refrigerants to 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030. Starting in 2022, new facilities will be required to
use refrigerants that can reduce their emissions by up to 90 percent. The intent of the new rules is to
eliminate the use of very high-GWP refrigerants in every sector that uses non-residential refrigeration
systems. Compliance begins for most home air conditioning equipment in 2025. Senate Bill 1206, signed
into law in September 2022, prohibits the sale or distribution of HFCs that exceed a specified GWP. Under
this new law, refrigerants would not be allowed to exceed 2,200 GWP beginning January 1, 2025; 1,500
GWP beginning January 1, 2030; and 750 GWP beginning January 1, 2030.
California Building Code
The CBC contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of
materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other
improvement to real property. The California Building Code is adopted every three years by the Building
Standards Commission (BSC). In the interim, the BSC also adopts annual updates to make necessary mid-
term corrections. The CBC standards apply statewide; however, a local jurisdiction may amend a CBC
standard if it makes a finding that the amendment is reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geological,
or topographical conditions.
California Green Building Standards
In essence, green buildings standards are indistinguishable from any other building standards. Both
standards are contained in the CBC and regulate the construction of new buildings and improvements.
The only practical distinction between the two is that whereas the focus of traditional building standards
has been protecting public health and safety, the focus of green building standards is to improve
environmental performance.
The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2019 Standards), adopted in May 2018, addressed four
key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat
transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation
requirements, and non-residential lighting requirements. The 2019 Standards required new residential
and non-residential construction; as well as major alterations to existing structures, to include EV-capable
parking spaces which have electrical panel capacity and conduit to accommodate future installation. In
addition, the 2019 Standards also required the installation of PV systems for low-rise residential dwellings,
defined as single-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings up to three stories in height. These
requirements are based on various factors, including the floor area of the home, sun exposure, and
climate zone. Under the 2019 standards, nonresidential buildings will use about 30 percent less energy
due mainly to lighting upgrades (CEC 2019).
The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2022 Standards), which were approved in December 2021,
encourage efficient electric heat pumps, establish electric-ready requirements when natural gas is
installed, support the future installation of battery storage, further expand solar photovoltaic and battery
storage standards. The 2022 Standards extend solar PV system requirements, as well as battery storage
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
40
capabilities for select land uses, including high-rise multi-family and non-residential land uses, such as
office buildings, schools, restaurants, warehouses, theaters, grocery stores, and more. Depending on the
land use and other factors, solar systems should be sized to meet targets of up to 60 percent of the
structure’s loads. These solar requirements became effective on January 1, 2023, and contribute to
California’s goal of reaching a net-zero carbon footprint by 2045 (CEC 2022).
The most current standards are the 2025 Standards, which became effective January 1, 2026. The 2025
Standards build upon the previous standards by expanding the use of heat pumps in newly constructed
residential buildings, encouraging electric-readiness, strengthens ventilation standards, and more (CEC
2026).
Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy
In March 2017, the ARB adopted the Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy (SLCP Strategy)
establishing a path to decrease GHG emissions and displace fossil-based natural gas use. Strategies include
avoiding landfill methane emissions by reducing the disposal of organics through edible food recovery,
composting, in-vessel digestion, and other processes; and recovering methane from wastewater
treatment facilities, and manure methane at dairies, and using the methane as a renewable source of
natural gas to fuel vehicles or generate electricity. The SLCP Strategy also identifies steps to reduce natural
gas leaks from oil and gas wells, pipelines, valves, and pumps to improve safety, avoid energy losses, and
reduce methane emissions associated with natural gas use. Lastly, the SLCP Strategy also identifies
measures that can reduce HFC emissions at national and international levels, in addition to State-level
action that includes an incentive program to encourage the use of low-GWP refrigerants and limitations
on the use of high-GWP refrigerants in new refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment (ARB 2026b).
Advanced Clean Cars II
In August 2022, ARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars II program. The rule establishes a year-by-year
roadmap so that by 2035 100% of new cars and light trucks sold in California will be zero-emission vehicles,
including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Beginning in model year 2026 automakers sales of new vehicles
will be required to be made up of 35% ZEVs and PHEVs. The regulation applies to automakers and covers
only new vehicle sales. It does not impact existing vehicles on the road today, which will still be legal to
own and drive (ARB 2026c).
Small Off-Road Engines
In December 2021, ARB approved the Small Off-Road Engines regulation. This will require most newly
manufactured small off-road engines such as those found in leaf blowers, lawn mowers and other
equipment be zero emission starting in 2024. Portable generators, including those in recreational vehicles,
would be required to meet more stringent standards in 2024 and meet zero-emission standards starting
in 2028. Despite their small size, these engines are highly polluting. The volume of smog-forming emissions
from this type of equipment has surpassed emissions from light-duty passenger cars and is projected to
be nearly twice those of passenger cars by 2031. Older equipment can continue to be used and resold as
this rule only impacts new equipment (ARB 2026d).
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
41
2023 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
The 2023 RTP was adopted by the SLOCOG Board in June 2023. The RTP includes the region's SCS, which
outlines how the region will exceed its GHG reduction targets as required by SB 375 through the
promotion of a variety of transportation demand management & system management tools and
techniques to maximize the efficiency of the transportation network. Consistency with the requirement
of SB 375 ensures consistency with the GHG-reduction targets set by ARB. The 2023 SCS was found to be
consistent with the requirement of SB 375 and is also consistent with the general plans of the region’s
jurisdictions (SLOCOG 2023).
City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan
The City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a long-range policy document intended to cost-
effectively reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from City government operations and community
activities within Atascadero. The City’s CAP provided a baseline year 2005 inventory of GHG emissions and
projected year 2020 emissions relative to the State’s GHG emissions-reduction target for year 2020 of 15
percent below 2005 levels by the year 2020, as established under California Assembly Bill (AB) 32.
According to the City’s 2005 GHG emissions inventory, the City of Atascadero emitted approximately
141,428 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent GHG emissions (MTCO2e). Major emissions sectors
included transportation, residential energy use, commercial and industrial energy use, off-road vehicles
and equipment, solid waste, and wastewater sectors. The City’s CAP has not been updated to address the
State’s more recent GHG-reduction targets for future years, including the 2030-2035 GHG-reduction
targets and carbon-neutrality goals (City of Atascadero 2014).
Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the
environment if the project would:
GHG-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment.
GHG-2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The methodology for evaluating the 2045 GPU/ZCU’s impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on
consistency with statewide, regional, and local goals, targets, and plans that have been adopted for the
purposes of reducing and mitigating GHG emissions. This approach has been deemed appropriate for
analyzing GHG impacts by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and has been upheld in
court challenges (Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment & Infrastructure 2016). The
evaluation of consistency with such plans serves as the sole basis for determining the significance of the
project’s GHG-related impacts to the environment. Estimated net increases of GHG emissions associated
with implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU’s has also been provided for informational purposes.
The State’s current GHG-reduction goals for future years include reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent
below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, per SB 32 and EO B-30-15; as well
as achieving carbon neutrality by 2045, consistent with EO B-55-18. Current plans supporting the
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
42
achievement of these goals and targets include ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality
and SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS. As previously noted, the City’s CAP was developed with the primary purpose of
demonstrating consistency with the State’s GHG-reduction target for year 2020 conditions, consistent
with AB 32. The City’s CAP has not been updated to address the State’s more recent GHG-reduction
targets for future years, to include the 2030-2050 GHG-reduction targets and carbon-neutrality goals. For
this reason, projected increases in development-related GHG emissions attributable to the proposed 2045
GPU/ZCU and/or associated increases in VMT that would conflict with ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan for
Achieving Carbon Neutrality or SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS would be considered to have a potentially significant
impact.
Methodology
Short-term GHG emissions associated with construction activities are largely dependent on the type of
development proposed, off-road equipment and on-road vehicles required, and construction schedules.
Because much of this information for specific future development projects is unknown at this time,
construction-related impacts were qualitatively discussed.
Long-term operational increases in GHG emissions were calculated using the California Emissions
Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.1.37. Emissions were quantified based on the net increase
in land uses attributable to the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU and associated increases in VMT derived from
the traffic analysis prepared for this project (CCTC 2025). ARB’s Emission Factor 2021 (EMFAC2021) Off-
Model Greenhouse Gas Adjustment Factors to Remove the Impact of Advanced Clean Trucks, Zero-
Emission Airport Shuttle, Heavy-Duty Omnibus and Warranty Phase I Regulations were applied to mobile-
source emissions (ARB 2025). To be conservative, EMFAC2021 off-model adjustment factors were based
on the highest adjustment factors noted taking into account various vehicle classifications and fuel
sources. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU are provided for information
purposes. Emissions modeling files are provided in Appendix A.
As noted above, evaluation of impact significance was based on consistency with applicable plans
supporting the State’s future GHG-reduction targets of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, consistent
with SB 32, and the State’s goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045, consistent with EO B-55-18.
Current plans supporting the achievement of these goals include ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving
Carbon Neutrality and SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS.
Relevant Proposed GPU Goals and Policies
The 2045 General Plan includes numerous goals and policies that would reduce air contaminant emissions.
Some of the most relevant of these goals and policies include, but are not limited to, the following:
Goal PSI-6: Increased development and use of clean, renewable energy systems
Policy PSI-6.1: Onsite Renewable Energy. Facilitate the installation of onsite renewable energy
systems for residences and places of business.
Policy PSI-6.2: Energy Efficient Planning and Building Design. Encourage energy-efficient site
planning and building design/construction.
Action A: Implement streamlined building permit review processes for onsite energy
systems.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
43
Action B: Continue to implement the California Green Building Standards.
Goal REC-7: Improve air quality and reduced health risks
Policy REC-7.1: Clean Air. Support regional efforts to maintain clean air.
Action A: Require dust control and emissions limitations during project construction.
Action B: Adopt circulation policies that encourage vehicle trip reductions consistent with the
Mobility Element, and support regional programs to maintain clean air.
Action C: Concentrate new intensive development at identified nodes and commercial corridors
to help reduce vehicle trips.
Action D: Continue to support the development of Park-and-Ride facilities in appropriate
locations.
Goal MO-1: A safe, multimodal, interconnected, and efficient circulation system that serves all community
members
Policy MO-1.2: Multimodal Options. Increase pedestrian and bicycle connections and safety between
residential areas and commercial areas along major corridors, parks and recreation opportunities,
and neighboring communities.
Policy MO-1.3: Regional Facilities. Provide regional roadway facilities that minimize through-traffic
intrusion on local streets and mitigate impacts on local traffic.
Policy MO-1.4: Congestion Management and Trip Reduction. Encourage mixed-use and jobs focused
infill development that is served by multi-modal facilities to support reductions in regional and local
vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Policy MO-1.6: Truck Routes. Ensure the new and existing business that use large trucks as a core
part of their operations, more than just routine delivery, minimize maintenance impacts on City
infrastructure and noise impacts on residents.
Goal MO-4: Safe, functional, and appealing bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian (in rural areas) facilities
that allow convenient multi-modal mobility
Policy MO-4.1: Coordination and Planning. Provide “backbone” pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian
systems that link residential, commercial, recreational, and regional areas.
Policy MO-4.2: Pedestrian Mobility. Ensure pedestrian safety, enhance pedestrian comfort, and
promote walking as an alternative to vehicle travel, with priority in retail districts and multi-family
neighborhoods.
Policy MO-4.3: Bicycle Mobility. Promote bicycle mobility and increase bicyclist safety with
new/upgraded facilities and amenities.
Policy MO-4.4: Rural Trails. Provide for walkways, bikeways, and horse trails without curbs and
sidewalks in rural areas.
Policy MO-4.5: School and Park Connections. Provide a comprehensive system of routes to schools
and parks.
Goal MO-5: Reliable alternative travel modes that reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.
Policy MO-5.1: Single-Occupancy Vehicle Alternatives. Promote alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicle travel, particularly for commute trips.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
44
Policy MO-5.2: Public Transit. Support the evolution of public transit to meet the changing needs for
local and regional access, including fixed route and demand responsive service.
Policy MO-5.3: County TDM Requirements. Seek alternatives that bring Atascadero closer to
compliance with Transportation Demand Management program requirements of the San Luis Obispo
County Clean Air Plan to reduce peak period trip generation.
Goal MO-6: Anticipating and addressing emerging mobility technology proactively to allow new systems
and industries to operate in Atascadero on the City’s terms.
Policy MO-6.1: Changing Mobile Technology. Encourage the use of mobile or other electronic devices
with similar on-demand hailing functions, particularly for seniors, persons with disabilities, and other
mobility challenged people.
Policy MO-6.2: Autonomous Vehicles. Update, when warranted, transportation systems and policies
as autonomous and automated vehicles and their attendant facilities are developed locally and
regionally.
Goal LU-2: Enhanced major corridors that serve regional focused, distinct, and economically viable nodes
Policy LU-2.3: Mid-block Infill. Promote flexible land use patterns in areas between activity nodes
along El Camino Real and support increased residential densities adjacent to and along commercial
corridors to support commercial business activity and growth
Policy LU-2.4: Mixed-Use Areas. Create mixed-use districts in locations that benefit from the synergy
of commercial and residential uses.
Policy LU-2.5: Multi-Modal Corridors. Improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities along El Camino Real
and Morro Road. Major corridors should be safe, comfortable, and enjoyable for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and drivers alike.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact GHG-1: Would the General Plan generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? and
Impact GHG-2: Would the General Plan conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Annual operational emissions associated with the 2045 GPU/ZCU buildout conditions are summarized in
Table 12. As noted in Table 12, estimated increases in GHG emissions attributable to the 2045 GPU/ZCU
would total approximately 145,588 MTCO2e/year, with the inclusion of natural gas use. On a service
population basis, net increases in GHG emissions would be approximately 14.9 MTCO2e/SP. Estimated
increases in GHG emissions were predominantly associated with increases in motor vehicle use. To a lesser
extent, energy consumption, waste generation, water use, and area sources also contribute to overall
increases in projected future community-wide GHG emissions. It is important to note that estimated year
2045 GHG emissions are conservative and do not fully account for future GHG reductions associated with
existing and future building standards and/or regulations related to motor vehicle emission standards. In
addition, the recent rescission of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding by the U.S. EPA, which
was issued on February 12, 2026, has resulted in significant increases in projected future-year mobile-
source GHG emissions. As noted earlier in this report, the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
45
served as a prerequisite for regulating emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines;
as well as, all subsequent federal GHG emissions standards promulgated pursuant to the Endangerment
Finding. In response to the rescission 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding by the U.S. EPA, the
ARB has released EMFAC adjustment factors that are to be applied to on-road mobiles sources, which
taking into account various vehicle classifications and fuel sources (ARB 2025). To be conservative, EMFAC
adjustment factors were based on the highest values noted for the various vehicle classifications and fuel
sources. As a result, actual future year GHG emissions may be lower than estimated depending on future
changes related to GHG-emission reduction efforts and associated state and federal regulatory
requirements.
Table 12. Annual Operational GHG Emissions at Buildout
Source Annual Emissions (MTCO2e/Year)1
Mobile3 133,857.1
Energy Use2,4 8,746.6
Area4 1,213.8
Water4,5 582.3
Waste4 1,163.7
Refrigerants4 24.4
Total: 145,588
Service Population (Residents + Employees): 9,781
MTCO2e/SP: 14.9
1. Emissions were quantified using the CalEEMod computer program based on projected future development associated with
implementation of the General Plan Update.
2. Includes natural gas use. Excludes wood burning hearths per SLOAPCD Rule 4901.
3. Emissions quantified based on trip-generation rates derived from the traffic analysis prepared for this project (CCTC 2025). Includes
EMFAC2021 off-model adjustment factors (ARB 2025).
4. Emissions associated with area sources, water use, energy use, refrigerants, and waste generation were quantified based on projected
increases in future development, by land use type, and default usage/generation rates identified in the CalEEMod computer program
for San Luis Obispo County.
5. Includes the use of low-flow water fixtures per current building standards.
Totals may not sum due to rounding. Refer to Appendix A for emissions modeling assumptions and results.
Consistency with ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality
The 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan is the most comprehensive and far-reaching Scoping Plan
developed to date. It identifies a technologically feasible and cost-effective path to achieve carbon
neutrality by 2045 while also assessing the progress California is making toward meeting the State’s year
2030 GHG-reduction goals. The 2030 target is an important but interim step toward achieving the State’s
future-year GHG-reduction and carbon-neutrality goals.
To achieve the State’s future-year GHG-reduction goals, including carbon neutrality by 2045, the State will
need to reduce emissions from carbon-based sources commonly associated with community
development. The Scoping Plan identifies numerous action items in support of the State’s future-year
GHG-reduction goals. Such action items include, to the extent possible, the installation of all-electric
appliances for new residential and commercial development, replacement of residential and commercial-
use natural-gas appliances with electric appliances at end of life, prevention of conversion of natural land,
provision of lower income affordable housing, and incorporation of smart-growth measures that would
support reductions in VMT and associated mobile-source emissions.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
46
The 2045 GPU/ZCU uses a designator system consisting of “Placetypes.” Each Placetype category defines
both the primary uses of land allowed and the character of those uses. For instance, the Mixed Use
Placetype is intended to promote a flexible and compatible mix of residential and commercial uses in
focused areas. The Downtown Mixed Use Placetype encourages an eclectic and complementary mix of
uses, pedestrian-scale development, and locally owned retail and restaurant businesses with upper-story
residential and office units. The 2045 GPU/ZCU is expected to result in reductions in vehicle trips/ trip
lengths, improved accessibility to alternative means of transportation (e.g., transit), and overall
reductions in VMT. In addition, the City’s jobs-housing ratio would improve from 0.77 to 0.83. Numerous
other goals and policies have been included in the 2045 GPU/ZCU that would support regional
transportation planning efforts, including policies to improve accessibility to transit, bicycle and public
transit improvements, park and ride lots, traffic flow improvements, and various other policies intended
to reduce vehicle use and VMT. In addition, the 2045 GPU/ZCU includes policies that would encourage
energy-efficient site planning and building design/construction and incorporation of onsite renewable
energy systems.
However, even with implementation of the 2045 GPU/ZCU goals and policies, the 2045 GPU/ZCU would
generate residential and employment-based VMT at levels that are above OPR’s recommended
thresholds. In addition, the 2045 GPU/ZCU does not include policies for encouraging all-electric
development of future residential and commercial land uses. As a result, the 2045 GPU/ZCU would be
inconsistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.
Consistency with SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS
The RTP includes the region's SCS, which outlines how the region will exceed its GHG reduction targets as
required by SB 375 through the promotion of a variety of transportation demand management & system
management tools and techniques to maximize the efficiency of the transportation network. Consistency
with the requirement of SB 375 ensures consistency with the GHG-reduction targets set by ARB. The 2023
SCS was found to be consistent with the requirement of SB 375 and is also consistent with the existing
general plans of the region’s jurisdictions (SLOCOG 2023).
As noted above, the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU is expected to result in reductions in vehicle trips/ trip
lengths and improved accessibility to alternative means of transportation (e.g., transit). In addition, the
2045 GPU/ZCU would not be anticipated to result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy associated with future development. Although implementation of the 2045 General Plan and
Zoning Code Update would result in increased development, population, and jobs, in excess of what is
currently projected by SLOCOG, the jobs/housing ratio for the City would be projected to improve with
implementation of the project. Therefore, the goals, policies, and actions included in the 2045 General
Plan Update are generally consistent with the goals and policies established within SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS.
Consistency with City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan
The City of Atascadero Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a long-range policy document intended to cost-
effectively reduce GHG emissions from City government operations and community activities within
Atascadero. Appendix C of the City’s CAP contains a CAP Consistency Worksheet. The CAP worksheet
includes various mandatory and voluntary GHG-reduction measures that projects can implement to
demonstrate consistency with the City’s CAP. These project-level mandatory measures include the
following (City of Atascadero 2014):
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
47
Measure TL-1: Bicycle Network.
o Incorporation of bicycle lanes, routes, and/or shared use paths into street system, as
currently required by the General Plan and Municipal Code, to provide a continuous
network or routes, facilitated with markings, signage, and bicycle parking.
Measure TL-2: Pedestrian Network.
o Provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects all existing
or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site, as
currently required by the General Plan and Municipal Code.
o Minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity, as currently required by the
General Plan and Municipal Code.
o Implement traffic calming improvements as appropriate (e.g., marked crosswalks, count-
down signal timers, curb extensions, speed tables, raised crosswalks, median islands,
mini-circles, tight corner radii, etc.), as currently required by the General Plan and
Municipal Code.
Measure TL-3: Expand Transit Network.
o Provide safe and convenient access to public transit within and/or contiguous to the
project area, as currently required by the General Plan and Municipal Code
Measure TL-8: Atascadero General Plan.
o Consistent with the City’s land use and zoning code.
Measure S-1: Solid Waste Diversion Rate.
o If the project involves demolition, divert 70 percent of non-hazardous debris
The mandatory measures identified above must be incorporated as binding and enforceable components
of a project for it to be found consistent with the CAP. If the project cannot meet one or more of the
mandatory measures, voluntary or other City-approved measures may be substituted provided the
measures would achieve equivalent GHG reductions. Additional voluntary measures include those related
to reducing GHG emissions from the energy, transportation, and land use sectors.
The 2045 General Plan includes numerous goals and policies that would reduce GHG emissions,
specifically those associated with the energy, transportation, and land use sectors, consistent with the
CAP worksheet. As noted earlier in this report, these goals and policies include the promotion of emerging
mobility technologies; promotion of alternative means of transportation; providing safe, functional, and
appealing multi-modal mobility alternatives; promoting clean, renewable energy systems; and various
measures to reduce regional and local VMT.
It is important to note that the City’s CAP was developed to address the State’s year 2020 GHG emissions-
reduction target, as established under California Assembly Bill (AB) 32. The City’s CAP has not been
updated to address the State’s more recent GHG-reduction targets for future years, including the 2030-
2035 GHG-reduction targets and carbon-neutrality goals. The goals and policies contained in the 2045
GPU/ZCU would facilitate future project consistency with the City’s current CAP, as well as, GHG
reductions in support of the State’s current GHG-reduction targets for future years, including the 2030-
2035 GHG-reduction targets and carbon-neutrality goals. As a result, the 2045 GPU/ZCU would be
considered consistent with the City’s CAP.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
48
Because the 2045 GPU/ZCU would conflict with CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan, this impact would be
considered potentially significant.
Proposed GPU Policies that Provide Mitigation
The 2045 GPU/ZCU includes numerous goals and policies that would help to reduce criteria pollutant
emissions, energy demands, and VMT. Some of the more relevant 2045 GPU/ZCU policies include Policy
REC-7.1,a, PSI-6.1, PSI-6.2, MO-1.2 – MO-1.6, MO-4.1 – MO-4.5, MO-5.1 – MO-5.3, MO-6.1, MO-6.2, and
LU-2.3 – LU-2.5.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
GHG-1: 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.
GHG-2: 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 turn outs) for future planned transit stops located adjacent to
the development site.
GHG-3: The City shall 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 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would require 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.
Mitigation Measure GHG-2 would require implementation of additional measures for land use
development projects in support of the State’s future year 2045 carbon-neutrality goal. Mitigation
Measure GHG-3 would require 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 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy. However, while policies contained in the GPU, 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 GPU/ZCU would still exceed applicable OPR thresholds. Therefore, this impact would be
considered significant and unavoidable.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
49
REFERENCES
Air Quality
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2022. California Emissions Estimator
Model. Website URL: https://www.caleemod.com/.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health
Perspective. Website URL: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed January 20, 2018. ARB Health-Related Fact Sheets.
Website URL: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/fs/fs.htm.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Small Off-Road Engines. Website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-updated-regulations-requiring-most-new-small-road-
engines-be-zero-emission-2024.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed: July 2022a. Aerometric Data Analysis and Measurement
System (iADAM). Website url: http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022b. Advanced Clean Cars II. Website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2025. EMFAC2021 Off-Model Adjustment Factors to Remove the
Impact of Advanced Clean Trucks, Zero-Emission Airport Shuttle, Heavy-Duty Omnibus and
Warranty Phase I Regulations. Available at website url: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/msei/emfac2021-model-and-documentation.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed February 1, 2026a. Pollution Mapping Tool (v2.7).
Website URL: https://www.arb.ca.gov/carbapps/pollution-map/?_ga=2.78233943.
2101177362.1772325512-416571266.1767833131.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed February 1, 2026b. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics.
Website URL: https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1996. Transportation Project-Level Carbon
Monoxide Protocol. University of California Davis, Institute of Transportation Studies, UCD-ITS-RR-
96-1.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2019-building-energy-efficiency.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. California Building Decarbonization Assessment. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2021/california-building-decarbonization-assessment.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website url:
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2019-building-energy-efficiency.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026. Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Website url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-
efficiency-standards/2025-building-energy-efficiency.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
50
Central Coast Transportation Consultants (CCTC). July 11, 2025. Memorandum: Atascadero General Plan
Update-Transportation (CEQA).
City of Atascadero. June 25, 2002. Atascadero General Plan 2025. Available at Website url:
https://www.atascadero.org/service/planning-documents-resources.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). April 13, 2015. Sierra Club, Revive the San
Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. County of Fresno,
Defendant and Respondent. Application for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief of San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District in Support of Defendant and Respondent, County of Fresno
and Real Party in Interest and Respondent, Friant Ranch, L.P. Website URL:
https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/7-s219783-ac-san-joaquin-valley-unified-air-pollution-
control-dist-041315.pdf.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). December 2001. Clean Air Plan.
Available at website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/clean-air-plan.php.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). April 2012. CEQA Air Quality Handbook
with 2023 Administrative Updates. Available at website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-
regulations/land-use-ceqa.php.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2017. Clarification Memo related to the
CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Available at website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-
regulations/land-use-ceqa.php.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2018. APCD Naturally Occurring
Asbestos Map. Available at website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/land-use-
ceqa.php.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2025. Air Quality Standards. Available at
website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/air-quality/about.php.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2026. Asbestos NESHAP. Available at
website URL: https://www.slocleanair.org/air-quality/about.php.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2019. SLOCOG 2019 Regional Housing Needs Plan.
Website url: https://sanluiscog.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOCOGTeamFolder/Shared%
20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FSLOCOGTeamFolder%2FShared%20Documents
%2FSLOCOG%20Website%20Files%2FPrograms%2FSpecial%20Studies%2FRHNA%2F%5F2019%20R
HNA%20Plan%5Fadopted%5Ffinal%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FSLOCOGTeamFolder%2FShared%20
Documents%2FSLOCOG%20Website%20Files%2FPrograms%2FSpecial%20Studies%2FRHNA&p=tru
e&ga=1.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2025. 2060 Regional Growth Forecast for the San
Luis Obispo County Region. Website url: https://sanluiscog.sharepoint.com/sites/
SLOCOGTeamFolder/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FSLOCOGTeamFol
der%2FShared%20Documents%2FSLOCOG%20Website%20Files%2FPrograms%2FData%20Services
%2FMapping%20%26%20GIS%2FSLOCOG%2DRTP%2DRegionalForecastReport%209%2D24%2D202
5%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FSLOCOGTeamFolder%2FShared%20Documents%2FSLOCOG%20Web
site%20Files%2FPrograms%2FData%20Services%2FMapping%20%26%20GIS&p=true&ga=1.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
51
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1991. Risk Assessment for Toxic Air
Pollutants. Website URL: https://www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/3_90_024.html#:~:text=
Health%20problems%20can%20include%20cancer,as%20life%2Dthreatening%20lung%20dam.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2026. Air Quality Index Report. Website URL:
https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-quality-index-report.
Greenhouse Gas
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2020. California Emissions Estimator
Model 2020.4.0. Website URL: https://www.caleemod.com/.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Website URL:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Small Off-Road Engines. Website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-updated-regulations-requiring-most-new-small-
road-engines-be-zero-emission-2024.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). December 2022. California’s 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
Website URL: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2022.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2025. EMFAC2021 Off-Model Adjustment Factors to Remove the
Impact of Advanced Clean Trucks, Zero-Emission Airport Shuttle, Heavy-Duty Omnibus and
Warranty Phase I Regulations. Available at website url: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/msei/emfac2021-model-and-documentation.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed: February 2, 2026a. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Inventory: 2000-2023. Available at website url: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed: February 2, 2026b. Short Lived Climate Pollutants.
Website URL: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/slcp.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed: February 2, 2026c. Advanced Clean Cars II. Website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-
cars-ii.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). Accessed: February 2, 2026d. Small Off-Road Engine or Equipment
Regulatory and Certification Documents. Website URL: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/small-road-
engine-or-equipment-regulatory-and-certification-documents.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). May 10, 2022. Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update. Available at
Website URL: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/2022-draft-sp.pdf.
Central Coast Transportation Consultants (CCTC). July 11, 2025. Memorandum: Atascadero General Plan
Update-Transportation (CEQA).
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website URL:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2019-building-energy-efficiencyCity of Atascadero. June 25, 2002. Atascadero
General Plan 2025. Available at Website url: https://www.atascadero.org/ service/planning-
documents-resources.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. California Building Decarbonization Assessment. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2021/california-building-decarbonization-assessment.
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update March 2026
52
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website url:
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website
url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2019-building-energy-efficiency.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026. Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Website url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-
efficiency-standards/2025-building-energy-efficiency.
City of Atascadero. January 28, 2014. Climate Action Plan. Available at website url: https://storage.
googleapis.com/slocleanair-org/images/cms/upload/files/Atascadero_Final%20CAP%20
Council%20Edit%20version%20Jan%2028%2C%202014.pdf.
Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI). Accessed: February 2, 2026. Fact Sheet: Energy
Efficiency Standards for Appliances, Lighting and Equipment (2017). Website url:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-energy-efficiency-standards-for-appliances-
lighting-and-equipmen.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Fourth Assessment Report, Climate Change
2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Available at website url: https://www.ipcc.ch/
site/assets/uploads/ 2018/03/ar4_wg2_full_report.pdf.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2023. SLOCOG 2023 Regional Transportation Plan.
Available at Website URL: https://www.slocog.org/programs/regional-planning/2023-rtp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Accessed: August 20, 2018. Overview of
Greenhouse Gases. Website URL: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-
gases.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Accessed: February 23, 2026. Final Rule:
Rescission of the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
Emission Standards Under the Clean Air Act. Website URL: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-
emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-rescission-greenhouse-gas-endangerment.
APPENDIX A
Emissions Modeling & Supportive Documentation
SLOAPCD NOA BUFFER AREAS
SLOAPCD. Accessed: November 12, 2025. Naturally Occurring Asbestos. District NOA Map Available at website url:
https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/noa.php.
e a1 e
Templeton
\"'""
2. Emissions Summary
2.5 Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Sector CO₂T CH₄N₂O R CO₂e
Annual
Mobile - Unadjusted 57702.371479872591.02362537445398161.7226151381542643 10.20 58251.50
EmFac21 Adj Factors 2.29 2.43 2.70 0.00
Mobile -Adjusted 132408.92 2.49 4.65 10.20 133857.01
Area 1212.2292549787410.025290098537810140.00298070319413192960.00 1213.75
Energy 8699.1911577749691.0097190828551720.07440002909912327 0.00 8746.61
Water 289.786058931916110.9891167352107730.2639815364265747 0.00 643.18
Waste 332.6054628340675733.242721083502860 0.00 1163.67
Refrig.0.00 0.00 0.00 24.42 24.42
Total 142942.74 47.76 4.99 34.62 145624.22
Total Mobile-Adjusted:328008.94 116.23 13.48 34.62 334965.13 276713.63
Total with Nat Gas
Mobile (Adjusted):132408.92 2.49 4.65 10.20 133857.01
Energy (Electricity & Nat Gas):8699.1911577749691.0097190828551720.07440002909912327 0.00 8746.61
Area 1212.2292549787410.025290098537810140.00298070319413192960.00 1213.75Water (With Low Flow Fixtures):263.10416991521869.9251980126675840.2384456819287284 0 582.2909334466693
Waste:332.6054628340675733.242721083502860 0.00 1163.67
Refrigerants:0 0 0 24.42 24.42
Total:142916.05 46.69 4.97 34.62 145587.75 -131125.88
Based on MIG SP data Net Increase Service Population (SP):9781
GHG/SP:14.88475077
Service Population Existing GPU 2045 Net Increase
Residents 30683 37279 6596
Employees 9729 12914 3185
Total Net Increase 9781
GHG/SP
WITHOUT
EMFAC
ADJUSTMENT
CO2e INCREASE
WITH EMFAC
ADJUSTMENT
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
1 / 51
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.1.2. Mitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
2 / 51
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.3.2. Mitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.4.2. Mitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.5.2. Mitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.6.2. Mitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.7.2. Mitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
3 / 51
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.8.2. Mitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.9.2. Mitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.9.2. Mitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
4 / 51
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.11.2. Mitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.12.2. Mitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.13.2. Mitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.14.2. Mitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
5 / 51
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
6 / 51
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
8.1. Justifications
8.5. Operations
8.5.2. Area Sources
8.5.2.1. Hearths
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
7 / 51
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase
Operational Year 2045
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Plan/community
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)3.00000
Precipitation (days)29.6000
Location 35.489982894823555, -120.66750601348814
County San Luis Obispo
City Atascadero
Air District San Luis Obispo County APCD
Air Basin South Central Coast
TAZ 3311
EDFZ 6
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.37
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Single Family
Housing
205.000 Dwelling Unit 66.5584 399,750 2,401,136 —492.000 —
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
8 / 51
—6,451.00—0.000002,580,48070.7368Dwelling Unit2,688.00Apartments Mid
Rise
Strip Mall 481.454 1000sqft 11.0527 481,454 0.00000 ———
General Office
Building
594.666 1000sqft 13.6517 594,666 0.00000 ———
Industrial Park 467.501 1000sqft 10.7323 467,501 0.00000 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
Sector #Measure Title
Water W-4 Require Low-Flow Water Fixtures
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 160.381 126.460 1,228.14 3.91304 6.24729 409.534 415.781 6.11780 103.670 109.787 456,681 280.361 12.1016 290.118 467,587
Mit. 160.381 126.460 1,228.14 3.91304 6.24729 409.534 415.781 6.11780 103.670 109.787 456,520 273.935 11.9474 290.118 467,219
%
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — < 0.5% 2% 1% — < 0.5%
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 134.645 130.327 891.929 3.77711 6.05468 409.534 415.588 5.97210 103.670 109.642 443,342 280.155 12.5662 151.181 454,242
Mit. 134.645 130.327 891.929 3.77711 6.05468 409.534 415.588 5.97210 103.670 109.642 443,181 273.729 12.4120 151.181 453,874
%
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — < 0.5% 2% 1% — < 0.5%
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
9 / 51
Average
Daily
(Max)
———————————————
Unmit. 156.073 105.160 1,106.99 3.63725 4.06734 401.707 405.774 3.94235 101.713 105.655 412,150 279.597 12.4665 209.071 423,064
Mit. 156.073 105.160 1,106.99 3.63725 4.06734 401.707 405.774 3.94235 101.713 105.655 411,989 273.171 12.3123 209.071 422,697
%
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — < 0.5% 2% 1% — < 0.5%
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 28.4832 19.1918 202.026 0.66380 0.74229 73.3115 74.0538 0.71948 18.5626 19.2821 68,236.2 46.2905 2.06398 34.6141 70,043.1
Mit. 28.4832 19.1918 202.026 0.66380 0.74229 73.3115 74.0538 0.71948 18.5626 19.2821 68,209.5 45.2266 2.03844 34.6141 69,982.2
%
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — < 0.5% 2% 1% — < 0.5%
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 34.8974 66.1337 968.272 3.53289 1.38041 409.534 410.914 1.29783 103.670 104.967 359,054 6.30530 9.97529 142.636 362,327
Area 123.973 34.0733 245.709 0.21534 2.77929 — 2.77929 2.73238 — 2.73238 41,324.7 0.79459 0.08248 — 41,369.1
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 — 2.08759 2.08759 — 2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 — 52,830.0
Water — — — — — — — — — — 1,750.32 66.3749 1.59446 — 3,884.85
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
Total 160.381 126.460 1,228.14 3.91304 6.24729 409.534 415.781 6.11780 103.670 109.787 456,681 280.361 12.1016 290.118 467,587
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 34.4515 72.0811 864.152 3.40809 1.38041 409.534 410.914 1.29783 103.670 104.967 346,429 6.12886 10.4459 3.69892 349,699
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
10 / 51
Area 98.6824 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 —2.58668 2.58668 —2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 —40,651.7
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 — 2.08759 2.08759 — 2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 — 52,830.0
Water — — — — — — — — — — 1,750.32 66.3749 1.59446 — 3,884.85
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
Total 134.645 130.327 891.929 3.77711 6.05468 409.534 415.588 5.97210 103.670 109.642 443,342 280.155 12.5662 151.181 454,242
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 34.5781 71.7675 880.751 3.42881 1.38041 401.707 403.087 1.29783 101.713 103.011 348,525 6.18275 10.4047 61.5895 351,842
Area 119.984 7.13979 212.077 0.04363 0.59935 — 0.59935 0.55694 — 0.55694 7,321.93 0.15275 0.01800 — 7,331.12
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 — 2.08759 2.08759 — 2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 — 52,830.0
Water — — — — — — — — — — 1,750.32 66.3749 1.59446 — 3,884.85
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
Total 156.073 105.160 1,106.99 3.63725 4.06734 401.707 405.774 3.94235 101.713 105.655 412,150 279.597 12.4665 209.071 423,064
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.31050 13.0976 160.737 0.62576 0.25192 73.3115 73.5634 0.23685 18.5626 18.7995 57,702.4 1.02363 1.72262 10.1968 58,251.5
Area 21.8970 1.30301 38.7041 0.00796 0.10938 — 0.10938 0.10164 — 0.10164 1,212.23 0.02529 0.00298 — 1,213.75
Energy 0.27571 4.79120 2.58468 0.03008 0.38098 — 0.38098 0.38098 — 0.38098 8,699.19 1.00972 0.07440 — 8,746.61
Water — — — — — — — — — — 289.786 10.9891 0.26398 — 643.180
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 332.605 33.2427 0.00000 — 1,163.67
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — 24.4173 24.4173
Total 28.4832 19.1918 202.026 0.66380 0.74229 73.3115 74.0538 0.71948 18.5626 19.2821 68,236.2 46.2905 2.06398 34.6141 70,043.1
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
11 / 51
———————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Mobile 34.8974 66.1337 968.272 3.53289 1.38041 409.534 410.914 1.29783 103.670 104.967 359,054 6.30530 9.97529 142.636 362,327
Area 123.973 34.0733 245.709 0.21534 2.77929 —2.77929 2.73238 —2.73238 41,324.7 0.79459 0.08248 —41,369.1
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 —2.08759 2.08759 —2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 —52,830.0
Water ——————————1,589.16 59.9487 1.44022 —3,517.07
Waste ——————————2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 —7,028.65
Refrig.—————————————147.482 147.482
Total 160.381 126.460 1,228.14 3.91304 6.24729 409.534 415.781 6.11780 103.670 109.787 456,520 273.935 11.9474 290.118 467,219
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Mobile 34.4515 72.0811 864.152 3.40809 1.38041 409.534 410.914 1.29783 103.670 104.967 346,429 6.12886 10.4459 3.69892 349,699
Area 98.6824 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 —2.58668 2.58668 —2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 —40,651.7
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 —2.08759 2.08759 —2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 —52,830.0
Water ——————————1,589.16 59.9487 1.44022 —3,517.07
Waste ——————————2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 —7,028.65
Refrig.—————————————147.482 147.482
Total 134.645 130.327 891.929 3.77711 6.05468 409.534 415.588 5.97210 103.670 109.642 443,181 273.729 12.4120 151.181 453,874
Average
Daily
———————————————
Mobile 34.5781 71.7675 880.751 3.42881 1.38041 401.707 403.087 1.29783 101.713 103.011 348,525 6.18275 10.4047 61.5895 351,842
Area 119.984 7.13979 212.077 0.04363 0.59935 —0.59935 0.55694 —0.55694 7,321.93 0.15275 0.01800 —7,331.12
Energy 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 —2.08759 2.08759 —2.08759 52,543.6 6.09876 0.44938 —52,830.0
Water ——————————1,589.16 59.9487 1.44022 —3,517.07
Waste ——————————2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 —7,028.65
Refrig.—————————————147.482 147.482
Total 156.073 105.160 1,106.99 3.63725 4.06734 401.707 405.774 3.94235 101.713 105.655 411,989 273.171 12.3123 209.071 422,697
Annual ———————————————
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
12 / 51
Mobile 6.31050 13.0976 160.737 0.62576 0.25192 73.3115 73.5634 0.23685 18.5626 18.7995 57,702.4 1.02363 1.72262 10.1968 58,251.5
Area 21.8970 1.30301 38.7041 0.00796 0.10938 — 0.10938 0.10164 — 0.10164 1,212.23 0.02529 0.00298 — 1,213.75
Energy 0.27571 4.79120 2.58468 0.03008 0.38098 — 0.38098 0.38098 — 0.38098 8,699.19 1.00972 0.07440 — 8,746.61
Water — — — — — — — — — — 263.104 9.92520 0.23845 — 582.291
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 332.605 33.2427 0.00000 — 1,163.67
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — 24.4173 24.4173
Total 28.4832 19.1918 202.026 0.66380 0.74229 73.3115 74.0538 0.71948 18.5626 19.2821 68,209.5 45.2266 2.03844 34.6141 69,982.2
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Mobile source emissions results are presented in Sections 2.6. No further detailed breakdown of emissions is available.
4.1.2. Mitigated
Mobile source emissions results are presented in Sections 2.5. No further detailed breakdown of emissions is available.
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 694.653 0.11238 0.01362 — 701.522
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 4,458.40 0.72127 0.08743 — 4,502.49
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
13 / 51
Strip Mall ——————————2,227.10 0.36030 0.04367 —2,249.12
General
Office
Building
——————————6,936.26 1.12214 0.13602 —7,004.84
Industrial
Park
——————————5,452.99 0.88217 0.10693 —5,506.91
Total ——————————19,769.4 3.19826 0.38767 —19,964.9
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————694.653 0.11238 0.01362 —701.522
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————4,458.40 0.72127 0.08743 —4,502.49
Strip Mall ——————————2,227.10 0.36030 0.04367 —2,249.12
General
Office
Building
——————————6,936.26 1.12214 0.13602 —7,004.84
Industrial
Park
——————————5,452.99 0.88217 0.10693 —5,506.91
Total ——————————19,769.4 3.19826 0.38767 —19,964.9
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————115.008 0.01861 0.00226 —116.145
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————738.139 0.11941 0.01447 —745.438
Strip Mall ——————————368.721 0.05965 0.00723 —372.367
General
Office
Building
——————————1,148.38 0.18578 0.02252 —1,159.73
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
14 / 51
911.732—0.017700.14605902.805——————————Industrial
Park
Total — — — — — — — — — — 3,273.05 0.52951 0.06418 — 3,305.41
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 694.653 0.11238 0.01362 — 701.522
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 4,458.40 0.72127 0.08743 — 4,502.49
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 2,227.10 0.36030 0.04367 — 2,249.12
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 6,936.26 1.12214 0.13602 — 7,004.84
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 5,452.99 0.88217 0.10693 — 5,506.91
Total — — — — — — — — — — 19,769.4 3.19826 0.38767 — 19,964.9
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 694.653 0.11238 0.01362 — 701.522
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 4,458.40 0.72127 0.08743 — 4,502.49
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 2,227.10 0.36030 0.04367 — 2,249.12
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
15 / 51
7,004.84—0.136021.122146,936.26——————————General
Office
Building
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 5,452.99 0.88217 0.10693 — 5,506.91
Total — — — — — — — — — — 19,769.4 3.19826 0.38767 — 19,964.9
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 115.008 0.01861 0.00226 — 116.145
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 738.139 0.11941 0.01447 — 745.438
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 368.721 0.05965 0.00723 — 372.367
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1,148.38 0.18578 0.02252 — 1,159.73
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 902.805 0.14605 0.01770 — 911.732
Total — — — — — — — — — — 3,273.05 0.52951 0.06418 — 3,305.41
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.12084 2.06520 0.87881 0.01318 0.16697 — 0.16697 0.16697 — 0.16697 2,621.42 0.23199 0.00494 — 2,628.69
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.99300 16.9712 7.22180 0.10833 1.37214 — 1.37214 1.37214 — 1.37214 21,542.0 1.90646 0.04056 — 21,601.8
Strip Mall 0.04248 0.77241 0.64882 0.00463 0.05870 — 0.05870 0.05870 — 0.05870 921.608 0.08156 0.00174 — 924.165
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
16 / 51
General
Office
Building
0.19844 3.60792 3.03065 0.02165 0.27420 —0.27420 0.27420 —0.27420 4,304.85 0.38098 0.00811 —4,316.79
Industrial
Park
0.15600 2.83639 2.38257 0.01702 0.21557 —0.21557 0.21557 —0.21557 3,384.29 0.29951 0.00637 —3,393.68
Total 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 —2.08759 2.08759 —2.08759 32,774.2 2.90050 0.06171 —32,865.1
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
0.12084 2.06520 0.87881 0.01318 0.16697 —0.16697 0.16697 —0.16697 2,621.42 0.23199 0.00494 —2,628.69
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.99300 16.9712 7.22180 0.10833 1.37214 —1.37214 1.37214 —1.37214 21,542.0 1.90646 0.04056 —21,601.8
Strip Mall 0.04248 0.77241 0.64882 0.00463 0.05870 —0.05870 0.05870 —0.05870 921.608 0.08156 0.00174 —924.165
General
Office
Building
0.19844 3.60792 3.03065 0.02165 0.27420 —0.27420 0.27420 —0.27420 4,304.85 0.38098 0.00811 —4,316.79
Industrial
Park
0.15600 2.83639 2.38257 0.01702 0.21557 —0.21557 0.21557 —0.21557 3,384.29 0.29951 0.00637 —3,393.68
Total 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 —2.08759 2.08759 —2.08759 32,774.2 2.90050 0.06171 —32,865.1
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
0.02205 0.37690 0.16038 0.00241 0.03047 —0.03047 0.03047 —0.03047 434.006 0.03841 0.00082 —435.209
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.18122 3.09725 1.31798 0.01977 0.25042 —0.25042 0.25042 —0.25042 3,566.53 0.31564 0.00672 —3,576.42
Strip Mall 0.00775 0.14096 0.11841 0.00085 0.01071 —0.01071 0.01071 —0.01071 152.583 0.01350 0.00029 —153.006
General
Office
Building
0.03621 0.65845 0.55309 0.00395 0.05004 —0.05004 0.05004 —0.05004 712.717 0.06308 0.00134 —714.694
Industrial
Park
0.02847 0.51764 0.43482 0.00311 0.03934 —0.03934 0.03934 —0.03934 560.308 0.04959 0.00106 —561.862
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
17 / 51
Total 0.27571 4.79120 2.58468 0.03008 0.38098 —0.38098 0.38098 —0.38098 5,426.14 0.48021 0.01022 —5,441.19
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.12084 2.06520 0.87881 0.01318 0.16697 — 0.16697 0.16697 — 0.16697 2,621.42 0.23199 0.00494 — 2,628.69
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.99300 16.9712 7.22180 0.10833 1.37214 — 1.37214 1.37214 — 1.37214 21,542.0 1.90646 0.04056 — 21,601.8
Strip Mall 0.04248 0.77241 0.64882 0.00463 0.05870 — 0.05870 0.05870 — 0.05870 921.608 0.08156 0.00174 — 924.165
General
Office
Building
0.19844 3.60792 3.03065 0.02165 0.27420 — 0.27420 0.27420 — 0.27420 4,304.85 0.38098 0.00811 — 4,316.79
Industrial
Park
0.15600 2.83639 2.38257 0.01702 0.21557 — 0.21557 0.21557 — 0.21557 3,384.29 0.29951 0.00637 — 3,393.68
Total 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 — 2.08759 2.08759 — 2.08759 32,774.2 2.90050 0.06171 — 32,865.1
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.12084 2.06520 0.87881 0.01318 0.16697 — 0.16697 0.16697 — 0.16697 2,621.42 0.23199 0.00494 — 2,628.69
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.99300 16.9712 7.22180 0.10833 1.37214 — 1.37214 1.37214 — 1.37214 21,542.0 1.90646 0.04056 — 21,601.8
Strip Mall 0.04248 0.77241 0.64882 0.00463 0.05870 — 0.05870 0.05870 — 0.05870 921.608 0.08156 0.00174 — 924.165
General
Office
Building
0.19844 3.60792 3.03065 0.02165 0.27420 — 0.27420 0.27420 — 0.27420 4,304.85 0.38098 0.00811 — 4,316.79
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
18 / 51
Industrial
Park
0.15600 2.83639 2.38257 0.01702 0.21557 —0.21557 0.21557 —0.21557 3,384.29 0.29951 0.00637 —3,393.68
Total 1.51075 26.2532 14.1627 0.16481 2.08759 — 2.08759 2.08759 — 2.08759 32,774.2 2.90050 0.06171 — 32,865.1
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.02205 0.37690 0.16038 0.00241 0.03047 — 0.03047 0.03047 — 0.03047 434.006 0.03841 0.00082 — 435.209
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
0.18122 3.09725 1.31798 0.01977 0.25042 — 0.25042 0.25042 — 0.25042 3,566.53 0.31564 0.00672 — 3,576.42
Strip Mall 0.00775 0.14096 0.11841 0.00085 0.01071 — 0.01071 0.01071 — 0.01071 152.583 0.01350 0.00029 — 153.006
General
Office
Building
0.03621 0.65845 0.55309 0.00395 0.05004 — 0.05004 0.05004 — 0.05004 712.717 0.06308 0.00134 — 714.694
Industrial
Park
0.02847 0.51764 0.43482 0.00311 0.03934 — 0.03934 0.03934 — 0.03934 560.308 0.04959 0.00106 — 561.862
Total 0.27571 4.79120 2.58468 0.03008 0.38098 — 0.38098 0.38098 — 0.38098 5,426.14 0.48021 0.01022 — 5,441.19
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.87194 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 — 2.58668 2.58668 — 2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 — 40,651.7
Consumer
Products
96.8104 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
19 / 51
717.442—0.006010.02992714.9030.14570—0.145700.19261—0.192610.01112232.0952.0801025.2907Landscap
e
Equipmen
Total 123.973 34.0733 245.709 0.21534 2.77929 — 2.77929 2.73238 — 2.73238 41,324.7 0.79459 0.08248 — 41,369.1
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.87194 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 — 2.58668 2.58668 — 2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 — 40,651.7
Consumer
Products
96.8104 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 98.6824 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 — 2.58668 2.58668 — 2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 — 40,651.7
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.05616 0.95980 0.40842 0.00613 0.07760 — 0.07760 0.07760 — 0.07760 1,105.22 0.02081 0.00208 — 1,106.36
Consumer
Products
17.6679 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipmen
t
4.17297 0.34322 38.2957 0.00184 0.03178 — 0.03178 0.02404 — 0.02404 107.011 0.00448 0.00090 — 107.391
Total 21.8970 1.30301 38.7041 0.00796 0.10938 — 0.10938 0.10164 — 0.10164 1,212.23 0.02529 0.00298 — 1,213.75
4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.87194 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 — 2.58668 2.58668 — 2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 — 40,651.7
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
20 / 51
Consumer
Products
96.8104 ——————————————
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 ——————————————
Landscap
e
Equipmen
t
25.2907 2.08010 232.095 0.01112 0.19261 —0.19261 0.14570 —0.14570 714.903 0.02992 0.00601 —717.442
Total 123.973 34.0733 245.709 0.21534 2.77929 —2.77929 2.73238 —2.73238 41,324.7 0.79459 0.08248 —41,369.1
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Hearths 1.87194 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 —2.58668 2.58668 —2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 —40,651.7
Consumer
Products
96.8104 ——————————————
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 ——————————————
Total 98.6824 31.9932 13.6141 0.20421 2.58668 —2.58668 2.58668 —2.58668 40,609.8 0.76467 0.07647 —40,651.7
Annual ———————————————
Hearths 0.05616 0.95980 0.40842 0.00613 0.07760 —0.07760 0.07760 —0.07760 1,105.22 0.02081 0.00208 —1,106.36
Consumer
Products
17.6679 ——————————————
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.00000 ——————————————
Landscap
e
Equipmen
t
4.17297 0.34322 38.2957 0.00184 0.03178 —0.03178 0.02404 —0.02404 107.011 0.00448 0.00090 —107.391
Total 21.8970 1.30301 38.7041 0.00796 0.10938 —0.10938 0.10164 —0.10164 1,212.23 0.02529 0.00298 —1,213.75
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
21 / 51
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 116.671 1.23430 0.03098 — 156.760
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 401.307 16.0018 0.38407 — 915.804
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 176.172 7.02470 0.16860 — 402.033
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 522.116 20.8190 0.49969 — 1,191.50
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 534.058 21.2951 0.51112 — 1,218.75
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1,750.32 66.3749 1.59446 — 3,884.85
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 116.671 1.23430 0.03098 — 156.760
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 401.307 16.0018 0.38407 — 915.804
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 176.172 7.02470 0.16860 — 402.033
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 522.116 20.8190 0.49969 — 1,191.50
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 534.058 21.2951 0.51112 — 1,218.75
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1,750.32 66.3749 1.59446 — 3,884.85
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
22 / 51
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 19.3162 0.20435 0.00513 — 25.9535
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 66.4409 2.64928 0.06359 — 151.622
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 29.1672 1.16302 0.02791 — 66.5612
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 86.4423 3.44682 0.08273 — 197.266
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 88.4194 3.52565 0.08462 — 201.778
Total — — — — — — — — — — 289.786 10.9891 0.26398 — 643.180
4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 113.834 1.12117 0.02826 — 150.286
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 364.106 14.5184 0.34847 — 830.909
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 159.083 6.34331 0.15225 — 363.036
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 470.688 18.7683 0.45047 — 1,074.14
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 481.453 19.1976 0.46077 — 1,098.70
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1,589.16 59.9487 1.44022 — 3,517.07
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
23 / 51
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————113.834 1.12117 0.02826 —150.286
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————364.106 14.5184 0.34847 —830.909
Strip Mall ——————————159.083 6.34331 0.15225 —363.036
General
Office
Building
——————————470.688 18.7683 0.45047 —1,074.14
Industrial
Park
——————————481.453 19.1976 0.46077 —1,098.70
Total ——————————1,589.16 59.9487 1.44022 —3,517.07
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————18.8465 0.18562 0.00468 —24.8815
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————60.2818 2.40369 0.05769 —137.567
Strip Mall ——————————26.3380 1.05021 0.02521 —60.1048
General
Office
Building
——————————77.9277 3.10730 0.07458 —177.835
Industrial
Park
——————————79.7101 3.17837 0.07629 —181.903
Total ——————————263.104 9.92520 0.23845 —582.291
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
24 / 51
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 54.7937 5.47644 0.00000 — 191.705
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 1,071.24 107.066 0.00000 — 3,747.89
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 272.448 27.2302 0.00000 — 953.203
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 298.054 29.7895 0.00000 — 1,042.79
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 312.423 31.2256 0.00000 — 1,093.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 54.7937 5.47644 0.00000 — 191.705
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 1,071.24 107.066 0.00000 — 3,747.89
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 272.448 27.2302 0.00000 — 953.203
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 298.054 29.7895 0.00000 — 1,042.79
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 312.423 31.2256 0.00000 — 1,093.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
25 / 51
Single
Family
Housing
——————————9.07173 0.90669 0.00000 —31.7389
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 177.355 17.7260 0.00000 — 620.506
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 45.1069 4.50827 0.00000 — 157.814
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 49.3463 4.93199 0.00000 — 172.646
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 51.7253 5.16976 0.00000 — 180.969
Total — — — — — — — — — — 332.605 33.2427 0.00000 — 1,163.67
4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 54.7937 5.47644 0.00000 — 191.705
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 1,071.24 107.066 0.00000 — 3,747.89
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — 272.448 27.2302 0.00000 — 953.203
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 298.054 29.7895 0.00000 — 1,042.79
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — 312.423 31.2256 0.00000 — 1,093.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 — 7,028.65
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
26 / 51
———————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
——————————54.7937 5.47644 0.00000 —191.705
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————1,071.24 107.066 0.00000 —3,747.89
Strip Mall ——————————272.448 27.2302 0.00000 —953.203
General
Office
Building
——————————298.054 29.7895 0.00000 —1,042.79
Industrial
Park
——————————312.423 31.2256 0.00000 —1,093.06
Total ——————————2,008.96 200.788 0.00000 —7,028.65
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————9.07173 0.90669 0.00000 —31.7389
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
——————————177.355 17.7260 0.00000 —620.506
Strip Mall ——————————45.1069 4.50827 0.00000 —157.814
General
Office
Building
——————————49.3463 4.93199 0.00000 —172.646
Industrial
Park
——————————51.7253 5.16976 0.00000 —180.969
Total ——————————332.605 33.2427 0.00000 —1,163.67
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
27 / 51
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.86301 2.86301
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.4814 18.4814
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.99861 2.99861
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.44623 1.44623
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 121.693 121.693
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.86301 2.86301
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.4814 18.4814
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.99861 2.99861
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.44623 1.44623
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 121.693 121.693
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
28 / 51
Single
Family
Housing
—————————————0.47400 0.47400
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.05981 3.05981
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.49645 0.49645
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.23944 0.23944
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 20.1476 20.1476
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — 24.4173 24.4173
4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.86301 2.86301
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.4814 18.4814
Strip Mall — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.99861 2.99861
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.44623 1.44623
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — 121.693 121.693
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — 147.482 147.482
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
29 / 51
———————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
—————————————2.86301 2.86301
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
—————————————18.4814 18.4814
Strip Mall —————————————2.99861 2.99861
General
Office
Building
—————————————1.44623 1.44623
Industrial
Park
—————————————121.693 121.693
Total —————————————147.482 147.482
Annual ———————————————
Single
Family
Housing
—————————————0.47400 0.47400
Apartment
s
Mid Rise
—————————————3.05981 3.05981
Strip Mall —————————————0.49645 0.49645
General
Office
Building
—————————————0.23944 0.23944
Industrial
Park
—————————————20.1476 20.1476
Total —————————————24.4173 24.4173
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
30 / 51
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
Total ———————————————
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
Total ———————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
31 / 51
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
Total ———————————————
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
Total ———————————————
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
32 / 51
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
Total ———————————————
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
———————————————
Total ———————————————
Annual ———————————————
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
33 / 51
Total ———————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
34 / 51
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
35 / 51
Subtotal ———————————————
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
36 / 51
Total ———————————————
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
----------------
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
37 / 51
Sequester ———————————————
Subtotal ———————————————
Removed ———————————————
Subtotal ———————————————
————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Total all Land Uses 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 582,755 582,755 582,755 212,705,575
5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Total all Land Uses 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 582,755 582,755 582,755 212,705,575
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)Mitigated (number)
Single Family Housing Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing Gas Fireplaces 205 205
Single Family Housing Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing No Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
38 / 51
Single Family Housing Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Single Family Housing Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Single Family Housing Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Gas Fireplaces 2,688 2,688
Apartments Mid Rise Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise No Fireplaces 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Apartments Mid Rise Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Strip Mall Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Strip Mall Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Strip Mall Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Strip Mall Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Strip Mall No Fireplaces 0 0
Strip Mall Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Strip Mall Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Strip Mall Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Strip Mall Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Wood Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Gas Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Propane Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Electric Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building No Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
39 / 51
General Office Building Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park No Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
6,034,966 2,011,655 2,315,432 771,811 —
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00000
Summer Days day/yr 330.000
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00000
Summer Days day/yr 330.000
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
40 / 51
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Single Family Housing 1,242,987 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 8,179,524
Apartments Mid Rise 7,977,704 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 67,216,897
Strip Mall 3,985,087 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 2,875,665
General Office Building 12,411,497 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 13,432,288
Industrial Park 9,757,388 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 10,559,891
5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Single Family Housing 1,242,987 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 8,179,524
Apartments Mid Rise 7,977,704 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 67,216,897
Strip Mall 3,985,087 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 2,875,665
General Office Building 12,411,497 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 13,432,288
Industrial Park 9,757,388 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 10,559,891
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Single Family Housing 6,195,510 39,808,014
Apartments Mid Rise 81,236,736 0.00000
Strip Mall 35,662,512 0.00000
General Office Building 105,692,217 0.00000
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
41 / 51
Industrial Park 108,109,606 0.00000
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Single Family Housing 5,621,186 39,808,014
Apartments Mid Rise 73,706,091 0.00000
Strip Mall 32,203,248 0.00000
General Office Building 95,281,534 0.00000
Industrial Park 97,460,810 0.00000
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 101.670 0.00000
Apartments Mid Rise 1,987.68 0.00000
Strip Mall 505.527 0.00000
General Office Building 553.039 0.00000
Industrial Park 579.701 0.00000
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 101.670 0.00000
Apartments Mid Rise 1,987.68 0.00000
Strip Mall 505.527 0.00000
General Office Building 553.039 0.00000
Industrial Park 579.701 0.00000
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
42 / 51
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Single Family Housing Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.03750 1.000000 0.00000 1.000000
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freezers
R-404A 3,922.00 0.00040 7.50000 7.50000 20.0000
General Office
Building
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.01679 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
General Office
Building
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
Industrial Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.30000 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
43 / 51
10.000002.500002.500000.002252,088.00R-410ASingle Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
Single Family Housing Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.03750 1.000000 0.00000 1.000000
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freezers
R-404A 3,922.00 0.00040 7.50000 7.50000 20.0000
General Office
Building
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.01679 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
General Office
Building
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
Industrial Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.30000 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
44 / 51
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
45 / 51
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 21.2000 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 9.85000 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 34.1100 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
46 / 51
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
47 / 51
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 32.1469
AQ-PM 2.93715
AQ-DPM 12.6696
Drinking Water 31.2851
Lead Risk Housing 44.5117
Pesticides 45.0000
Toxic Releases 12.4531
Traffic 30.6125
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00000
Groundwater 0.00000
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 50.1390
Impaired Water Bodies 51.2180
Solid Waste 75.6701
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 39.7183
Cardio-vascular 16.4756
Low Birth Weights 15.8712
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 30.4100
Housing 30.2028
Linguistic 29.5304
Poverty 48.9196
Unemployment 28.2015
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
48 / 51
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 50.94315411
Employed 57.44899269
Median HI 43.46208136
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 34.96727833
High school enrollment 5.787244963
Preschool enrollment 60.90080842
Transportation —
Auto Access 47.37585012
Active commuting 46.70858463
Social —
2-parent households 13.1271654
Voting 69.79340434
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 65.10971385
Park access 9.033748236
Retail density 39.11202361
Supermarket access 35.78852817
Tree canopy 90.65828307
Housing —
Homeownership 38.44475812
Housing habitability 68.77967407
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 57.70563326
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 71.42307199
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
49 / 51
Uncrowded housing 65.16104196
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 62.95393302
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 58.7
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin)0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 17.9
Cognitively Disabled 32.0
Physically Disabled 55.6
Heart Attack ER Admissions 71.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 52.2
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 8.3
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
50 / 51
Children 22.0
Elderly 63.3
English Speaking 87.4
Foreign-born 2.3
Outdoor Workers 24.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 90.1
Traffic Density 24.3
Traffic Access 0.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 44.5
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.0
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)15.0000
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)45.0000
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 - Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
51 / 51
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Operations: Hearths Excludes wood-burning fireplaces. To be conservative, assumes all new residential units would
include gas-fired fireplaces. Assumes an average of 2 hrs/day, 60 days/yr based on model
defaults.
8.5. Operations
8.5.2. Area Sources
8.5.2.1. Hearths
Land Use Model Parameter Default Value New Value
Single Family Housing Gas Fireplaces 0 205
Single Family Housing No Fireplaces 205 0
Single Family Housing Hours/Day 0 2
Single Family Housing Days/Year 0 60
Apartments Mid Rise Gas Fireplaces 0 2,688
Apartments Mid Rise No Fireplaces 2,688 0
Apartments Mid Rise Hours/Day 0 2
Apartments Mid Rise Days/Year 0 60
Calendar Year EMFAC2021 Vehicle Category Fuel Type Exhaust CO2 Exhaust CH4 Exhaust N2O
2045 All Other Buses DSL 1 1 1
2045 All Other Buses NG 1 1 1
2045 All Other Buses ELEC 0 0 0
2045 LDA GAS 1 1 1
2045 LDA DSL 1 1 1
2045 LDA ELEC 1 1 1
2045 LDA PHE 1 1 1
2045 LDT1 GAS 1 1 1
2045 LDT1 DSL 1 1 1
2045 LDT1 ELEC 1 1 1
2045 LDT1 PHE 1 1 1
2045 LDT2 GAS 1 1 1
2045 LDT2 DSL 1 1 1
2045 LDT2 ELEC 1 1 1
2045 LDT2 PHE 1 1 1
2045 LHD1 GAS 1.625233765 1.566391721 1.612440372
2045 LHD1 DSL 1.586890542 1.606223669 1.586890542
2045 LHD1 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 LHD2 GAS 1.594353597 1.519354002 1.573976909
2045 LHD2 DSL 1.556295501 1.541099403 1.556295501
2045 LHD2 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 MCY GAS 1 1 1
2045 MDV GAS 1 1 1
2045 MDV DSL 1 1 1
2045 MDV ELEC 1 1 1
2045 MDV PHE 1 1 1
2045 MH GAS 1 1 1
2045 MH DSL 1 1 1
2045 MH ELEC 0 0 0
2045 Motor Coach DSL 1 1 1
2045 Motor Coach ELEC 0 0 0
2045 OBUS GAS 1.908523492 1.535626665 2.543996189
2045 OBUS ELEC 0 0 0
2045 PTO DSL 1.803485583 1.786556153 1.803485583
2045 PTO ELEC 0 0 0
2045 SBUS GAS 1.333174415 1.436540079 1.52836209
2045 SBUS DSL 1.583661815 1.534945941 1.583661815
2045 SBUS NG 1.537550324 1.625388497 1.537550324
2045 SBUS ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 4 DSL 2.260146672 2.342620402 2.260146672
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 4 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 5 DSL 2.256103779 2.336573798 2.256103779
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 6 DSL 2.267324628 2.351788051 2.267324628
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 7 DSL 1.260104459 1.298702965 1.260104459
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 7 NG 1.206948773 1.316145571 1.206948773
2045 T6 CAIRP Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 DSL 1.928272398 1.982620091 1.928272398
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 NG 1.876732831 2.080599564 1.876732831
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 DSL 1.927081738 1.981968488 1.927081738
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 NG 1.891400552 2.097049707 1.891400552
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 DSL 1.930831639 1.985426629 1.930831639
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 NG 1.893725174 2.099698829 1.893725174
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 DSL 1.499589013 1.476006978 1.499589013
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 NG 1.401444907 1.526829508 1.401444907
2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 4 DSL 1.986592759 2.02130179 1.986592759
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 4 NG 1.909961541 2.108734188 1.909961541
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 4 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 5 DSL 1.987989581 2.02102998 1.987989581
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 5 NG 1.918461452 2.116924594 1.918461452
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 6 DSL 1.986969621 2.020625577 1.986969621
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 6 NG 1.91065848 2.108010116 1.91065848
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 7 DSL 1.620248979 1.528126657 1.620248979
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 7 NG 1.51109084 1.614799674 1.51109084
2045 T6 Instate Other Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 DSL 2.0384636 2.050485047 2.0384636
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 NG 1.962738637 2.159181999 1.962738637
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 DSL 1.176736256 1.180771669 1.176736256
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 NG 1.138259876 1.2151928 1.138259876
2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 OOS Class 4 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T6 OOS Class 4 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 OOS Class 5 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T6 OOS Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 OOS Class 6 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T6 OOS Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 OOS Class 7 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T6 OOS Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Public Class 4 DSL 1.705462353 1.522944343 1.705462353
2045 T6 Public Class 4 NG 1.660789344 1.808261815 1.660789344
2045 T6 Public Class 4 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Public Class 5 DSL 1.703186046 1.546634975 1.703186046
2045 T6 Public Class 5 NG 1.625287755 1.7561386 1.625287755
2045 T6 Public Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Public Class 6 DSL 1.704442022 1.585678166 1.704442022
2045 T6 Public Class 6 NG 1.636916979 1.781260372 1.636916979
2045 T6 Public Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Public Class 7 DSL 1.575874108 1.483825001 1.575874108
2045 T6 Public Class 7 NG 1.50053842 1.637967823 1.50053842
2045 T6 Public Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Utility Class 5 DSL 2.261598693 2.366768041 2.261598693
2045 T6 Utility Class 5 NG 2.150256725 2.402390224 2.150256725
2045 T6 Utility Class 5 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Utility Class 6 DSL 2.260663191 2.365503668 2.260663191
2045 T6 Utility Class 6 NG 2.149528695 2.401491252 2.149528695
2045 T6 Utility Class 6 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6 Utility Class 7 DSL 2.294687728 2.389912934 2.294687728
2045 T6 Utility Class 7 NG 2.181976653 2.433821293 2.181976653
2045 T6 Utility Class 7 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T6TS GAS 1.948665831 1.812150386 2.646232773
2045 T6TS ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 CAIRP Class 8 DSL 1.23266703 1.276945037 1.23266703
2045 T7 CAIRP Class 8 NG 1.168325027 1.285576147 1.168325027
2045 T7 CAIRP Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 NNOOS Class 8 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T7 NNOOS Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 NOOS Class 8 DSL 1 1 1
2045 T7 NOOS Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Other Port Class 8 DSL 1.204990253 1.234317082 1.204990253
2045 T7 Other Port Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 POAK Class 8 DSL 1.186097079 1.22780555 1.186097079
2045 T7 POAK Class 8 NG 1.114049348 1.229386418 1.114049348
2045 T7 POAK Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 POLA Class 8 DSL 1.138385562 1.172797263 1.138385562
2045 T7 POLA Class 8 NG 1.076405653 1.182094195 1.076405653
2045 T7 POLA Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Public Class 8 DSL 1.502391447 1.391370266 1.502391447
2045 T7 Public Class 8 NG 1.556514394 1.714004358 1.556514394
2045 T7 Public Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 DSL 2.160092575 2.214678366 2.160092575
2045 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 NG 2.026275116 2.275349847 2.026275116
2045 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Single Dump Class 8 DSL 1.704055109 1.644961143 1.704055109
2045 T7 Single Dump Class 8 NG 1.605675448 1.752536314 1.605675448
2045 T7 Single Dump Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Single Other Class 8 DSL 1.789275157 1.741557433 1.789275157
2045 T7 Single Other Class 8 NG 1.696931821 1.856843867 1.696931821
2045 T7 Single Other Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 SWCV Class 8 DSL 1.26695296 1.361450416 1.26695296
2045 T7 SWCV Class 8 NG 1.507835231 1.105684997 1.507835231
2045 T7 SWCV Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Tractor Class 8 DSL 1.153835943 1.17706537 1.153835943
2045 T7 Tractor Class 8 NG 1.086951942 1.181896804 1.086951942
2045 T7 Tractor Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7 Utility Class 8 DSL 1.629301501 1.647109549 1.629301501
2045 T7 Utility Class 8 ELEC 0 0 0
2045 T7IS GAS 1.897138164 1.926772857 2.699580817
2045 T7IS ELEC 0 0 0
2045 UBUS ELEC 1 1 1
2045 UBUS NG 0.90399137 1 0.90399137
2045 UBUS GAS 0.904166491 1 1
2045 UBUS DSL 0.90399137 1 0.90399137
2045 UBUS ELEC 0 0 0
HIGHEST VALUE ALL VEHICLE CATEGORIES:2.294687728 2.433821293 2.699580817
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX D
Energy Impact Analysis
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
E NERGY I MPACT
A NALYSIS
F OR
C ITY OF A TASCADERO
2045 G ENERAL P LAN
U PDATE
FEBRUARY 2026
PREPARED BY:
75 HIGUERA STREET, SUITE 105
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
AIR QUALllY & NOISE CONSULJING
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Proposed City of Atascadero General Plan Update ....................................................................................................... 1
Energy Fundamentals .................................................................................................................................................... 1
Existing Setting .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Physical Setting ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Energy Resources ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
Electricity .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Natural Gas ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
Petroleum ............................................................................................................................................................. 3
Regulatory Framework .............................................................................................................................................. 3
Federal .................................................................................................................................................................. 3
State ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Environmental Impacts .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Significance Threshold Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 9
Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
Construction ....................................................................................................................................................... 10
Operations .......................................................................................................................................................... 10
Relevant Proposed 2045 GPU Goals and Policies ................................................................................................... 10
Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................................... 12
References ................................................................................................................................................................... 15
List of Tables
Table 1. Operational Fuel Consumption ...................................................................................................................... 12
Table 2. Operational Electricity & Natural Gas Consumption ..................................................................................... 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. PG&E 2021 Power Mix .................................................................................................................................... 2
Appendices
Appendix A: Energy Modeling
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
ii
LIST OF COMMON TERMS & ACRONYMS
AFV Alternative Fuel Vehicles
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
ARB California Air Resource Board
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
EMFAC Emissions Factor
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPACT Energy Policy Act
GHG
GPU
kBTU
Greenhouse Gas
General Plan Update
Kilo British Thermal Units
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt Hour
MMBTU Million Metric British Thermal Units
MW Megawatt
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric
PV Photovoltaic
RTP Regional Transpotation Plan
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SLOCOG San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company
VMT Vehicle Mile Traveled
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
1
INTRODUCTION
This report provides an overview of existing energy providers and usage within the City of Atascadero and
surrounding regions; a summary of the applicable regulatory framework and an analysis of energy impacts
associated with implementation of the City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update (2045 GPU). The
findings of this analysis are intended to help inform the development of goals and policies in the City’s
2045 GPU.
PROPOSED CITY OF ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
The 2045 GPU is a long-range policy document that provides context and establishes guidance for
decision-making, design and development of new projects, conservation of natural resources, promotion
of economic development, improvements to mobility and infrastructure systems, expansion of public
services, and enhancement of community amenities. The 2045 GPU identifies year 2045 as a horizon year;
however, the City recognizes that not all initiatives and goals in the 2045 GPU may be achieved by 2045.
ENERGY FUNDAMENTALS
Energy use is typically associated with transportation, construction, and the operation of land uses.
Transportation energy use is generally categorized as direct and indirect energy. Direct energy relates to
energy consumption by vehicle propulsion. Indirect energy relates to the long-term energy consumption
of equipment, such as maintenance activities. Energy is also consumed by construction, routine operation
and, maintenance of land use. Construction energy relates to a direct one-time energy expenditure
primarily associated with the consumption of fuel to operate construction equipment. Energy
consumption related to land use is normally associated with direct energy consumption for heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning of buildings.
EXISTING SETTING
Physical Setting
The City of Atascadero is located within San Luis Obispo County. Energy use, including the consumption
of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum-based fuels, can directly impact local and regional air quality and
generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that contribute to climate change. The City is served primarily
by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) for electrical service and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) for
natural gas service.
Energy Resources
Electricity
State of California
In 2024, total system electric generation (TSEG) for California was 278,338 gigawatt-hours (GWh), down
1 percent (2,802 GWh) from 2023. TSEG is the sum of all utility-scale in-state generation plus net electricity
imports from power plants with a nameplate capacity of at least one megawatt (MW). Clean energy
resources accounted for 62 percent of California’s power mix, a 4 percent increase from 58 percent in
2023. In-state generation was 216,181 GWh in 2024, virtually unchanged from the 2023 value of 216,047
GWh. Imported energy decreased to 62,157 GWh, down 5 percent (3,361 GWh) from 2023 (CEC 2026a).
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
2
City of Atascadero
Electric services within the City of Atascadero are provided through a partnership between PG&E and
Central Coast Community Energy (3CE). 3CE is committed to providing energy from 100-percent
renewable sources. Participation in the 3CE program is voluntary and PG&E continues to provide electrical
service and maintains electrical infrastructure (3CE 2026).
In 2024, PG&E supplied 98% greenhouse gas-free electricity to residential and business customers to
whom we directly sell power, including from renewables, nuclear and large hydroelectric power. The
power mix delivered to PG&E's bundled-service customers in 2024 included the following greenhouse gas-
free technologies. The breakdown of PG&E’s power mix is shown in Figure 1 (PG&E 2026):
• Eligible renewable resources, such as wind, geothermal, biomass, solar and small hydro (23%)
• Non-emitting nuclear generation (63%)
• Large hydroelectric facilities (12%)
• Natural gas fueled facilities (2%)
Electricity usage rates for the City of Atascadero are not currently available. However, in 2024, San Luis
Obispo County consumed a total of 1,681.4 GWh of electricity (CEC 2026e).
Figure 1. PG&E 2021 Power Mix
Source: PG&E 2026
Natural Gas
California
Natural gas continues to play an important and varied role in California. Nearly 45 percent of the natural
gas burned in California was used for electricity generation, and much of the remainder consumed in the
residential (21 percent), industrial (25 percent), and commercial (9 percent) sectors. California continues
to depend upon out-of-state imports for nearly 90 percent of its natural gas supply, underscoring the
importance of monitoring and evaluating ongoing market trends and outlook. Natural gas has become an
increasingly important source of energy since the state's power plants rely on this fuel (CEC 2026b).
City of Atascadero
Natural gas services in the City of Atascadero are provided by Southern California Gas Company
(SoCalGas). SoCalGas’s natural gas system encompasses approximately 20,000 square miles in Southern
23% • Renewablet
12% • Large Hydroelectrict
63% • Nucleart
2% • Natural Gas
t These resources are greenhouse
gas-free and/or renewable.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
3
California. Natural gas throughput provided by SoCalGas totals approximately 2.8 billion cubic feet per
day (SoCalGas 2026).
Natural gas usage rates for the City of Atascadero are not currently available. However, in 2024, San Luis
Obispo County consumed a total of 84.2 millions of therms of natural gas (CEC 2026f).
Petroleum Fuels
Gasoline
Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California, with ninety seven percent of all gasoline being
consumed by light-duty cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles. In 2024, 11.681 billion gallons of
gasoline were sold.
Existing and historical gasoline consumption rates for the City of Atascadero are not available. However,
in 2024, the County of San Luis Obispo consumed an estimated 118 million gallons of gasoline (CEC
2026d).
Diesel
Diesel is the second largest transportation fuel used in California, representing 17 percent of total fuel
sales behind gasoline. In 2024, 2.968 billion gallons of diesel were sold (CEC 2026c).
Existing and historical diesel consumption rates for the City of Atascadero are not available. However,
in 2024, the County of San Luis Obispo consumed an estimated 21 million gallons of diesel (CEC 2026d).
Regulatory Framework
Federal
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 sought to ensure that all vehicles sold in the United States
would meet certain fuel economy goals. Through this Act, Congress established the first fuel economy
standards for on-road motor vehicles in the U.S. Pursuant to the Act, the NHSTA, which is part of the U.S.
DOT, is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and for revising existing standards. Since
1990, the fuel economy standard for new passenger cars has been 27.5 mpg. Since 1996, the fuel economy
standard for new light trucks (gross vehicle weight of 8,500 pounds or less) has been 20.7 miles per gallon
(mpg). Heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles and trucks over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight) are not
currently subject to fuel economy standards. Compliance with federal fuel economy standards is
determined based on each manufacturer’s average fuel economy for the portion of its vehicles produced
for sale in the U.S. The CAFE program, administered by U.S. EPA, was created to determine vehicle
manufacturers’ compliance with the fuel economy standards. U.S. EPA calculates a CAFE value for each
manufacturer based on city and highway fuel economy test results and vehicle sales. Based on the
information generated under the CAFE program, the U.S. DOT is authorized to assess penalties for
noncompliance.
Energy Policy Act of 1992
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) was passed to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign
petroleum and improve air quality. EPAct includes several parts intended to build an inventory of
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
4
alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in large, centrally fueled fleets in metropolitan areas. EPAct requires
certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase a percentage of light-duty AFVs
capable of running on alternative fuels each year. In addition, financial incentives are included in EPAct.
Federal tax deductions will be allowed for businesses and individuals to cover the incremental cost of
AFVs. States are also required by the act to consider a variety of incentive programs to help promote AFVs.
Energy Policy Act of 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was signed into law on August 8, 2005. Generally, the Act provides for
renewed and expanded tax credits for electricity generated by qualified energy sources, such as landfill
gas; provides bond financing, tax incentives, grants, and loan guarantees for clean renewable energy and
rural community electrification; and establishes a federal purchase requirement for renewable energy.
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is intended to improve vehicle fuel economy and help
reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
also set energy efficiency standards for lighting and appliances.
State
Warren-Alquist Act
The 1975 Warren-Alquist Act established the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Commission, now known as the California Energy Commission (CEC). The Act established a state policy to
reduce wasteful, uneconomical, and unnecessary uses of energy by employing a range of measures. The
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) regulates privately-owned utilities in the energy, rail,
telecommunications, and water fields.
Assembly Bill 32: Climate Change Scoping Plan and Update
In 2006, the Legislature passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 [Assembly Bill 32 (AB
32)], which created a comprehensive, multi-year program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in
California. In October 2008, ARB published its first Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008 Scoping Plan). The
2008 Scoping Plan contained the main strategies to be implemented to achieve the year 2020 target
emission levels identified in AB 32. The 2008 Scoping Plan included ARB-recommended GHG reductions
for each emissions sector of the state’s GHG inventory. The largest proposed GHG reduction
recommendations were associated with improving emissions standards for light-duty vehicles,
implementing the Low Carbon Fuel Standard program, implementation of energy efficiency measures in
buildings and appliances, the widespread development of combined heat and power systems, and
developing a renewable portfolio standard for electricity production (ARB 2008).
The ARB’s Scoping Plan is updated every five years. The First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
was approved by the ARB on May 22, 2014, which looked past the year 2020 targets to set mid-term goals
(2030-2035) on the road to reaching the 2050 goals (ARB 2013). The 2017 Scoping Plan identified how the
State established a path to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2030, and
substantially advance toward the 2050 climate goal of reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990
levels (ARB 2017). The most recent Scoping Plan update is the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon
Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan). The 2022 Scoping Plan lays out a path to achieve targets for carbon
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
5
neutrality and reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels no later
than 2045, as directed by Assembly Bill 1279 (ARB 2026).
Assembly Bill 1007: State Alternative Fuels Plan
AB 1007 (Chapter 371, Statues of 2005) required CEC to prepare a state plan to increase the use of
alternative fuels in California. CEC prepared the State Alternative Fuels (SAF) Plan in partnership with ARB
and consultation with other state, federal, and local agencies. The SAF Plan presents strategies and actions
California must take to increase the use of alternative non-petroleum fuels in a manner that minimizes
the costs to California and maximizes the economic benefits of in-state production. The SAF Plan assessed
various alternative fuels and developed fuel portfolios to meet California’s goals to reduce petroleum
consumption, increase alternative fuel use, reduce GHG emissions, and increase in-state production of
biofuels without causing significant degradation of public health and environmental quality.
Assembly Bill 2076: Reducing Dependence on Petroleum
Pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 2076 (Chapter 936, Statutes of 2000), the CEC and the ARB prepared and
adopted a joint agency report in 2003, Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence. Included in this
report are recommendations to increase the use of alternative fuels to 20 percent of on-road
transportation fuel use by 2020 and 30 percent by 2030, significantly increase the efficiency of motor
vehicles, and reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (ARB 2003). Further, a performance-based
goal of AB 2076 was to reduce petroleum demand to 15 percent below 2003 demand by 2020.
Senate Bill SB 100
SB 100 The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018, which sets a state policy that eligible renewable energy
and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent (%) of all retail sales of electricity in California by 2045.
Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Prevention Reduction Act of 2015
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350) requires the amount of electricity
generated and sold to retail customers per year from eligible renewable energy resources to be increased
to 50 percent by December 31, 2030. This act also requires a doubling of the energy efficiency savings in
electricity and natural gas for retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation by December
31, 2030.
Senate Bill 375
SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy
(SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that will address land use allocation in that MPOs regional
transportation plan (RTP). ARB, in consultation with MPOs, establishes regional reduction targets for GHGs
emitted by passenger cars and light trucks for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be
updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies
affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. ARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s SCS
or APS for consistency with its assigned targets. If MPOs do not meet the GHG reduction targets, funding
for transportation projects may be withheld.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
6
Senate Bill 1078: California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program
Senate Bill (SB) 1078 (Public Utilities Code Sections 387, 390.1, 399.25, and Article 16) addresses electricity
supply and requires that retail sellers of electricity, including investor-owned utilities and community
choice aggregators, provide a minimum of 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017.
This SB will affect statewide GHG emissions associated with electricity generation. In 2008, Governor
Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order (EO) S-14-08, which set the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS)
target to 33 percent by 2020. It directed state government agencies and retail sellers of electricity to take
all appropriate actions to implement this target. EO S-14-08 was later superseded by EO S-21-09 on
September 15, 2009. EO S-21-09 directed the ARB to adopt regulations requiring 33 percent of electricity
sold in the State to come from renewable energy by 2020. Statute SB X1-2 superseded this EO in 2011,
which obligated all California electricity providers, including investor-owned utilities and publicly owned
utilities, to obtain at least 33 percent of their energy from renewable electrical generation facilities by
2020.
Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197 of 2016
SB 32 was signed by Governor Brown on September 8, 2016. SB 32 effectively extends California’s GHG
emission-reduction goals from the year 2020 to the year 2030. This new emission-reduction target of 40
percent below 1990 levels by 2030 is intended to promote further GHG reductions in support of the State’s
ultimate goal of reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. SB 32 also directs the
ARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to address this interim 2030 emission-reduction target.
Achievement of these goals will have the co-benefit of increasing energy efficiency and reducing
California’s dependency on fossil fuels.
Executive Order S-06-06
EO S-06-06, signed on April 25, 2006, establishes targets for the use and production of biofuels and
biopower and directs state agencies to work together to advance biomass programs in California while
providing environmental protection and mitigation. The EO establishes the following target to increase
the production and use of bioenergy, including ethanol and biodiesel fuels made from renewable
resources: produce a minimum of 20 percent of its biofuels within California by 2010, 40 percent by 2020,
and 75 percent by 2050. The EO also calls for the State to meet a target for use of biomass electricity. The
Bioenergy Action Plans developed by the CEC to identify those barriers and recommend actions to address
them so that the State can meet its clean energy, waste reduction, and climate protection goals. The 2012
Bioenergy Action Plan provides a detailed action plan to achieve the following goals:
• increase environmentally- and economically-sustainable energy production from organic waste;
• encourage the development of diverse bioenergy technologies that increase local electricity
generation, combined heat and power facilities, renewable natural gas, and renewable liquid fuels
for transportation and fuel cell applications;
• create jobs and stimulate economic development, especially in rural regions of the state; and
• reduce fire danger, improve air, and water quality, and reduce waste.
In 2019, 2.87 percent of the total electrical system power in California was derived from biomass (CEC
2020).
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
7
Executive Order B-48-18: Zero-Emission Vehicles
In January 2018, Governor Brown signed EO B-48-18 which required all State entities to work with the
private sector to put at least 5 million zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2030, as well as install 200
hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 zero-emissions chargers by 2025. In addition, State entities are also
required to continue to partner with local and regional governments to streamline the installation of zero-
emission vehicle infrastructure. Additionally, all State entities are to support and recommend policies and
actions to expand infrastructure in homes, through the Low-Carbon Fuel Standard.
Executive Order B-55-18
Establishes a new statewide goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045,
and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.
Energy Action Plan
The first Energy Action Plan (EAP) emerged in 2003 from a crisis atmosphere in California’s energy
markets. The State’s three major energy policy agencies (CEC, CPUC, and the Consumer Power and
Conservation Financing Authority [established under deregulation and now defunct]) came together to
develop one high-level, coherent approach to meeting California’s electricity and natural gas needs. It was
the first time that energy policy agencies formally collaborated to define a common vision and set of
strategies to address California’s future energy needs and emphasize the importance of the impacts of
energy policy on the California environment.
In the October 2005 EAP II, CEC and CPUC updated their energy policy vision by adding some important
dimensions to the policy areas included in the original EAP, such as the emerging importance of climate
change, transportation-related energy issues, and research and development activities. The CEC adopted
an update to the EAP II in February 2008 that supplements the earlier EAPs and examines the State’s
ongoing actions in the context of global climate change.
California Building Code
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties,
performance, or types of materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or
rehabilitation of a building or other improvements to real property. The CBC is adopted every three years
by the State’s Building Standards Commission (BSC). In the interim, the BSC also adopts annual updates
to make necessary mid-term corrections. The CBC standards apply statewide; however, a local jurisdiction
may amend a CBC standard if it makes a finding that the amendment is reasonably necessary due to local
climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
Green Building Standards
In essence, green building standards are indistinguishable from any other building standards, are
contained in the CBC, and regulate the construction of new buildings and improvements. Whereas the
focus of traditional building standards has been protecting public health and safety, the focus of green
building standards is to improve environmental performance.
The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2019 Standards), adopted in May 2018, addressed four
key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat
transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
8
requirements, and non-residential lighting requirements. The 2019 Standards required new residential
and non-residential construction; as well as major alterations to existing structures, to include electric
vehicle (EV)-capable parking spaces which have electrical panel capacity and conduit to accommodate the
future installation. In addition, the 2019 Standards also required the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV)
systems for low-rise residential dwellings, defined as single-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings up
to three stories in height. These requirements are based on various factors, including the floor area of the
home, sun exposure, and climate zone. Under the 2019 standards, nonresidential buildings will use about
30 percent less energy due mainly to lighting upgrades (CEC 2019).
The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2022 Standards), which were approved in December 2021,
encourage efficient electric heat pumps, establish electric-ready requirements when natural gas is
installed, support the future installation of battery storage, further expand solar photovoltaic and battery
storage standards. The 2022 Standards extend solar PV system requirements, as well as battery storage
capabilities for select land uses, including high-rise multi-family and non-residential land uses, such as
office buildings, schools, restaurants, warehouses, theaters, grocery stores, and more. Depending on the
land use and other factors, solar systems should be sized to meet targets of up to 60 percent of the
structure’s loads. These solar requirements became effective on January 1, 2023, and contribute to
California’s goal of reaching a net-zero carbon footprint by 2045 (CEC 2022).
The most current standards are the 2025 Standards, which became effective January 1, 2026. The 2025
Standards build upon the previous standards by expanding the use of heat pumps in newly constructed
residential buildings, encouraging electric-readiness, strengthens ventilation standards, and more (CEC
2026g).
Advanced Clean Cars Program
In January 2012, ARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars program which combines the control of GHG
emissions and criteria air pollutants, as well as requirements for greater numbers of zero-emission
vehicles, into a single package of standards for vehicle model years 2017 through 2025. The new rules
strengthen the GHG standard for 2017 models and beyond. This will be achieved through existing
technologies, the use of stronger and lighter materials, and more efficient drivetrains and engines. The
program’s zero-emission vehicle regulation requires a battery, fuel cell, and/or plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles to account for up to 15 percent of California’s new vehicle sales by 2025. The program also
includes a clean fuels outlet regulation designed to support the commercialization of zero-emission
hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned by vehicle manufacturers by 2015 by requiring increased numbers of
hydrogen fueling stations throughout the state. The number of stations will grow as vehicle manufacturers
sell more fuel cell vehicles. By 2025, when the rules will be fully implemented, the statewide fleet of new
cars and light trucks will emit 34 percent fewer global warming gases and 75 percent fewer smog-forming
emissions than the statewide fleet in 2016 (ARB 2016).
Advanced Clean Cars II
In August 2022, ARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars II program. The rule establishes a year-by-year
roadmap so that by 2035 100% of new cars and light trucks sold in California will be zero-emission vehicles,
including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Beginning in model year 2026 automakers sales of new vehicles
will be required to be made up of 35% ZEVs and PHEVs. The regulation applies to automakers and covers
only new vehicle sales. It does not impact existing vehicles on the road today, which will still be legal to
own and drive (ARB 2022).
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
9
Small Off-Road Engines
In December 2021, ARB approved the Small Off-Road Engines regulation. This will require most newly
manufactured small off-road engines such as those found in leaf blowers, lawn mowers and other
equipment be zero emission starting in 2024. Portable generators, including those in recreational vehicles,
would be required to meet more stringent standards in 2024 and meet zero-emission standards starting
in 2028. Despite their small size, these engines are highly polluting. The volume of smog-forming emissions
from this type of equipment has surpassed emissions from light-duty passenger cars and is projected to
be nearly twice those of passenger cars by 2031. Older equipment can continue to be used and resold as
this rule only impacts new equipment (ARB 2021).
San Luis Obispo County Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOGs) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and
Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) provides a comprehensive assessment of various forms of
transportation available within San Luis Obispo County (County), as well as, projected travel and goods
movement needs through future years. The most current version of the RTP is the 2023 RTP/SCS. The
RTP/SCS provides a collective vision for the region's future, while balancing transportation and housing
needs with social, economic, and environmental goals. The RTP/SCS helps guide future planning efforts
and policy decisions that affect transportation, including its relationship with housing and land use that
will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the County and local jurisdictions. The 2023 RTP/SCS also provides
recommendations for the County and local jurisdictions in making decisions about transportation,
housing, and land-use. The RTP/SCS is updated every four years (SLOCOG 2026).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Significance Threshold Criteria
According to Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a project would
normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project would:
1. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.
2. Conflict or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
The CEQA Guidelines, Appendix F, require environmental analyses to include a discussion of potential
energy impacts associated with a proposed project. Where necessary, CEQA requires that mitigation
measures be incorporated to reduce the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. The
State CEQA Guidelines, however, do not establish criteria that define inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary
consumption. Compliance with the State’s building standards for energy efficiency would result in
decreased energy consumption for proposed buildings. However, compliance with building codes may not
adequately address all potential energy impacts associated with a project. As a result, this analysis
includes an evaluation of electricity and natural gas usage requirements associated with future
development, as well as fuel usage associated with the operation of on-road and off-road vehicles. The
degree to which the proposed project would comply with existing energy standards, as well as applicable
regulatory requirements and policies related to energy conservation, was also taken into consideration
for the evaluation of project-related energy impacts.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
10
Methodology
Energy consumption is categorized in terms of “operational” and “construction” energy. Operational
energy accounts for energy consumed by mobile sources and land use scenarios envisioned under the
2045 GPU, such as fuel consumed by vehicles, natural gas consumed for heating and/or power, and
electricity consumed for power. Construction energy is the energy needed for construction and
maintenance of the transportation system and land use scenario facilitated by the 2045 GPU. The analysis
of operational energy involves the quantification of anticipated net increases of transportation fuel,
natural gas, and electricity consumption under the 2045 GPU and a qualitative discussion of the efficiency,
necessity, and wastefulness of the energy consumption. The analysis of construction energy involves a
qualitative discussion of construction and maintenance energy requirements anticipated under buildout
of the 2045 GPU.
Construction-Related Energy Consumption
Development facilitated by the 2045 GPU would involve the use of energy during construction and
operation. Energy use during construction would be primarily in the form of fuel consumption to operate
heavy equipment, light-duty vehicles, machinery, and generators for lighting. Much of this information
for specific future development projects is unknown at this time. As a result, construction-related impacts
were qualitatively discussed.
Operational Energy Consumption
The long-term operation of the proposed 2045 GPU would require electricity usage for lighting, space and
water heating, appliances, water conveyance, and landscaping maintenance equipment. Indirect energy
use would include wastewater treatment and solid waste removal.
Projections for the 2045 GPU transportation fuel were calculated based on the VMT Impact Assessment
conducted by Central Coast Transportation Consultants (CCTC 2025) and ARB’s Emission Factors 2025
(EMFAC2025) database. Fuel usage rates for gasoline and diesel fuels were quantified based on County-
wide fleet average VMT and fuel usage rates derived from EMFAC2025. For comparison purposes, fuel
usage rates were converted to million metric British thermal units (MMBTU) per service population.
Service population was calculated based on the total population and employee estimates for the County
and net increases attributable to the 2045 GPU. Net increases of natural gas and electricity consumption
under buildout of the land use scenario envisioned by the 2045 GPU were calculated based on
consumption rates derived from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version
2022.1.1.37. Existing and historical fuel consumption rates for the City of Atascadero are not available.
For comparison purposes, electricity and natural gas usage rates for the County and net increases
attributable to the 2045 GPU, were calculated based on usage per service population, which is defined as
the total population plus employees. Modeling assumptions are included in Appendix A.
Relevant Proposed 2045 GPU Goals and Policies
The 2045 GPU includes numerous goals and policies related to energy use. Some of the more relevant
goals and policies include the following:
Goal PSI-6: Increased development and use of clean, renewable energy systems.
Policy PSI-6.1: Onsite Renewable Energy. Facilitate the installation of onsite renewable energy
systems for residences and places of business.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
11
Policy PSI-6.2: Energy Efficient Planning and Building Design. Encourage energy-efficient site planning
and building design/construction.
Goal MO-1: A safe, multimodal, interconnected, and efficient circulation system that serves all community
members
Policy MO-1.2: Multimodal Options. Increase pedestrian and bicycle connections and safety between
residential areas and commercial areas along major corridors, parks and recreation opportunities,
and neighboring communities.
Policy MO-1.4: Congestion Management and Trip Reduction. Encourage mixed-use and jobs focused
infill development that is served by multi-modal facilities to support reductions in regional and local
vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Goal MO-4: Safe, functional, and appealing bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian (in rural areas) facilities
that allow convenient multi-modal mobility
Policy MO-4.1: Coordination and Planning. Provide “backbone” pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian
systems that link residential, commercial, recreational, and regional areas.
Policy MO-4.2: Pedestrian Mobility. Ensure pedestrian safety, enhance pedestrian comfort, and
promote walking as an alternative to vehicle travel, with priority in retail districts and multi-family
neighborhoods.
Policy MO-4.3: Bicycle Mobility. Promote bicycle mobility and increase bicyclist safety with
new/upgraded facilities and amenities.
Policy MO-4.4: Rural Trails. Provide for walkways, bikeways, and horse trails without curbs and
sidewalks in rural areas.
Policy MO-4.5: School and Park Connections. Provide a comprehensive system of routes to schools
and parks.
Goal MO-5: Reliable alternative travel modes that reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.
Policy MO-5.1: Single-Occupancy Vehicle Alternatives. Promote alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicle travel, particularly for commute trips.
Policy MO-5.2: Public Transit. Support the evolution of public transit to meet the changing needs for
local and regional access, including fixed route and demand responsive service.
Policy MO-5.3: County TDM Requirements. Seek alternatives that bring Atascadero closer to
compliance with Transportation Demand Management program requirements of the San Luis Obispo
County Clean Air Plan to reduce peak period trip generation.
Goal MO-6: Anticipating and addressing emerging mobility technology proactively to allow new systems
and industries to operate in Atascadero on the City’s terms.
Policy MO-6.1: Changing Mobile Technology. Encourage the use of mobile or other electronic devices
with similar on-demand hailing functions, particularly for seniors, persons with disabilities, and other
mobility challenged people.
Policy MO-6.2: Autonomous Vehicles. Update, when warranted, transportation systems and policies
as autonomous and automated vehicles and their attendant facilities are developed locally and
regionally.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
12
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact E-1: Would the project result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources during project construction or operation?
Implementation of the proposed project would increase electricity, diesel, gasoline, and natural gas
consumption associated with construction activities, as well as long-term operational activities.
Construction-Related Energy Consumption
Energy consumption associated with construction of the proposed 2045 GPU would including fuel use
associated with the on-site operation of off-road equipment and vehicles traveling to and from the
construction site. The CBC includes specific requirements related to recycling, construction materials, and
energy efficiency standards that would apply to construction of future development envisioned by the
2045 GPU and would minimize wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary energy consumption. Construction
and operation of projects facilitated by the 2045 GPU would be required to comply with relevant
provisions of CBC and Title 24 of the California Energy Code, which would avoid wasteful, inefficient, and
unnecessary energy consumption. As a result, the construction of proposed facilities and improvements
would not result in an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy.
Operational Mobile-Source Energy Consumption
Operational mobile-source energy consumption would be primarily associated with fuel use associated
with vehicle trips attributable to the proposed land uses. Table 1 summarizes annual fuel use for the
County; as well as, net increases in fuel use associated with the proposed 2045 GPU. As noted in Table 1,
the County consumed an estimated 14,943,147 MMBTU of gasoline fuel and 10,420,451 MMBTU of diesel
fuel in 2024. Net increases in fuel use associated with the 2045 GPU would total approximately 147,833
MMBTU of gasoline and 103,090 MMBTU of diesel fuel. On a service population (SP) basis, the County’s
fuel usage equates to 36.6 MMBTU/SP for gasoline and 25.5 MMBTU/SP for diesel. By comparison, fuel
usage associated with the 2045 GPU would be 15.1 MMBTU/SP for gasoline and 10.5 MMBTU/SP for diesel
fuel. While the overall fuel consumption would increase with the adoption of the proposed 2045 GPU the
efficiency of the fuel usage would improve when compared to the County average. The development of
increasingly efficient automobile engines would further increase energy efficiency and energy
conservation.
Table 1. Operational Fuel Consumption
Gasoline
(MMBTU/Year)
Diesel
(MMBTU/Year)
San Luis Obispo County (Year 2024) 14,943,147 10,420,451
2045 General Plan Update 147,833 103,090
Annual Usage Rates/Service Population (SP)
San Luis Obispo County (Year 2024) 36.6 25.5
2045 General Plan Update 15.1 10.5
Based on County of San Luis Obispo year 2024 population of 281,843 individuals and 126,927 employees (U.S. Census 2024).
Based on City of Atascadero 2045 GPU net increase in population of 6,596 individuals and 3,185 employees.
Totals may not sum due to rounding.
MMBTU= million metric British thermal units
SP=Service Population (population+employees)
Refer to Appendix A for modeling assumptions and results.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
13
Operational Building-Use Energy Consumption
The proposed 2045 GPU would result in increased electricity and natural gas consumption associated with
the long-term operation of the proposed land uses. It is important to note that buildings included in the
2045 GPU would be required to comply with Title 24 standards for energy efficiency, which would include
increased building insulation and energy-efficiency requirements, including the use of energy-efficient
lighting, energy-efficient appliances, and use of low-flow water fixtures.
Table 2 summarizes annual electricity and natural gas use for the County; as well as, net increases in
energy use attributable to the proposed 2045 GPU. As noted in Table 2, the County consumed an
estimated 1,681,400,000 kWh/year of electricity and 84,200,000 therms/year of natural gas in 2024. Net
increases in energy use associated with the 2045 GPU would total approximately 35,374,663 kWh/year of
electricity and 1,022,265 therms/year of natural gas. On a service population (SP) basis, the County’s
energy usage equates to 4,113 kWh/SP for electricity use and 206 therms/SP for natural gas use. By
comparison, energy use associated with the 2045 GPU would be 3,617 kWh/SP for electricity use and 105
therms/SP for natural gas. While the overall energy consumption would increase with the adoption of the
proposed 2045 GPU the efficiency of energy usage on a service-population basis would improve when
compared to the County average. However, at this time, most projects incorporated in the 2045 GPU do
not have sufficient detail to allow project-level analysis and thus it would be speculative to analyze
project-level impacts on energy consumption. Given that specific projects have the potential to be
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessarily consume energy resources, this impact would be considered
potentially significant.
Table 2. Operational Electricity & Natural Gas Consumption
Electricity
(kWh/Year)
Natural Gas
(Therms/Year)
San Luis Obispo County (Year 2024) 1,681,400,000 84,200,000
2045 General Plan Update 35,374,663 1,022,265
Annual Usage Rates/Service Population (SP)
San Luis Obispo County (Year 2024) 4,113 kWh/SP 206 therms/SP
2045 General Plan Update 3,617 kWh/SP 105 therms/SP
Based on County of San Luis Obispo year 2024 population of 281,843 individuals and 126,927 employees (U.S. Census 2024).
Based on City of Atascadero 2045 GPU net increase in population of 6,596 individuals and 3,185 employees.
MMBTU= million metric British thermal units
SP=Service Population (population+employees)
Refer to Appendix A for modeling assumptions and results.
Proposed 2045 GPU Policies that Provide Mitigation
As noted above, the 2045 GPU includes various goals and policies that would reduce energy consumption
attributable to new land uses; as well as, goals and policies that would promote the use of alternative
means of transportation and reductions in VMT. However, no policies have been proposed that
specifically require existing or future land uses to evaluate and mitigate potential energy impacts.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
14
Proposed Mitigation Measures
MM E-1: The following measures shall be implemented to further reduce energy use associated with
existing and future land uses:
a. Incorporate renewable energy efficiency into public facilities capital improvements.
b. Encourage public lighting with energy-efficient lighting that meets or exceeds the State’s
building standards at the time of development.
c. Implement large-scale energy storage in commercial and industrial buildings to control peak
loads that exceed the State’s building standards at the time of development.
d. Encourage future development to incorporate on-site renewable energy generation (e.g.,
solar photovoltaic systems), that exceed the State’s building standards at the time of
development.
e. Encourage future residential and commercial development to use all-electric appliances and
end uses as opposed to natural gas-fueled appliances and end uses.
Significance After Mitigation
Mitigation measures have been included to reduce overall operational energy consumption, including
those associated with long-term operational building energy use. Implementation of Mitigation Measures
E-1a through E-1e would help to ensure consistency with applicable regulatory requirements related to
energy use and would also help to promote the use of energy from renewable sources (e.g., solar).
Mitigation Measure E-1e would encourage future residential and commercial development to use all-
electric appliances and end uses. Using electric instead of natural gas-powered appliances and end uses
replaces a more emissions-intensive fossil fuel source of energy with a less emissions-intensive and largely
renewable source of energy. With mitigation, this impact would be considered less than significant.
Impact E-2: Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
Proposed land uses associated with the 2045 GPU would be required to be in full compliance with the
California Building Code, including applicable green building standards and building energy efficiency
standards. In addition to complying with federal and state regulations, the 2045 GPU itself provides
policies that are designed specifically to reduce energy consumption or to reduce other types of pollutants
that have the co-benefit of reducing energy consumption. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation
Measures E-1a through E-1e would help to ensure consistency with applicable regulatory requirements
related to energy use and would also help to promote the use of energy from renewable sources. For
these reasons, implementation of the proposed 2045 GPU would not be anticipated to conflict with or
obstruct state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. This impact would be considered
less than significant.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
15
REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2003. Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence. Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/carefinery/ab2076final.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. 2008 Scoping Plan. Available at website url:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan/2008-scoping-plan-
documents.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_climate_change_scopin g_plan.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2016. California’s Advanced Clean Cars Program. Available at website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/drive-forward-light-duty-vehicle-program/advanced-clean-cars.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2017. Scoping Plan for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target.
Available at website url: ttps://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-
plan/2017-scoping-plan-documents.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Small Off-Road Engines. Available at website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-updated-regulations-requiring-most-new-small-road-engines-
be-zero-emission-2024.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. Advanced Clean Cars II. Available at website URL:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii.
California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2026. AB 32: Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available at website url:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/Title_24_2019_Building_Standards _FAQ_ada.pdf.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website URL:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-
building-energy-efficiency.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026a. 2024 Total System Electric Generation. Website
url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2024-total-system-
electric-generation.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026b. Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in California.
Website url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas-
market/supply-and-demand-natural-gas-california.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026c. Transportation Energy. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026d. 2010-2024 CEC-A15 Results and Analysis ADA.
Website url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/3874.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026e. Electricity Consumption. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-
consumption-dashboards-0.
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026f. Natural Gas Consumption. Website url:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-
consumption-dashboards-1.
Energy Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update February 2026
16
California Energy Commission (CEC). Accessed: February 8, 2026g. Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website
url: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2025-
building-energy-efficiency.
Central Coast Community Energy (3CE). Accessed: February 8, 2026. About 3CE. Website url:
https://3cenergy.org/about-us/.
Central Coast Transportation Consultants (CCTC). July 11, 2025. Memorandum: Atascadero General Plan Update-
Transportation (CEQA).
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). Accessed: February 8, 2026. Clean Energy Solutions. Website url:
https://www.pge.com/en/about/corporate-responsibility-and-sustainability/taking-responsibility/clean-
energy-solutions.html#cleanenergyelectricpowermix.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). Accessed: February 18, 2026. Regional Transportation Plan.
Website url: https://www.slocog.org/programs/regional-planning/2027-rtp.
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). 2013. Pipeline Basics. Available at website url:
https://www.socalgas.com/documents/news-room/fact-sheets/PipelineBasics.pdf.
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). 2026. Natural Gas Transmission. Available at website url:
https://www.socalgas.com/stay-safe/pipeline-and-storage-safety/natural-gas-transmission.
United States Census. Accessed: February 17, 2026. Quick Facts San Luis Obispo County, California. Website url:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sanluisobispocitycalifornia,
sanluisobispocountycalifornia/IPE120224.
APPENDIX A
Energy Use Modeling
Source: EMFAC2025 (v2.0.0) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: County
Region: San Luis Obispo
Calendar Year: 2045
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC202Y Categories
Region
Calendar
Year
Vehicle
Category Model Year Speed Fuel Total VMT CVMT
Fuel
Consumptio
n
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 247573.274 247573.274 6.36570967
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 13.523242 13.523242 0.00075253
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 357370.102 357370.102 9.37290826
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD1 Other Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 15461660.7 15461660.7 963.556057
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD1 Public Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 139952.068 139952.068 8.72168035
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD2 Other Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 12590455 12590455 850.984961
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD2 Public Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 257332.329 257332.329 17.3930125
San Luis Obispo 2045 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 7478000.89 7478000.89 294.282916
San Luis Obispo 2045 MH Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 928279.353 928279.353 99.4994211
San Luis Obispo 2045 Motor Coach Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 490226.795 490226.795 77.415244
San Luis Obispo 2045 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 633122.031 633122.031 76.0467577
San Luis Obispo 2045 PTO Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 679865.46 679865.46 122.002486
San Luis Obispo 2045 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 383889.776 383889.776 45.5202549
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 CAIRP Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1234.6026 1234.6026 0.12516682
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 CAIRP Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2230.89757 2230.89757 0.22616947
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 CAIRP Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 6602.52013 6602.52013 0.65888163
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 CAIRP Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 54544.1005 54544.1005 4.75534475
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 224641.362 224641.362 25.1837995
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 181378.805 181378.805 20.1670013
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 678492.087 678492.087 74.7446716
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 192862.951 192862.951 20.5854797
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Other Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 943650.296 943650.296 103.600956
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Other Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4374212.47 4374212.47 481.764074
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Other Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2053817.41 2053817.41 222.09511
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Other Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1924646.05 1924646.05 203.259693
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 35748.7226 35748.7226 3.57843379
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 350830.646 350830.646 31.03654
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 OOS Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 8105.29313 8105.29313 0.76812944
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 OOS Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14676.1197 14676.1197 1.39043459
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 OOS Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 33256.0671 33256.0671 3.15219493
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 OOS Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 192335.553 192335.553 16.2892888
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Public Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1871.76074 1871.76074 0.24212641
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Public Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 16271.6422 16271.6422 2.00550758
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Public Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3602.41283 3602.41283 0.4508513
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Public Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 12858.3873 12858.3873 1.59565737
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Utility Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 25191.1644 25191.1644 2.55459779
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Utility Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 5385.3512 5385.3512 0.55607771
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6 Utility Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 7592.22191 7592.22191 0.76270881
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 CAIRP Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 6336950.21 6336950.21 862.907879
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 NNOOS Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 27467428.4 27467428.4 3589.00068
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 NOOS Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 9723938.07 9723938.07 1278.30251
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Other Port Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 522962.55 522962.55 69.7398545
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Public Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 45393.2407 45393.2407 7.99470242
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8AggregateAggregate Diesel 1145524.21 1145524.21 195.455737
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Single Dump Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 714461.805 714461.805 107.761765
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Single Other Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1510967.52 1510967.52 225.510761
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 SWCV Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 292698.95 292698.95 91.7863316
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Tractor Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3114298.05 3114298.05 406.041887
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7 Utility Class 8Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 23130.6477 23130.6477 3.39621006
101891534 101891534 10630.6094
CONSUMPTIONS RATE:0.10433261 G/MI
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 104542762 104542762 3686.73095
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 54626810.2 54626810.2 2443.87021
San Luis Obispo 2045 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 141582186 141582186 5639.04425
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD1 Other Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 14955862.6 14955862.6 1464.29178
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD1 Public Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1283104.69 1283104.69 125.625629
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD2 Other Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2942456.06 2942456.06 306.264356
San Luis Obispo 2045 LHD2 Public Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 539350.399 539350.399 56.1380695
Units: miles/year, 1000 gallons/year for Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Consumption
San Luis Obispo 2045 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 11386641.5 11386641.5 281.768804
San Luis Obispo 2045 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 118419756 118419756 5825.40141
San Luis Obispo 2045 MH Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1894196.58 1894196.58 428.881174
San Luis Obispo 2045 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 195653.55 195653.55 39.9132221
San Luis Obispo 2045 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 386147.243 386147.243 36.248538
San Luis Obispo 2045 T6TS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2136593.82 2136593.82 398.358483
San Luis Obispo 2045 T7IS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 8490.30632 8490.30632 2.53634567
454900011 454900011 20735.0732
CONSUMPTIONS RATE:0.04558161 G/MI
TOTAL ALL:556791545 556791545 31365.6826
PERCENT GAS:81.70%81.70%66.11%
PERCENT DIESEL:22.40%22.40%51.27%
ATASCADERO GPU - NET INCREASE IN VMT 87028 DAILY
ANNUAL VMT - TOTAL 31765220 ANNUAL
VMT CONSUMPTION RATE (G/MI)TOTAL CONSUMPN (G)MMBTU SP MMBTU/SP VMT/SP
ANNUAL -GAS 25952260 0.04558161 1182945.7 147832.724 9781 15.114275 2653.33401
ANNUAL - DIESEL 7114985.51 0.10433261 742324.988 103089.64 9781 10.5397853 727.429252
BASELINE DAILY VMT 8796917
BASELINE ANNUAL VMT 3210874705
VMT CONSUMPTION RATE (G/MI)TOTAL CONSUMPN (G)MMBTU SP MMBTU/SP VMT/SP
ANNUAL -GAS 2623292240 0.04558161 119573874 14943147 408,770 36.5563692 6417.52633
ANNUAL - DIESEL 719193099 0.10433261 75035291 10420451 408,770 25.4922108 1759.40773
COUNTY SERVICE POPULATION (SP)
POP (JUL 2024 US CENSUS)281843
EMPLOYMENT 126927
TOTAL 408770
With Natural-gas
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
AGPU Operational Yr 2045 -Net Increase Detailed Report, 2/8/2026
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electnc,ty (kWh/yr) Natural Gas (kBTUfyr)
Single Family Housing 1.242,987 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 8.179,524
Apartments Mid Rise 7,977,704 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 67,216,897
StripMa11 3,985,087 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 2,875,665
General Office Building 12,411.497 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 13.432,288
Industrial Park 9.757.388 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 10.559,891
MODELING ASSUMPTIONS & CALCULATIONS
LAND USE -NET CHANGE
No. of Units Sq. Ft.
du_sf I du_mf bldLretail I bldg_office I bldL public I bldg_industrial
205 I 2,688 481,454 I 594,666 I 0 I 467,501
Existing Year: 2024
Future Year: 2045
Employment: 3,185
Population: 6,596
TOTALSP 9,781
ELECTRICITY AND NAT GAS USE -NET INCREASE
Land Use Electricity (kWh/y Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Single Family Housing
Apartments Mid Rise
Strip Mall
General Office Building
Industrial
Total
Derived from Ca/EEMod modeling.
net inc/sp
EXISTING COUNTY USAGE RATES
ELECTRICITY
NATURAL GAS
General Plan Update
General Plan Update SP
General Plan Update TOTAL/SP
COUNTY SP
POP (JUL 2024 US CENSUS)
EMPLOYMENT
TOTAL
1,242,987
7,977,704
3,985,087
12,411,497
9,757,388
35,374,663
5363.364875
8,179,524
67,216,897
2,875,665
13,432,288
10,559,891
102,264,265
1681.4 GWh
84200000 therms
ELECTRICITY
35,374,663
9,781
3616.696836
281843
126927
408770
NAT GAS
1,022,265
9,781
104.5161219
1022642.65 therms
155.0489871
2024 SP
408770
408770
0.004113316 Gwh/SP
205.9838051 Therms/SP
I ELECTRICITY
San Luis Obispo County (Year 2024) 1,681,400,000
l5p 408770
ITOTAL/SP 4113.32
4113.3156 kWh/sp/yr
NAT GAS
84,200,000
408770
205.98
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX E
2045 General Plan Existing Conditions Report |
Chapter 5: Biological Resources
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-1
2045 General Plan
Existing Conditions
Report
Chapter 5: Biological Resources
tasca ero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-2 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Biological Resources Findings
OAK WOODLANDS
1. Atascadero contains a diversity of oak woodlands, including Blue Oak Woodlands,
Coast Live Oak Woodlands, Valley Oak Woodlands, and Blue Oak-Foothill Pine. Oak
woodlands provide important wildlife habitat and are an integral part of the aesthetic
appeal for living in the city. Approximately 10,822 acres of oak woodlands have been
mapped within the urban reserve area by the California Department of Forestry.
WATERWAYS
1. Atascadero contains approximately 27 miles of creeks and rivers, including Atascadero
Creek, Boulder Creek, Graves Creek, Paloma Creek, and the Salinas River. These
waterways provide important wildlife corridors connecting the Salinas River to the
Santa Lucia Mountains and are designated critical habitat areas for South-Central
California Coast Steelhead Trout. They also provide recreational opportunities for
many residents.
2. The creeks have been highly impacted by problems with trash, illegal dumping, off-
road vehicle use, and urban pollution that has significantly degraded the quality of
the habitat. Protecting and enhancing these areas can better support the local
ecosystem, help improve water flow (and reduce localized flooding risks), and increase
the quality of life for residents. In addition, the Salinas River has been identified as a
key natural resource that should be protected and bolstered as a regional attraction
for tourism, recreation, and education.
3. All waterways in the study area contain identified barriers to fish passage as mapped
by California’s Fish Passage Assessment Database (California Department of Fish and
Wildlife [CDFW] 2022c); however, Atascadero Creek contains the highest number with
10 barriers. These barriers range from only partial barriers to total barriers.
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
1. Based on an analysis of California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) occurrence
records and suitable vegetation and habitats within the study area, it was determined
that populations of eight special-status plant species occur in the study area. There
are suitable habitat conditions for four additional special-status plant species and
marginal conditions present to potentially support habitat for 13 additional special-
status plant species.
2. There are CNDDB occurrence records for nine special-status animal species in the
study area. These are the obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus), crotch bumble
bee (Bombus crotchii), Atascadero June beetle (Polyphylla nubile), coast range newt
(Taricha torosa), California red-legged frog, northern California legless lizard (Anniella
pulchra), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), purple martin (Progne subis), and
golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos).
3. There are suitable habitat conditions present, and the study area is within the range
of 16 additional special-status animal species. Four additional special-status animal
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-1
species have historically occurred in the study area, but their populations have been
extirpated.
CRITICAL HABITAT
1. Graves Creek, Atascadero Creek, and the Salinas River are designated as Critical
Habitat for South-Central California Coast steelhead DPS. These creeks fall within the
Paso Robles Hydrologic Subarea 330981, which is part of the larger Salinas Hydrologic
Unit 3309 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine
Fisheries Service [NOAA Fisheries] 2005).
2. Anthropogenic threats to steelhead in the Salinas River watershed include: 1) barriers
to upstream and downstream migration (roads, dams, groundwater extraction, sand
and gravel mining); 2) agricultural conversion of floodplain habitats; 3) recreational
facilities and activities; and 4) water management activities, including dam
operations, diversions, and groundwater extractions (NOAA Fisheries 2013).
3. The study area contains a small portion, approximately 3,000 acres, of critical habitat
for California red-legged frogs, Critical Habitat Unit SLO-3. Critical habitat areas
include the upper watershed areas of Morro and Atascadero Creeks, a small portion of
the Santa Margarita Creek watershed that falls in the study area, and a small corner of
the Paloma Creek watershed but does not include Paloma Creek itself.
4. The key threats to the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
California red-legged frog in Critical Habitat Unit SLO-3 include predation by
nonnative species, water diversion, overgrazing, and urbanization (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2010).
MINERALS
1. The California Geological Survey maps Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) to identify the
potential for the production of geologic resources such as metals, minerals, and
construction aggregate. There are several MRZ-1 zones (areas of no mineral resource
significance) located along the southwestern city limit and within the central and
eastern portions of the city. There is an MRZ-2 zone (areas that contain identified
mineral resources; Portland cement concrete-grade) surrounding the Salinas River,
along the eastern city limit.
2. There are no active mines located in the city.
GROUNDWATER BASIN
1. The city is in the Atascadero Area Groundwater Subbasin. The projected future
groundwater budget period (2020–2042) shows an average annual increase in
groundwater in storage of 800 acre-feet per year (AFY).
WILDFIRE
1. The city is at an increased risk of wildfire occurrence, with the majority of land within
the city of Atascadero being considered a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ)
in a local responsibility area (LRA).
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-4 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
MAJOR POLLUTANTS
1. Atascadero Creek is listed on the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) Section 303(d) List of Impaired Waters for dissolved oxygen and pathogens
(e.g., fecal coliform, E. coli) and the Salinas River is listed on the Section 303(d) List of
Impaired Waters for turbidity (RWQCB 2018).
2. Based on a query of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
EnviroStor and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker databases,
there are no open hazardous materials sites located within the city. There are 34
closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanup sites, two closed school
investigation sites, and one closed school cleanup site within the city (DTSC 2022;
SWRCB 2022).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-5
5.1 Introduction
This chapter examines the existing biological resources present within Atascadero. The
purpose of this analysis is to provide planning and environmental context for the General
Plan Update project. The information presented in this chapter will be used by the City to
develop Open Space Element policies and objectives and define programs that implement
those policies.
The intent of this chapter is to identify and evaluate existing biological resources within the
study area, identify which ones are protected by Federal or State laws, and to provide
guidance to protect and avoid those resources that legally require protection while
developing compatible land use policies, avoiding incompatibility problems in the future. The
chapter addresses existing physical and biological conditions and focuses on sensitive
resources. This information will serve as the basis for developing guidelines for identifying
compatible land uses, identifying the proper distribution of land uses, and establishing
proper development standards. A discussion of Federal, State, and local regulations
protecting biological resources is also included.
This chapter is organized into the following sections:
Section 5.1: Introduction
Section 5.2: Regulatory Setting
Section 5.3: Methods
Section 5.4: Existing Physical and Biological Conditions
Section 5.5: Special-Status Species
Section 5.6: Critical Habitat
Section 5.7: Oak Woodland Resources
Section 5.8: Minerals
Section 5.9: Groundwater Basin(s)
Section 5.10: Wildfires
Section 5.11: Major Pollutants
Section 5.12: Sources
Section 5.13: Acronyms and Key Terms
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-6 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
5.2 Regulatory Setting
FEDERAL
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 is administered by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National
Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries). Overall, NOAA Fisheries is responsible for the
protection of FESA-listed marine species and anadromous fish species, while other listed
species fall under USFWS jurisdiction.
Federal Clean Water Act
The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 provides guidance for the restoration and
maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. CWA
requirements pertaining to the proposed project are described below.
Section 401 requires that an applicant for a Federal license or permit that allows activities
resulting in a discharge to waters of the United States (WOTUS), must obtain State
certification that the discharge complies with other provisions of CWA. The nine Regional
Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) administer the certification program in California.
Section 404 establishes U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction over fill materials
in essentially all waterbodies, including wetlands. All Federal agencies are to avoid impacts
on wetlands whenever there is a practicable alternative. Section 404 established a permit
program administered by USACE regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into
WOTUS (including wetlands).
Section 404 guidelines allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system
only if there is no practicable alternative that would have less adverse impacts.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 with Canada, Mexico, and Japan makes it
unlawful to take, possess, import, export, transport, sell, purchase, barter, or offer for sale,
purchase, or barter, any migratory bird, or the parts, nests, or eggs of such a bird except
under the terms of a valid Federal permit. The Federal MBTA applies to the removal of nests
(such as swallow nests on bridges) occupied by migratory birds during the breeding season.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 (as amended) provides for the protection
of bald and golden eagles by prohibiting the take, possession, sale, purchase, barter, offer to
sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, of any bald or golden eagle, alive or dead,
including any part, nest, or egg, unless allowed by permit (16 United States Code [USC] 668(a);
50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 22). The USFWS may authorize take of bald and golden
eagles for activities where the take is associated with, but not the purpose of, the activity and
cannot practicably be avoided (50 CFR 22.26).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-7
STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
Guidance for determining California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) significance
thresholds is based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Using these guidelines,
activities requiring CEQA review within the study area would have a significant impact on
biological resources if they would:
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by the USFWS or California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW);
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the USFWS or
CDFW;
Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by CWA Section
404;
Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory species of wildlife,
wildlife corridors, or wildlife nursery sites;
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; or
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved State, regional, or local habitat conservation plan.
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) of 1970 generally parallels the main provisions
of the FESA but also extends the take prohibitions to species proposed for listing. Sections
2080 and 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) prohibit the take (defined as
hunting, pursuing, catching, capturing, or killing) of endangered, threatened, or candidate
species unless otherwise authorized by permit. The CDFW regulates activities that may result
in the “take” of such species. The CESA has a much less inclusive definition of “take” (limited
to direct take such as hunting, shooting, capturing, etc.) that does not include the broad
“harm” and “harassment” definitions in Federal law.
Take of State-listed species would require a Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit from the
CDFW. This process requires the submittal of a sensitive species study and permit application
package, and is similar to the FESA Section 10 process, except that the CDFW is the
regulatory and decision-making agency. As no State-listed species are anticipated to be
subjected to take for this proposed project, a Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit from the
CDFW will not be required.
Native Plant Protection Act
The legal protection afforded to listed plants under the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) of
1977 (CFGC Sections 1 900–1913) includes provisions that prohibit the taking and possession of
plants from the wild and a salvage requirement for landowners and project proponents that
may encounter rare plants during implementing a project that may impact those species. If a
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-8 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
landowner has been informed of a listed plant species on their property, the CDFW must be
notified at least 10 days in advance of any land use change that might affect the species or its
habitat, thereby affording CDFW an opportunity to conduct a salvage operation. Candidate
species are also protected from taking by the NPPA.
The CDFW has demonstrated a general policy of regarding many of the plants on the
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPRs) 1 and 2 as meeting
the definitions of Chapter 10, Section 1901 of the NPPA. As such, those plants also qualify for
protection under CEQA.
California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515
Section 3503 of the CFGC includes provisions to protect the nests and eggs of birds. Sections
3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 include provisions to protect Fully Protected species, such as:
(1) prohibiting take or possession “at any time” of the species listed in the statute, with few
exceptions; (2) stating that “no provision of this code or any other law shall be construed to
authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to ‘take’ the species;” and (3) stating that no
previously issued permits or licenses for take of the species “shall have any force or effect” for
authorizing take or possession. The CDFW is unable to authorize incidental take of “fully
protected” species when activities are proposed in areas inhabited by those species;
therefore, project-related activities must avoid take of Fully Protected species.
California Fish and Game Code Section 1602
Section 1602 of the CFGC requires any person, State, or local government agency or public
utility proposing a project that may affect a river, stream, or lake to notify the CDFW before
beginning the project. If activities will result in the diversion or obstruction of the natural flow
of a stream; substantially alter its bed, channel, or bank; impact riparian vegetation; or
adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources, a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA)
is required. An SAA lists the CDFW conditions of approval relative to the proposed project
and serves as an agreement between an applicant and the CDFW for a term of not more
than 5 years (for standard agreements) for the performance of activities subject to this
section. Implementation of the proposed project may require a Section 1602 SAA for any
impacts within the banks of drainages and extending to the outer edge of riparian
vegetation (whichever is greater) if these areas are determined to be jurisdictional by CDFW.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act) serves as the primary
water quality law in California and addresses two primary functions: water quality control
planning and waste discharge regulation. The various RWQCBs are charged with protecting
all waters of California, defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters,
within the boundaries of the State.” This encompasses all waters of the State (WOTS),
including those not under Federal jurisdiction. The Porter-Cologne Act defines WOTS very
broadly, with no physical descriptors, and no interstate commerce limitation. In regulating
discharges of dredged or fill material, the RWQCB jurisdiction is broader than Federal
jurisdiction. The discharge of dredged or fill material may constitute a discharge of waste
that could affect the quality of WOTS.
In 2019, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted a State Wetland
Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State,
for inclusion in the forthcoming Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters and
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-9
Enclosed Bays and Estuaries and Ocean Waters of California (SWRCB 2019). Applicants
must file an application with the California Water Boards (defined as the SWRCB and nine
RWQCBs, collectively) for any activity that could result in the discharge of dredged or fill
material to WOTS in accordance with Title 23 California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section
3855. The SWRCB procedures became effective on May 28, 2020.
For the purposes of this chapter, RWQCB jurisdiction (i.e., WOTS) has been interpreted
conservatively as including natural streambeds, areas extending from the
streambed/thalweg to the outer edge of adjacent riparian vegetation, isolated wetlands or
waters that may not be under USACE jurisdiction, artificial ditches (non-agricultural) that
could be relocated WOTS and have become relatively permanent features of the natural
landscape, and excavated ponds or other artificial features that collect and/or convey surface
water. Based on previous experience with the Central Coast RWQCB, their interpretation of
State jurisdiction includes streambanks and riparian areas, despite the lack of a statewide
definition and methodology for limits of WOTS.
If there is no CWA Section 404/401 nexus (such as in instances where WOTS that are not
considered WOTUS could be impacted), compliance with the Porter-Cologne Act for impacts
to WOTS could be regulated by the RWQCB through the Waste Discharge Requirement
(WDR) program, which could require obtaining a WDR permit instead of CWA Section
404/401 permits. If the project does not qualify for an existing General Order WDR, in many
situations, the new dredge/fill procedures would be followed to obtain an Individual WDR,
which can be an extensive process.
LOCAL
Native Tree Protection Ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 11)
Preservation of natural flora and fauna is a basic community goal of the City of Atascadero
General Plan (City of Atascadero 2016) and native trees are valued community assets.
Recognizing the trees of Atascadero as a valuable natural resource, a Native Tree Ordinance
was adopted and was later revised to incorporate more stringent mitigation and follow-up
requirements. The Native Tree Ordinance applies to all native trees; 2 inches diameter at
breast height (DBH) or greater deciduous native oaks, California sycamore (Platanus
9acemose), and madrones (Arbutus menziesii); and 4 inches dbh or greater for all other
protected native trees. Based on the ordinance, intentional harm, damage, death, or decline
of a native tree or removal of a native tree requires a City-issued tree removal permit, unless
exempt by the ordinance. Mitigation includes planting replacement trees, payment of fees
into a tree fund, and/or establishment of an open space easement. A higher mitigation fee is
required for the removal of deciduous native trees than for evergreen trees and a higher fee
is required for commercial and multi-family properties versus single-family homes.
Existing General Plan Policies
General Plan Policy 6.1 states: “Ensure that development does not degrade scenic and
sensitive areas, including historic sites, creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands, woodlands,
hillsides and other valuable habitats.” The programs associated with this policy include:
1. Encourage use of planned developments to cluster projects around open space
easements, parks, and open space dedications and minimize impacts to natural
resources.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-10 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
2. Seek funding to purchase or require dedication of areas of unique habitats or scenic
value, especially in areas lacking adequate park facilities and open space.
3. Require native trees and plant species to be incorporated into landscaping plans.
4. Scenic and sensitive lands, including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands, and other
areas of significant habitat value, shall be protected from destruction, overuse, and
misuse by the use of zoning, tax incentives, easements, or fee acquisition.
5. Public and private development in close proximity to scenic and sensitive lands,
including creek reservations, wooded areas, flood plains, prominent viewsheds, and
historic sites, shall be designed to minimize impacts.
6. Scenic and open space easements, parklands, and open space dedications shall be
required as mitigation for subdivisions and development projects that impact,
floodplains, creek reservations, wooded areas, scenic backdrops, sensitive areas,
historic sites, cultural sites, and similar areas.
7. The City shall carefully evaluate both public and private projects to require the
preservation of trees, watersheds, natural slopes, and other natural features.
8. Subdivisions shall be reviewed in accordance with the Appearance Review Manual
and the principle of maintaining the rural and natural character of the community.
9. Attention shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land division. Building sites shall
minimize disruption of natural slopes, native vegetation, and watersheds by the
careful selection of building sites, leach fields, and driveways. Building designs
inappropriate for hillside locations shall not be approved.
General Plan Policy 7.1 states: “Ensure that the native trees of Atascadero are protected from
new development in order to retain the natural character of the community.” The programs
associated with this policy include:
1. Enforce all provisions of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance as a high priority.
2. Maintain a current geographic information system (GIS)-based inventory map of all
native woodlands, plant communities, sensitive habitats, connective habitat, and
wildlife corridors. Require lot line adjustments, subdivision maps, and development
permits to minimize impacts on mapped resources that are identified as sensitive and
provide mitigation as requirement by the Native Tree Ordinance.
3. Update and maintain the Appearance Review Manual to include standards requiring
building siting, mass, and scale to be compatible with surrounding natural features.
4. Require lot line adjustments and tentative subdivision maps on sites with 25 percent
or greater native tree canopy cover to establish locations of building sites, driveways,
and leach fields that will minimize native tree impacts.
General Plan Policy 7.2 states: “Protect and replenish native tree populations, including
saplings.” The programs associated with this policy include:
1. Continue to implement and enforce the Native Tree Ordinance to protect and
replenish native tree species within the city. Construction permits for both residential
and non-residential development shall be required to preserve as many native trees
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-11
as possible. Buildings shall be designed to utilize existing trees in the landscaping
pattern. Any trees removed shall either (1) be replaced with like species, (2) in-lieu
contributions made to the City's tree replacement fund or (3) have Planning
Commission approved conservation easements created depending on the
characteristics of the affected site.
2. Augment the City Geographic Information System to include a native tree GIS
database to assist decision-makers with analyzing development proposals.
3. The City shall implement a comprehensive program for street tree planting and
maintenance within the Urban Core and all major routes and approaches to the
community.
4. Require planting of large canopy shade trees in new projects, in part to provide
shading adjacent to buildings to conserve energy use.
General Plan Policy 8.1 states: “Ensure that development along Atascadero Creek, Graves
Creeks, the Salinas River, blue line creeks, and natural springs, lakes, or other riparian areas
does not interrupt natural flows or adversely impact riparian ecosystems and water quality.”
The programs associated with this policy include:
1. Work with other agencies to implement the Erosion Control Assistance Program for
review of development proposals to minimize sedimentation of creeks and the
Salinas River.
2. Update the Appearance Review Manual to include provisions for preserving,
reclaiming and incorporating riparian features in conjunction with new development.
3. The waterways in the city shall be maintained in a natural state and concrete
channelization creeks shall be prohibited.
4. The City shall strongly discourage underground piping, and unnecessary disturbance
of creeks and streams, and encourage use of bridges and arched culverts. Any
alterations required for public safety will be guided by this policy.
5. Allow flood protection measures (such as selective brush cleaning), low-impact trail
development, streambed maintenance and bank protection along streams where
appropriate with necessary permits.
6. Prohibit new structures or disturbance of riparian habitat along creek banks except
for restoration purposes.
7. Maintain a current GIS-based map of the riparian areas within Atascadero.
8. Prior to permit approval, refer projects along blue-line creeks to the Corps of
Engineers, Department of Fish and Game, Regional Water Quality Control, and Upper
Salinas-Las Tablas Resource Conservation District.
9. Creek reservations and the Salinas River shall be preserved for open space and
recreational use, with appropriate areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment
and habitat purposes. Any recreational use of the River and creeks shall minimize its
impact on the habitat value and open space qualities of the creeks.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-12 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
10. Land disturbance shall be minimized in proximity to watercourses including
necessary flood protection measures, such as selective brush clearing, and low-impact
trail development.
11. Areas subject to flooding, as identified through flood hazard overlay zoning and flood
maps, shall be protected from unsound development consistent with the City's flood
hazard ordinance requirements.
12. Wellhead and Aquifer Recharge Area Protection Zones: The City shall adopt and
maintain an ordinance that identifies existing and potential well sites and aquifer
recharge areas, including sufficient buffers to protect them from contamination. The
ordinance shall define restricted and prohibited land uses within the
wellhead/recharge protection zones and provide for the review and approval by both
the City and the Atascadero Mutual Water Company of any project or development
within the specified zones. The ordinance will establish a policy to provide for the
monitoring of activities within these protection zones.
13. Support the establishment and protection of floodable terraces, wetlands, and
revegetation along creeks and streams.
General Plan Policy 8.2 states: “Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards
for creek side development.” The programs associated with this policy include:
1. Adopt and maintain a creek setback ordinance that will establish building setbacks
and development standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, blue
line creeks and the Salinas River to ensure the uninterrupted natural flow of the
streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible standards for the
downtown area. Responsibility: CDD, Planning Commission, City Council Timeframe:
Adopt Ordinance in 2005.
2. Prior to adoption of a creek setback ordinance an interim 35-foot creek setback shall
be in effect along Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek until March 1, 2005. All other 7.5
min USGS quadrangle blue line creeks shall have an interim 20-foot setback. The
interim setbacks shall be subject to the following:
a) On Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek setbacks shall be measured from the
edge of the creek reservation.
b) All other blue line creek setbacks shall be measured from ordinary high-water
mark.
c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the interim creek
setbacks in the form of a Conditional Use Permit if the finding can be made
that creeks, riparian areas and site improvement will not be negatively
impacted by the exception.
General Plan Policy 8.3 states: “Preserve public creek reserves for public access and ensure
that recreational use does not impact habitat value and open space qualities.” The programs
associated with this policy include:
1. Develop park, trail, and recreational amenities where appropriate in public creek
reserves.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-13
2. Require the dedication of trail easements and access points as part of subdivision
maps or development permits consistent with the Circulation Element.
5.3 Methods
STUDY AREA
The study area consists of the city limits and sphere of influence boundary (see Figure 2-2:
Planning Area). The study area encompasses 20,266 acres, or roughly 32 square miles.
LITERATURE REVIEW
SWCA Environmental Consultants compiled and reviewed available biological resources data
within the study area. The desktop review included existing environmental literature and
other pertinent information, including but not limited to:
Special-Status Species
CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CNDDB 2022) search that focused on
the following 12 USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles: Atascadero, Templeton, Creston, Santa
Margarita, Lopez Mountain, San Luis Obispo, Morro Bay South, Morro Bay North, York
Mountain, Adelaida, Paso Robles, and Estrella.
CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2022b) query for the
same 12 quadrangles searched for the CNDDB.
USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website (USFWS 2022b) query for
the study area.
USFWS Critical Habitat (and relevant published shapefiles) (USFWS 2022a) query.
Wetlands and Waterways
Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) (CDFW 2022a)
USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper (USFWS 2022c)
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) (USGS 2022)
California’s Fish Passage Assessment Database (FishPAD)(CDFW 2022c)
Soils
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web
Soil Survey (NRCS 2022b)
Vegetation and Land Cover
USGS National Land Cover Database (NLCD) (Dewitz and USGS 2021)
Vegetation (fveg) - California Department of Forestry Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire and
Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) [ds1327] (CAL FIRE 2020)
5.4 Existing Physical and Biological Conditions
Atascadero is in the upper watershed of the Salinas River and is bordered by the Salinas River
to the east and the Santa Lucia Mountain Range to the west. Elevations within the study area
range from 760 to 2,305 feet. The city is located within the Interior Santa Lucia Range of the
Central California Foothills and Coastal Mountains Ecoregion (Griffith et al. 2016). The Interior
Santa Lucia Range stretches southeast from near Greenfield in the Salinas Valley, to near the
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-14 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Sisquoc River, east of the Santa Maria Valley. The primary distinguishing characteristic of this
ecoregion is its Mediterranean climate of hot dry summers and cool moist winters. Dominant
vegetation types include oak woodlands, mixed chaparral shrublands, and annual grasslands.
CLIMATE
The climate can be characterized as a typical Mediterranean climate of hot dry summers and
cool moist winters. The average amount of annual precipitation is 15.3 inches (NOAA 2021).
Most of the precipitation occurs between November and March, with January being on
average the wettest month with 3.44 inches of precipitation (NOAA 2021). Maximum average
summer (May through September) temperatures range between 86 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
to 92°F, but there are often multiple days with temperatures reaching over 100°F. Minimum
average summer temperatures range between 49°F and 52°F. Maximum average winter
(October–April) temperatures range between 61°F and 80°F, with minimum average winter
temperatures ranging between 32°F and 41°F. The coastal microclimates in San Luis Obispo
County differ greatly from the inland climates of Atascadero.
SOILS
The geology of the region is mostly Cretaceous sedimentary rocks and Miocene marine
sediments. There are 49 soil types within the study area, encompassing five taxonomic
orders: Alfisols, Entisols, Inceptisols, Mollisols, and Vertisols (Table 5-1; Figure 5-1). Only one—
Clear Lake clay, drained—is classified as hydric. The soil types are listed below by taxonomic
order, including their total area and percentage of the study area. The Mollisols dominate
(52%) the study area and are mostly centered along U.S. Route (US) 101 and El Camino Real
running north to south. Their associations range from alluvial fans, flats, and plains, to
terraces and mountains and hillslopes and are characterized as soft, deep, dark fertile soil
formed in grasslands. Inceptisols, young soils, comprise the second largest group (25%) of
soils in the study area. These are primarily located along the western edge of the study area
and comprise the foothills of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range, where they are mainly
associated with hills and mountains. The Entisols primarily occur in alluvial fans, floodplains,
stream terraces, and valleys or on the terraces of hills and mountains. Entisols are recently
formed soils that lack well-developed horizons and commonly found on river and beach
sediments of sand and clay or volcanic ash. One of the main soil types in this group are the
Corducci and Typic Xerofluvents, which primarily occur in the streambed of the Salinas River.
The Alfisols, soils with aluminum and iron, primarily occur on terraces adjacent to the Salinas
River. The smallest group (only 1.1%) are the Vertisols, which are clay-rich and contain the only
hydric soil in the study area—Clear Lake clay, drained—which occurs in a small pocket along
Morro Road west of State Route (SR) 1.
Table 5-1: Soil Types within the Study Area
Soil Type Total Acres % of Study Area Hydric
Alfisols 1,294 6.4%
Arbuckle fine sandy loam 184 0.9% No
Arbuckle-Positas complex 362 1.8% No
Arbuckle-San Ysidro complex 367 1.8% No
Dibble clay loam 84 0.4% No
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-15
Table 5-1: Soil Types within the Study Area
Soil Type Total Acres % of Study Area Hydric
Rincon clay loam 234 1.2% --
Ryer clay loam 63 0.3% No
Entisols 2,494 12%
Arnold loamy sand 486 2.0% No
Arnold-San Andreas complex 218 1.1% No
Corducci and Typic Xerofluvents occasionally flooded 483 2.4% No
Gaviota-Rock outcrop complex 108 0.5% No
Hanford and Greenfield gravelly sandy loams 68 0.3% No
Hanford and Greenfield soils 658 3.3% No
Metz loamy sand 10 <0.1% No
Metz-Tujunga complex occasionally flooded 28 0.1% No
Oceano loamy sand 435 2.2% No
Inceptisols 5,008 25%
Balcom-Calleguas complex 20 0.1% No
Balcom-Nacimiento association 87 0.4% No
Millsholm-Dibble complex 4,340 21.5% No
Millsholm-Rock outcrop complex 562 2.8% No
Mollisols 10,582 52%
Botella sandy loam 254 1.3% No
Concepcion sandy loam 20 0.1% No
Elder loam 183 0.8% No
Elder loam flooded 60 0.2% No
Gazos shaly clay loam 817 4% No
Linne-Calodo complex 1,491 7.4% No
Linne-Diablo complex 39 0.2% No
Linne-Zakme complex 705 3.5% No
Lockwood shaly loam 106 0.5% No
Lockwood-Concepcion complex 199 1% No
Lompico loam 595 2.9% No
Lompico-McMullin complex 369 1.8% No
Los Osos-Rock outcrop complex 816 4.0% No
McMullin-Rock outcrop complex 544 2.7% No
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-16 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-1: Soil Types within the Study Area
Soil Type Total Acres % of Study Area Hydric
Mocho clay loam 84 0.4% No
Nacimiento silty clay loam 34 0.2% No
Nacimiento-Los Osos complex 242 1.2% No
Pico fine sandy loam 19 0.1% No
San Andreas sandy loam 10 0.1% No
San Andreas-Arujo complex 1,480 7.3% No
Santa Lucia-Gazos complex 147 0.6% No
Santa Lucia-Lopez complex 1,052 5.2% No
Shimmon-Dibble association 43 0.2% No
Sorrento clay loam 105 0.5% No
Still clay loam 1,013 5.0% No
Still gravelly loam 141 0.7% No
Vertisols 216 1.1%
Ayar and Diablo soils 94 0.5% No
Clear Lake clay drained 68 0.3% Yes
Cropley clay 53 0.2% No
Unclassified 611 3.0%
PITS 66 0.3% No
Rock outcrop-Gaviota complex 505 2.5% No
Water 40 0.2% NA
Source: NRCS (2022a, 2022b)
WATERSHEDS
The majority (98%) of the study area falls within the Salinas River Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC)-8 No. 18060005, with less than 2% falling within the Central Coast (HUC-8 No.
18060006) (Figure 5-2). Table 5-2 lists the watersheds that fall within the study area; however,
the main watersheds are the Graves Creek (HUC-12 No. 180600050403) watershed (42%),
Atascadero Creek (HUC-12 No. 180600050204) watershed (32%), and Paloma Creek (HUC-12
No. 180600050205) watershed (24%). Graves, Atascadero, and Paloma Creeks all flow into the
Salinas River, which parallels the eastern edge of the study area. A significant number of
watercourses throughout the city contribute to the overall health of the watersheds and
support the City’s major creeks. Each of these watercourses and watersheds play a role in
water quality and can be affected by flooding, contamination, increased turbidity, litter and
debris, and other land use changes.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-17
Table 5-2: Major Watersheds within the Study Area
Watershed Area (acres) % of Study Area
Watersheds (USGS 8-digit HU)
Salinas River (HUC-8 No. 18060005) 19,920 >98%
Central Coastal (HUC-8 No. 18060006) 346 <2%
Subwatersheds (USGS 12-digit HU)
Graves Creek
(HUC-12 No. 180600050403)
8,497 42%
Atascadero Creek
(HUC-12 No. 180600050204)
6,466 32%
Paloma Creek
(HUC-12 No. 180600050205)
4,901 24%
Santa Margarita Creek (HUC-12 No. 180600050204) 36 <1%
Paso Robles Creek (HUC-12 No. 180600050402) 20 <1%
Morro Creek (HUC-12 No. 180600060412) 346 <2%
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-18
Figure 5-1: NRCS Soils
to, Padre,
Yanoual foreH
II &J
Atascadero
OUR C I TY, OU R P LAN
Figure 5-1
NRCS Soils
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
c=J Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
--Major Roads + Freeways
Taxonomic Order
1111 Null
f=i Alfisols
f=i Entisols
1111111 I nceptisols
f=i Mollisols
1111 Vertisols
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-19
Figure 5-1: Watersheds
llmma..k
Pao
RalllN a-
....
180IOOOI
S A N LUIS
O B ISPO C O U NTY
..... ....... a-
II
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Figu re 5-2
Watersheds
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ
c:J
HUC8
Atascadero Planning Area
Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
c::::J Cenlrll Coastal
c::::J s••
HUC12
1111 Graves Creek
1111 Atascadero Creek
Paloma Creek
CJ Paso Robles Creek
1111 Santa Margarita Creek
CJ Morro Creek
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-20 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
VEGETATION AND LANDCOVER TYPES
The vegetation and landcover categories used for the study area are from the CAL FIRE FRAP
[ds1327] (Figure 5-3) (CAL FIRE 2020). This database is the result of a multi-agency
collaboration to compile the "best available" land cover data available for California into a
single comprehensive statewide data set. The classification scheme follows the California
Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) system. Although these categories do not follow CNPS
vegetation classification, there is a crosswalk reference created by CDFW available online
(CDFW 2005).
Table 5-3: Vegetation and Landcover Types within the Study Area
Cover Type Area (acres) % of Study Area
Annual Grassland 4,919 24%
Barren 1,145 6%
Blue Oak Woodland 2,025 10%
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine 3,186 16%
Coastal Oak Woodland 4,786 24%
Coastal Scrub 381 2%
Cropland 26 0.13%
Deciduous Orchard 59 0.29%
Dryland Grain Crops 11 0.05%
Evergreen Orchard 8 0.04%
Irrigated Hayfield 24 0.12%
Lacustrine 31 0.15%
Mixed Chaparral 875 4%
Pasture 53 0.26%
Riverine 335 2%
Urban 1,482 7%
Valley Foothill Riparian 26 0.13%
Valley Oak Woodland 825 4%
Vineyard 68 0.34%
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-21
Vegetation Types
Blue Oak Woodland
Blue Oak Woodlands have an overstory dominated by blue oak (Quercus douglasii),
comprising 85% to 100%. The canopy is comprised of scattered trees but can be closed. More
often the canopy forms open, savanna-like stands on rolling ridges, hills, and slopes. The
dominant tree species is blue oak, but common associates in the canopy include coast live
live oak (Quercus agrifolia) and foothill pine (Pinus sabiniana). Shrubs are rarely present, but
can include poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), California coffeeberry (Frangula
californica), ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and
manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.) However, more commonly, the understory is an extension of
the Annual Grassland vegetation, comprising mainly of annuals, such as brome grass
(Bromus spp.), wild oats (Avena spp.), foxtail (Alopecurus spp.), barley (Hordeum spp.), filaree
(Erodium spp.), and others.
Within the study area, this community occurs as patches in a mosaic with Annual Grasslands,
Mixed Chaparral, Coastal Oak Woodland, Valley Oak Woodlands, Coastal Oak woodland and
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine Woodlands. It typically occurs where soils are shallow, rocky, infertile,
and well drained; and on dry, hot, hilly terrain where the water table is often inaccessible. The
impressive spring wildflower displays within the study area are often found within Blue Oak
Woodlands. It is an important wildlife habitat, used by birds, mammals, amphibians, and
reptiles for nearly all stages of their life. Blue Oak Woodlands comprise roughly 10%, or 2,025
acres, of the study area.
Coastal Oak Woodland
Coastal Oak Woodlands represent a highly diverse and variable community, based on the
interacting factors of slope, soil, precipitation, moisture availability, and air temperature. The
overstory is dominated by deciduous and evergreen hardwoods (mostly oaks) but can have
some scattered conifers. The trees can be dense and form a closed canopy, or they can be
scattered and form an open woodland. The understory can contain shrubs and annual
grasses and forbs. In dense coast live oak woodlands understory, plants may include more
shade-tolerant shrubs such as California blackberry (Rubus ursinus) and poison oak, which
typically occurs along riparian corridors. Significant litter accumulation is typical. The
dominant tree species within the study area is coast live oak, but may include blue oak, valley
oak (Quercus lobata), California bay (Umbellularia californica), big leaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum), or toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia).
Coastal Oak Woodlands is abundant throughout the study area, with most stands occurring
on steeper slopes west of US 101 and the urban core. Here, it is in a mosaic with Annual
Grassland, Mixed Chaparral, Blue Oak Woodland, Valley Oak Woodland, and Coastal Scrub.
On the eastern side of the freeway the stands form a mosaic with Blue Oak Woodlands and
urban development. It occurs on rolling ridges, slopes, and hills with well-drained soils.
Coastal Oak Woodlands comprise roughly 24%, or 4,786 acres, of the study area.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-22
Figure 5-3: California Vegetation
I 1 / ud1
\<11 11, 1 /f.
® o•--•o.s======------•2==:..__ __ --==:J3 D Miles
SA N
O B I SPO
L U IS
CO U NTY
••
II m
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Figu re 5-3
California Vegetation
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
[:] Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
California Vegetation
1111 Annual Grassland
1111 Barren
1111 Bl ue Oak Woodland
1111 Bl ue Oak-Foot hill Pine
1111 Coastal Oak Woodland
1111 Coastal Scrub
1111 Cropland
1111 Deciduous Orchard
1111 Dryland Grain Crops
1111 Evergreen Orchard
1111 Irrigated Hayfield
1111 Lacustrine
1111 Mixed Chaparral
1111 Pasture
1111 Riverine
1111 Urban
1111 Valley Foothi ll Riparian
1111 Val ley Oak Woodland
1111 Vineyard
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-23
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine Woodlands stands are characterized by an overstory of blue oak and
foothill pine, with blue oak typically dominating. Other tree species can be found within this
community, including coast live oak, valley oak, and California buckeye. Canopy cover
typically ranges from 10 to 59% and there is usually some component of standing dead wood
(snags). The understory can contain shrubs and annual grasses and forbs. This community
occurs in a mosaic with other communities, typically Annual Grasslands, Blue Oak
Woodlands, and Valley Oak Woodlands. Within the study area, the relative proportion of blue
oak to foothill pine is variable, but blue oak tends to dominate throughout. The understory
has few shrubs and is dominated by annual grasses and forbs.
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine Woodlands is a valuable breeding habitat for a large variety of wildlife
species. However, this community is most abundant west of US 101 between the urban core
and San Gabriel Road in areas zoned rural estates. Blue Oak-Foothill Pine Woodlands
comprises roughly 16% or 3,186 acres of the study area.
Valley Oak Woodland
Valley Oak Woodlands have an overstory dominated nearly exclusively by valley oak but can
have foothill pine and coast live oak components on the margins of stands where
communities begin to intergrade. The canopy can be open, with a savanna-like structure, or
closed, with a forest-like structure. Tree density is dependent on water and soil, with denser
stands occurring in valley soils along natural drainages. There can be a shrub component,
typically poison oak, toyon, and coffeeberry, particularly in undisturbed/ungrazed stands. The
understory is dominated by annual grasses and forbs.
Within the study area this community occurs nearly exclusively along the western edge, in a
mosaic with Blue Oak Woodland, Mixed Chaparral, Coastal Oak Woodland, and Annual
Grassland. It is found in valley bottoms and low areas where the soils are deep, well
developed, and alluvial. Valley Oak Woodland comprises roughly 4%, or 825 acres, of the
study area.
Annual Grassland
Annual Grasslands are open grasslands composed of annual herbaceous plant species, with
many of the species occurring as understory components in woodland and shrub
community types. The dominant species are introduced annual grasses, including wild oats,
soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), red brome (Bromus
rubens), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), and foxtail fescue (Vulpia myuros). Common
forbs in this community are a mixture of introduced and native species, including filaree
(Erodium spp.), true clovers (Trifolium spp.), bur clover (Medicago polymorpha), popcorn
flower (Plagiobothrys), fiddleneck (Amsinckia spp.), miniature lupine (Lupinus bicolor), and
sky lupine (Lupinus nanus). Native perennial grasses are occasionally found in less disturbed
areas, including purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) and one-sided bluegrass (Poa secunda).
This community is abundant throughout the study area and is found in a mosaic with all
community types. Annual Grassland comprises approximately 4,919 acres, or roughly 24%, of
the study area.
Mixed Chaparral
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-24 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Mixed Chaparral is a shrub community dominated by shrubs with thick, stiff leaves adapted
to hot, dry summers and limited winter precipitation. It is dense and forms a nearly
impenetrable stand with greater than 80% absolute shrub cover. The dominant shrub
species are several species of ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.) and manzanita (Arctostaphylos
spp.), as well as scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), toyon, hollyleaf cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), and
chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum). Within the study area, mixed chapparal occurs in the
western portion of the study area on mid-slopes below woodland and forest types. It is
bounded on its lower end by coastal scrub and begins to merge with woodland and forest
types on its upper edge. It is on steep slopes and ridges. Mixed Chaparral comprises 875
acres, or roughly 4%, of the study area.
Coastal Scrub
Coastal Scrub is a shrub community dominated by shrubs well adapted to hot, dry summers
and limited winter precipitation. Typically, shrubs have sclerophyllous leaves or are drought
deciduous, and have flexible branches and semi-woody stems. The shrub layer can be up to
7 feet and canopy cover can approach 100%. The dominant shrub species are black sage
(Salvia mellifera), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), sticky monkeyflower
(Diplacus aurantiacus), and coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica). This community
occurs in the western portion of the study area, in a mosaic with the tree communities
(Coastal Oak Woodland, Blue Oak Woodland, and Valley Oak Woodland) and mixed
chaparral. It is strictly in the western portion of the study area, at higher elevations on steep,
dry, south-facing slopes. Coastal Scrub comprises approximately 381 acres, or roughly 2%, of
the study area.
Valley Foothill Riparian
Valley Foothill Riparian is a habitat type restricted to areas adjacent to rivers and streams.
Dominant species in the canopy layer include cottonwood, California sycamore, and valley
oak. Subcanopy trees can include white alder (Alnus rhombifolia) and boxelder (Acer
negundo). Typical understory shrub layer plants include California blackberry, poison oak,
wild rose (Rosa californica), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), and willows (Salix spp.). The
herbaceous layer consists of sedges, rushes, grasses, miner's lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata),
poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), and hoary nettle (Urtica dioica). There are only two
small pockets of this vegetation type mapped within the study area in the northwestern side
along Graves Creek, but likely occurs in other areas along the riparian corridors. Valley
Foothill Riparian comprises approximately 26 acres, or roughly 0.13%, of the study area.
Riverine
The areas mapped as Riverine within the study area encompass the large, braided channel of
the Salinas River, which borders the eastern edge of the study area. While much of this area
may also contain similar species as those found in the Valley Foothill Riparian community,
the Salinas River Riparian corridor is a mature, multi-layered woodland habitat with
sycamore, cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and willow (Salix spp.). The central part of the
channel can be characterized by large washes and braided channels, and open water habitat
characteristic of a larger river. Riverine comprises approximately 335 acres, or roughly 2%, of
the study area.
Landcover Types
Agriculture
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-25
The main agricultural landcover types mapped by the CAL FIRE FRAP vegetation database
are vineyard, deciduous orchard, pasture, cropland, irrigated hayfield, dryland grain crops,
and evergreen orchard (see Figure 5-4). Much of the orchard, cropland, and pasture is
located within parcels zoned rural estates. However, vineyards were equally popular on
parcels zoned rural estates and larger (1.5–2.5 acre) single-family residential parcels.
Urban/Developed
The CAL FIRE FRAP vegetation database only identifies 1,482 acres of land within the study
area as urban, which is considerably smaller than the approximately 2,650 acres of
development (low, medium, and high intensity) mapped by the USGS NLCD. The majority of
this landcover type falls within areas zoned general commercial, downtown, residential,
public facilities, and public recreation.
Barren
The CAL FIRE FRAP vegetation database includes a barren category. The CWHR system
defines barren habitats by the absence of vegetation. More specifically, any habitat with less
than 2% total vegetation cover by herbaceous, desert, or non-wildland species and less than
10% cover by tree or shrub species. Within the study area, this category appears to correlate
with non-vegetated infill areas interspersed between lower-density residential areas. It is also
associated with public facilities, such as the fields around Atascadero High School. The
largest areas mapped barren are situated between US 101 and the Salinas River. Within the
study area there are 1,145 acres or roughly 6% of the study area.
AQUATIC RESOURCES
As mentioned above, three main creeks and several tributaries run through the City of
Atascadero: Graves, Atascadero, and Paloma Creeks. All three drain into the Salinas River,
which runs along the eastern boundary of the city. The other main aquatic feature that plays
a vital role in the community is Atascadero Lake.
Salinas River
The Salinas River defines the eastern boundary of Atascadero. It is the principal river system
on the Central Coast of California. It flows northward approximately 170 miles from San Luis
Obispo County, through Monterey County, and emptying into Monterey Bay near the City of
Marina (Upper Salinas-Las Tablas Resource Conservation District [US-LTRCD] 2012, 2014). The
central part of the channel can be characterized by large washes, braided channels, and
open water habitat characteristic of a larger river, as shown in the photographs below. The
Salinas River Riparian corridor consists of mature, multi-layered woodland habitat with
sycamore, cottonwood, and willow (Salix spp.) that provide habitat for many species of
songbirds and raptors. However, urban and agricultural practices have caused habitat
degradation and alteration over time. For example, illegal off-road use of the Salinas River
causes displacement of the riverbed, pollution of the river, and destruction of riparian
vegetation (US-LTRCD 2018).
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-26 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Salinas River: Photo taken from Halcon Road, facing north (downstream) and south
(upstream).
Graves Creek
Graves Creek is a tributary of the Salinas River. It flows northeast and joins the Salinas River
approximately 0.25 miles south of Paso Robles Creek. Almost the entire watershed of Graves
Creek falls within the study area boundary (8,498 acres) There are approximately 60 linear
miles of tributaries within the watershed that eventually drain into Graves Creek and the
Salinas River. Graves Creek itself stretches approximately 7.5 linear miles in a northeasterly
direction across the study area. The headwaters start in the northwestern portion of the
study area and meander eastward through rural estate and rural residential parcels. The
riparian canopy in the upper reaches is dominated by oaks and California bay trees. The
riparian canopy in the middle reach is dominated by oaks, willows, black walnut, and
California sycamore trees. The creek abruptly turns north at Ramona Road and US 101 where
it parallels the highway before flowing underneath it and eventually flowing into the Salinas
River. The creek opens into a wider channel east of US 101 where it parallels the Juan Bautista
de Anza Trail (de Anza trail) at the confluence with the Salinas River. In this area t,he riparian
vegetation is dominated by arroyo willows and California sycamore, and the banks are
dominated by coyote brush.
Graves Creek provides important wildlife habitat but is heavily impacted by residential
development. Historically (prior to the 1950s) Graves creek supported an abundant
population of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) (US-LTRCD 2002) and likely
supported populations of foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) and California red-legged
frog (Rana draytonii), but most of these species were extirpated from this area in the late
1970s. Nevertheless, Graves Creek still provides an important wildlife movement corridor
connecting the Santa Lucia Mountain Range to the Salinas River Valley. There are historic
accounts that steelhead runs would start in January and end in March, and depending on
the rains, could bring steelhead upstream through May (US-LTRCD 2002). Based on historical
occurrence data the entirety of Graves Creek has been designated as critical habitat for
steelhead.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-27
Figure 5-4: NLCD Land Cover
••
..
·-, ... r. ..
r
( -
I.
To, Podre,
Sa11011a/ Foresr
,. ..
:::,._
® 0 0.5 2 3
D -----=======---------=============== Miles
:::,._
:::,._ I
-.. -..
,,
t ,,,. ... -
.,. ;!.c
SA N
OB I SPO
.... r
't
/. ...
L U IS
CO U N T Y
*
l;,c--..
J
I
Illa
--«
I
' -.,,,~ ,
"" ~ r f ....
' .,.
"
,
~"
-,;..
~
,_;'-'
_..
\
~ ..
}t
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Figu re 5-4
N LCD Land Cover
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Plann ing Area
[:] Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
NLCD Land Cover
1111 Open Water
Developed Open Space
1111 Developed Low Intensity
1111 Developed Medium Intensity
1111 Developed High Intensity
Barren Land
1111 Deciduous Forest
1111 Evergreen Forest
1111 Mixed Forest
I
Source(s):
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland/Herbaceous
Pasture/Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-28
Figure 5-5: Aquatic Resources
T E
/
f-...;;
/
SAN
OBISPO
I
(
,...--;
\
/
\
ouR f!iff adero ' OUR PLAN
Figure 5-5
uat1c Resources Aq •
Basemap Features
I -7 L -_, Atascadero c · • • ~ 1tyL1m1ts
L__J Atascadero Pl •
A
ann1ng Area
tascade s h r-, ro p ere of lnfl L......J Urb s uence an ervices Li ne
Parks + Open S pace
~ Major Roads + F reeways
National H dr 1 -y o ogy Dataset (NHD)
Stream/River
-Art ificial Path
-Lake/Pond
-Reservoir
National Wet land
-
Inventory (NWI)
Freshwat E
-
er mergent W I Fresh et and
-
water Forested/Sh b
Freshwater Pond ru Wetland
-Lake
-Riverine
Source(s):
Esn, CA State 0 pen Data, County of San L a ero 2023. UIS Obispo, City of Atasc d
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-29
Graves Creek: Left photo taken on North Ferrocarril Road bridge, facing east (downstream).
Right photo taken on Santa Lucia Road bridge, facing north (downstream).
Atascadero Creek
Atascadero Creek is a tributary of the Salinas River that flows eastward, parallel to SR 41. Its
two main tributaries are Eagle and Hale Creeks. The study area includes approximately 6,427
acres of the Atascadero Creek watershed. There are approximately 42 linear miles of
tributaries within the watershed that eventually drain into Atascadero Creek and the Salinas
River. Atascadero Creek is an intermittent stream that stretches 6.7 linear miles across the
study area from west to east. Riparian vegetation ranges from willow scrub to multi-layer
mature riparian woodland with cottonwood, sycamore, black walnut, and willow. The creek
has been highly impacted by urban development. Historically, problems of illegal dumping,
off-road vehicles (ORVs) and urban pollution have significantly degraded the quality of the
habitat, particularly for key aquatic species, such as steelhead (US-LTRCD 2012, 2014).
Atascadero Creek: Left photo taken on Lewis Avenue bridge, facing west (upstream),
adjacent to City of Atascadero government offices downtown. Right photo taken from
Curbaril Avenue pedestrian bridge, facing south (upstream).
Paloma Creek
The study area encompasses approximately 7.5 linear miles of Paloma Creek, approximately
4,891 acres of the Paloma Creek-Salinas River watershed, and approximately 18 linear miles of
tributaries. The creek flows east and northeast in the southern portion of the study area
before eventually flowing into the Salinas River. This creek has been heavily impacted by
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-30 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
grazing. Accessible reaches generally lack extensive riparian vegetation and the channels are
highly incised. Riparian vegetation consists of arroyo willows, coyote brush, and a few
scattered oak trees. Several areas along Paloma Creek provide opportunities for riparian
plantings and creek restoration projects, such as the stretch that crosses through Paloma
Creek Park, as shown in the photos below.
Paloma Creek: Left photo taken on Atascadero Road bridge, facing south (upstream). Right
photo taken on Viejo Camino bridge, facing east (downstream) along Paloma Creek Park.
Atascadero Lake
Atascadero Lake is situated approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the intersection between
US 101 and SR 41. Prior to being a perennial lake, it was first a low-lying area fed by rainfall and
runoff that naturally filled with water then receded during the summer heat. This natural
basin was engineered into a larger lake as early as 1913 by the founder of Atascadero, E.G.
Lewis. There have been recent efforts by community groups to maintain water quality and
water levels in the lake. It is an important recreational area for the community and is
regularly stocked with trout for recreational fishing opportunities. It supports important
wetland vegetation that attracts waterfowl and other migratory bird species.
Atascadero Lake: Photos taken from deck of Pavilion, facing south (left photo) and north
(right photo).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-31
EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS
The open space areas and parks within the study area are primarily focused on providing
recreational opportunities for city residences. There are approximately 1,111 acres within the
study area zoned open space, including approximately 180 acres of Annual Grassland, 206
acres Of Blue Oak-Foothill Pine, 168 acres of Coast Live Oak Woodland, 58 acres of Blue Oak
Woodland, 27 acres of Lacustrine, and 17 acres of Mixed Chaparral. City-owned parks include
Atascadero Lake Park, Colony Park, Paloma Creek Park, Sunken Gardens Park, Apple Valley
Park, and Stadium Park. Non-City-owned parks include Heilmann Regional Park, Chalk
Mountain Golf Course, and Faces of Freedom Veterans Memorial. Immediately west of the
study area is the Los Padres National Forest. The preservation and maintenance of these
parks provide important recreational opportunities for residents, along with aesthetic value
and important pockets of urban wildlife habitat. For example, Atascadero Lake Park provides
important stopover habitat for migrating waterfowl. In addition, the City’s tree replacement
program identifies receiver sites for replanting, a majority of which are outside of formal
existing parklands.
5.5 Special-Status Species
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
For the purposes of this chapter, special-status plant species are defined as the following:
Plants listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA (50 CFR
Section 17.12 for listed plants and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed
species).
Plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the
FESA.
Plants that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under CEQA (State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15380).
Plants considered by the CNPS to be “rare, threatened, or endangered” in California (CNPS
CRPR 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B in CNPS 2022b).
Plants listed by the CNPS as plants about which we need more information and plants of
limited distribution (Ranks 3 and 4 in CNPS 2022b).
Plants listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered
under the CESA (14 CCR Section 670.5).
Plants listed under the NPPA (CFGC Section 1900 et seq.).
Plants considered sensitive by other Federal agencies (i.e., U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of
Land Management), State and local agencies, or jurisdictions.
The background review identified the potential for 92 taxa (plants and lichen) to occur within
and around the study area (see Table 5-4). Based on an analysis of CNDDB occurrence
records and suitable vegetation and habitats within the study area, it was determined that
populations of the following eight special-status plant species occur in the study area:
Santa Margarita manzanita (Arctostaphylos pilosula)
Mile’s milk vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus)
La Panza mariposa-lily (Calochortus obispoensis)
straight-awned spineflower (Chorizanthe rectispina)
Eastwood’s larkspur (Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae)
yellow-flowered eriastrum (Eriastrum luteum)
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-32 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Ojai fritillary (Fritillaria ojaiensis)
mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. puberula).
There are also suitable habitat conditions for the following four additional special-status plant
species:
Douglas’ fiddleneck (Amsinckia douglasiana)
San Luis Obispo owls clover (Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis)
Cuesta Ridge thistle (Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum)
shining navarretia (Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians).
Finally, there are marginal conditions present to potentially support habitat for the following
13 special-status plant species:
Hoover’s bent grass (Agrostis hooveri)
chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis)
Salinas milk-vetch (Astragalus macrodon)
dwarf calycadenia (Calycadenia villosa)
Palmer’s spineflower (Chorizanthe palmeri)
paniculate tarplant (Deinandra paniculate)
small-flowered gypsum-loving larkspur (Delphinium gypsophilum ssp. parviflorum)
San Benito poppy (Eschscholzia hypecoides)
stinkbells (Fritillaria agrestis)
small-leaved lomatium (Lomatium parvifolium)
spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis)
hooked popcornflower (Plagiobothrys uncinatus)
chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis)
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-33
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Bristlecone fir
Abies bracteata
Rocky sites in broadleaved
upland forest, chaparral, lower
montane coniferous forest, and riparian woodland. Elevation: 183–1,600 meters.
-- --/--/IB.3 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area does not support
the appropriate topographic
conditions and vegetative
communities for this species.
Hoover’s bent grass
Agrostis hooveri
Sandy sites in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, valley,
and foothill grassland. Elevation: 60–600 meters.
April–July --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area contains the
appropriate vegetation
community but lacks the
necessary mesic conditions for this species.
Douglas’ fiddleneck
Amsinckia douglasiana
Cismontane woodland and valley foothill grassland. Micro habitat: Monterey shale in dry conditions. Elevation: 0–1,950 meters.
March–May --/--/4.2 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The appropriate vegetation
community and environmental
conditions are present.
Oval-leaved
snapdragon
Antirrhinum ovatum
Clay or gypsum, often alkaline
soils in chaparral, cismontane
woodland, pinyon and juniper woodland, and valley and foothill
grassland. Elevation: 200–1,000
meters
May–
November
--/--/4.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks necessary soil
conditions.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-34 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Santa Lucia manzanita
Arctostaphylos luciana
Chaparral with shale outcrops.
Elevation: 350–850 meters.
February–
March
--/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence within 3 miles of the study area. Marginally appropriate vegetation
community is present; however,
the study area is farther interior
than the known range of the species.
Morro manzanita
Arctostaphylos morroensis
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and coastal scrub, on stabilized coastal dunes. Elevation: 5–205 meters.
December–
March
FT/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area does not support
coastal dune scrub.
Bishop manzanita
Arctostaphylos
obispoensis
Closed-cone coniferous forest,
chaparral, and cismontane
woodland. Elevation: 150–980 meters.
February–
June
--/--/4.3 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area does not contain ultramafic soils.
Oso manzanita
Arctostaphylos
osoensis
Chaparral and cismontane woodland (dacite porphyry
buttes). Elevation: 300–500
meters.
February–March --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks dacite
outcrops.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-35
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Pecho manzanita
Arctostaphylos pechoensis
Closed coniferous forest,
chaparral, and coastal scrub on
siliceous shale. Elevation: 125–850 meters.
November–
March
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area is farther interior
than the known range of the
species.
Santa Margarita
manzanita
Arctostaphylos pilosula
Closed coniferous forest,
chaparral, and cismontane
woodland on shale soils.
Elevation: 170–1,100 meters.
December–
March
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present;
Species Present. This species
occurs in small patches of
chaparral in the southwestern portion of the study area.
Dacite manzanita
Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. daciticola
Chaparral and cismontane woodland (dacite porphyry buttes). Elevation: 100–300 meters.
March --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks dacite
outcrops.
Marsh sandwort
Arenaria paludicola
Marshes and swamps. Grows
through dense mats of Typha,
Juncus, Scirpus, etc. in freshwater
marsh. Elevation: 10–170 meters.
May–August FE/SE/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. Suitable wetland vegetation communities are absent.
Mile’s milk vetch
Astragalus
didymocarpus var.
milesianus
Coastal scrub on clay soils. Elevation: 20–90 meters. March–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the
eastern part of the study area.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-36 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Salinas milk-vetch
Astragalus macrodon
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill grassland.
Micro habitat: sandstone, serpentinite, and shale. In openings. Elevation: 250–950 meters.
April–July --/--/4.3 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. Marginally suitable soil types are
present; however, suitable
vegetation community is absent
on appropriate soils.
Coulter’s saltbush
Atriplex coulteri
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes,
coastal scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland (alkaline or clay). Elevation: 3–460 meters.
March–
October
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. Saline/alkaline soils are absent.
Club-haired mariposa lily
Calochortus clavatus
var. clavatus
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland (typically
serpentinite, clay, or rocky soils).
Elevation: 75–1,300 meters.
May–June --/--/4.3 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
San Luis mariposa-lily
Calochortus obispoensis
Dry serpentine, generally open
chaparral. Elevation: 100–500
meters.
May–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
La Panza mariposa lily
Calochortus simulans
Chaparral, coastal scrub, and
valley and foothill grassland.
Often in serpentine grassland.
Elevation: 75–665 meters.
May–July --/--/1B.3 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. The CNDDB
documents occurrences within 1
mile southeast of the study area and in the southwest part of the study area.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-37
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Dwarf calycadenia
Calycadenia villosa
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
meadows and seeps, and valley
and foothill grassland (rocky). Elevation: 240–1,350 meters.
May–
October
--/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. Suitable vegetation communities
are present; however, suitable
climactic conditions are absent.
Cambria morning-glory
Calystegia subacaulis
ssp. episcopalis
Grassland and rocky areas
associated with chaparral and
cismontane woodland. Elevation:
60–500 meters.
April–May --/--/4.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks coastal grassland communities.
Hardham’s evening-primrose
Camissoniopsis
hardhamiae
Annual herb. Sandy, decomposed carbonate soils. Especially in
disturbed or burned areas
among chaparral and
cismontane woodland. Elevation: 140–945 meters.
March–May --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB
documents occurrences within 3
miles to the southeast of the study
area; however, the study area
lacks necessary limestone soils.
San Luis Obispo sedge
Carex obispoensis
Closed-cone coniferous forests,
chaparral, coastal prairie, coastal
scrub, and valley and foothill grassland. Usually adjacent to
seeps, springs, stream sides or
other water source with sand,
clay, or serpentine. Elevation: 5–
790 meters.
April–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-38 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
San Luis Obispo owls
clover
Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis
Valley and foothill grassland.
Elevation: 0–215 meters.
March–May --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area supports
appropriate vegetation
communities; however, these
communities may be too dry.
California jewelflower
Caulanthus
californicus
Sandy sites in chenopod scrub,
pinyon and juniper woodland,
and valley and foothill grassland.
Elevation: 61–1,000 meters.
February–
May
FE/SE/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks appropriate
vegetation communities and
environmental conditions.
Lemmon's jewelflower
Caulanthus lemmonii
Pinyon and juniper woodland
and valley and foothill grassland.
Elevation: 80–1,220 meters
March–May --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. Suitable grassland habitat present; however, the study area is
outside of the known range of the
species.
San Luis Obispo
ceanothus
Ceanothus thyrsiflorus var. obispoensis
Perennial shrub. Dacite soils
among chaparral and
cismontane woodland. Currently
only known from Morro Bay area. Elevation: 140–225 meters
June --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks dacite outcrops.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-39
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Congdon’s tarplant
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii
Depressional areas with clay soil
and valley and foothill grassland.
Elevation: 1–230 meters.
May–
November
--/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The appropriate vegetation
community is present; however,
appropriate soils within the
vegetation community are absent.
Coastal goosefoot
Chenopodium
littoreum
Coastal dunes. Elevation: 10–30
meters.
April–August --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal
dunes.
Dwarf soaproot
Chlorogalum
pomeridianum var.
minus
Chaparral habitats with
serpentine soils. Elevation: 305–
1,000 meters.
May–August --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. Chaparral is present within the study area; however, the study area lacks ultramafic soils.
Purple amole
Chlorogalum
purpureum
Gravelly and clay sites in chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill grassland.
Elevation: 205–385 meters.
April–June FT/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The grassland habitats in the
study area lack the necessary soil.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-40 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Point Reyes salty birds-
beak
Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre
Annual herb (hemiparasitic) that
occurs in marshes and swamps
(coastal salt). Elevation: 0–10 meters.
June–
October
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks coastal salt marshes.
Salt marsh bird’s beak
Chloropyron
maritimum ssp.
maritimum
Coastal dunes, marshes, and swamps. Elevation: 0–30 meters. May–October FE/SE/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal salt marshes.
Irish Hills spineflower
Chorizanthe aphanantha
Annual herb. Observed in Irish Hills area of San Luis Obispo County. Reportedly occurs in
chaparral, foothill woodland,
coastal sage scrub, and closed-
cone pine forest; however, little is known about species.
April–August --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
Brewer’s spineflower
Chorizanthe breweri
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, closed-cone
coniferous forest; rocky or gravelly serpentine sites; usually
in barren areas. Elevation: 45–800
meters.
May–August --/--/1B.3 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
Douglas’ spineflower
Chorizanthe douglasii
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, and lower
montane coniferous forest.
Elevation: 55–1,600 meters.
April–July --/--/--4.3 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-41
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Palmer’s spineflower
Chorizanthe palmeri
Chaparral, cismontane
woodlands, and valley and
foothill grassland (serpentinite). Elevation: 60–700 meters.
April–August --/--/4.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
Straight-awned spineflower
Chorizanthe rectispina
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and coastal scrub. Often on
granite in chaparral. Elevation:
355–1,035 meters.
April–July --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in
chaparral in the southwestern
portion of the study area.
Chorro Creek bog
thistle
Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense
Chaparral, cismontane
woodlands; serpentine seeps or bogs. Elevation: 35–380 meters.
February–
September
FE/SE/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks serpentine
seeps.
Cuesta Ridge thistle
Cirsium occidentale
var. lucianum
Chaparral (openings) on
serpentinite, often on steep rocky
slopes and disturbed roadsides.
Elevation: 500–750 meters.
April–June --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence to the
southwest within 3 miles of the
study area. The study area lacks serpentinite.
Popcorn lichen
Cladonia firma
Coastal dunes and coastal scrub (soil, detritus and moss). No blooming period. Elevation: 30–75 meters.
N/A --/--/2B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The study area lacks coastal dunes.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-42 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Pismo clarkia
Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata
Sandy soils, openings in
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill grassland. On ancient sand dunes not far from coast. Elevation: 25–185 meters.
May–July FE/SR/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ancient
dunes and is too far removed from
the coast.
Paniculate tarplant
Deinandra paniculata
Coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, and vernal pools. Micro
habitats: sometimes sandy, but
usually vernally mesic. Elevation: 25–940 meters
(March)
April–
November
--/--/4.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks vernal pools.
Small-flowered gypsum-loving larkspur
Delphinium
gypsophilum ssp.
parviflorum
Rocky, clay, and serpentinite soils in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grassland. Elevation: 190–350 meters.
March–June --/--/3.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The appropriate vegetation
community is present; however, appropriate soils are absent.
Dune larkspur
Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae
Maritime chaparral and coastal
dunes with sandy or rocky soils.
Elevation: 0–200 meters.
April–May --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks maritime
chaparral and coastal dunes.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-43
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Eastwood’s larkspur
Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae
Chaparral and valley and foothill
grassland (serpentinite, coastal).
Elevation: 75–500 meters.
February–
March
--/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the center of the study area. The study area contains the appropriate
vegetation but lacks ultramafic
soils.
Umbrella larkspur
Delphinium
umbraculorum
Perennial herb. Occurs in
cismontane woodland. Elevation:
400–1,600 meters.
April–June --/--/1B.3 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks the required mesic conditions.
Beach spectaclepod
Dithyrea maritima
Coastal dunes, seashores, and sandy places with coastal scrub. Elevation: 3–50 meters.
March–May --/ST/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal dune habitat.
Betty’s dudleya
Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae
Coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, and chaparral; rocky
barren serpentine exposures. Elevation: 20–180 meters.
May–July --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
Mouse-gray dudleya
Dudleya abramsii ssp.
murina
Serpentine outcrops in chaparral
and cismontane woodland.
Elevation: 90–300 meters.
May–June --/--/1B.3 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-44 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Yellow-flowered
eriastrum
Eriastrum luteum
Bare sandy decomposed granite
slopes in broadleaved upland
forest, chaparral, and cismontane woodland. Elevation: 240–580 meters.
May–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present;
Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the center of the study area.
Blochman's leafy daisy
Erigeron blochmaniae
Coastal scrub and coastal dunes. Elevation: 0–185 meters. July–October --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal dune
habitat.
Indian Knob
mountainbalm
Eriodictyon altissimum
Ridges in open, disturbed areas
within chaparral on Pismo sandstone. Elevation: 95–245 meters.
March–June FE/SE/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks appropriate
soil/vegetation community.
Hoover's button-celery
Eryngium aristulatum
var. hooveri
Alkaline depressions, vernal
pools, roadside ditches, and other
wet places near the coast.
Elevation: 1–50 meters.
July --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks vernal pools.
Irish Hills
monkeyflower
Erythranthe serpentinicola
Rocky, mesic openings in
serpentine chaparral. Elevation: 60–360 meters.
Unknown --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-45
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
San Benito poppy
Eschscholzia hypecoides
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill grasslands
on clayey serpentinite soils. Elevation: 200–1,500 meters.
March–June --/--/4.3 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The study area
lacks ultramafic soils.
San Joaquin spearscale
Extriplex joaquinana
Seasonal alkali wetlands or alkali
sink scrub. Elevation: 0–800 meters.
April–
September
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks alkali
wetlands.
Stinkbells
Fritillaria agrestis
Vertic clayey soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, and valley
and foothill grasslands. Elevation: 10–1,555 meters.
March–June --/--/4.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNNDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The soil types may not be ideal.
Ojai fritillary
Fritillaria ojaiensis
Rocky sites in chaparral, broadleaved upland forest, lower
montane coniferous forests, and
cismontane woodland,
sometimes roadsides. Elevation:
95–1,140 meters.
February–May --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. The CNDDB documents one occurrence in the
chapparal in the southwestern
portion of the study area.
Mesa horkelia
Horkelia cuneata var. puberula
Sandy or gravelly sites in
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
or coastal scrub. Elevation: 15–1,645 meters.
March–July --/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the center of the study area, which was slightly outside of the known range of the species.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-46 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Kellogg’s horkelia
Horkelia cuneata var. sericea
Sandy or gravelly soils in
openings in closed-cone
coniferous forest, coastal scrub, coastal dunes, and chaparral. Elevation: 5–430 meters.
April–August --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks mesic coastal conditions.
Santa Lucia dwarf rush
Juncus luciensis
Wet and sandy soils in vernal
pools, ephemeral drainages, wet
meadows, and streamsides.
Elevation: 280–2,035 meters.
April–August
(fruiting
time)
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks mesic conditions and vernal pools.
Perennial goldfields
Lasthenia californica ssp. macrantha
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, and coastal scrub. Elevation: 5–185 meters.
May–August --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal dune
habitat.
Coulter’s goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata ssp.
coulteri
Alkaline soils in playas, sinks, and
grasslands. Elevation: 1–1,375
meters.
April–May --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks alkaline conditions.
Salinas valley goldfields
Lasthenia leptalea
Openings in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill
grasslands. Elevation: 60–1,065
meters.
February–May --/--/4.3 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area outside of species’ range.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-47
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Jones’ layia
Layia jonesii
Clay soils and serpentine
outcrops in chaparral and foothill
grassland. Elevation: 5–245 meters.
March–May --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
Jared’s pepper-grass
Lepidium jaredii ssp. jaredii
Alkali flats and sinks with sandy,
alkaline soils in foothill
grasslands. Elevation: 335–1,005
meters.
March–April --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks alkaline conditions.
Blochman's leafy daisy
Erigeron blochmaniae
Coastal scrub and coastal dunes. Elevation: 0–185 meters. July–October --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal dune
habitat.
Indian Knob
mountainbalm
Eriodictyon altissimum
Ridges in open, disturbed areas
within chaparral on Pismo
sandstone. Elevation: 95–245
meters.
March–June FE/SE/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks the
appropriate soil/vegetation
community.
Hoover's button-celery
Eryngium aristulatum
var. hooveri
Alkaline depressions, vernal
pools, roadside ditches, and other
wet places near coast. Elevation:
1–50 meters.
July --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks vernal pools.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-48 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Irish Hills
monkeyflower
Erythranthe serpentinicola
Rocky, mesic openings in
serpentine chaparral. Elevation:
60–360 meters.
Unknown --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
San Benito poppy
Eschscholzia hypecoides
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill grasslands
on clayey serpentinite soils.
Elevation: 200–1,500 meters.
March–June --/--/4.3 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The study area
lacks ultramafic soils.
San Joaquin spearscale
Extriplex joaquinana
Occurs in seasonal alkali
wetlands or alkali sink scrub.
Elevation: 0–800 meters.
April–
September
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks alkali wetlands.
Stinkbells
Fritillaria agrestis
Vertic clayey soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, and valley
and foothill grasslands. Elevation:
10–1,555 meters.
March–June --/--/4.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNNDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The soil types may not be ideal.
Ojai fritillary
Fritillaria ojaiensis
Rocky sites in chaparral,
broadleaved upland forest, lower
montane coniferous forests, and cismontane woodland, sometimes roadsides. Elevation: 95–1,140 meters.
February–
May
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present;
Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the chapparal in the southwestern portion of the study area.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-49
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Mesa horkelia
Horkelia cuneata var. puberula
Sandy or gravelly sites in
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
or coastal scrub. Elevation: 15–1,645 meters.
March–July --/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Present. The CNDDB
documents one occurrence in the center of the study area, which is slightly outside of the known range of the species.
Kellogg’s horkelia
Horkelia cuneata var. sericea
Sandy or gravelly soils in
openings in closed-cone
coniferous forest, coastal scrub,
coastal dunes, and chaparral.
Elevation: 5–430 meters.
April–August --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks mesic coastal conditions.
Santa Lucia dwarf rush
Juncus luciensis
Wet and sandy soils in vernal pools, ephemeral drainages, wet meadows, and streamsides. Elevation: 280–2,035 meters.
April–August (fruiting time)
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks mesic
conditions and vernal pools.
Perennial goldfields
Lasthenia californica
ssp. macrantha
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes,
and coastal scrub. Elevation: 5–
185 meters.
May–August --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks coastal dune habitat.
Coulter’s goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata ssp.
coulteri
Alkaline soils in playas, sinks, and grasslands. Elevation: 1–1,375 meters.
April–May --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks alkaline conditions.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-50 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Salinas valley goldfields
Lasthenia leptalea
Openings in cismontane
woodland and valley and foothill
grasslands. Elevation: 60–1,065 meters.
February–
May
--/--/4.3 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area is outside the known range of the species.
Jones’ layia
Layia jonesii
Clay soils and serpentine
outcrops in chaparral and foothill
grassland. Elevation: 5–245
meters.
March–May --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
Jared’s pepper-grass
Lepidium jaredii ssp. jaredii
Alkali flats and sinks with sandy, alkaline soils in foothill grasslands. Elevation: 335–1005 meters.
March–April --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks alkaline
conditions.
Small-leaved lomatium
Lomatium parvifolium
Serpentine in chaparral, closed-
cone coniferous forest, coastal
scrub, and riparian woodland.
Elevation: 20–700 meters.
February–
May
--/--/4.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The appropriate
vegetation community is present;
however, ultramafic soils are absent.
San Luis Obispo County lupine
Lupinus ludovicianus
Open areas on sandy soils in chaparral and cismontane woodland. Elevation: 85–525 meters.
April–July --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area is outside the
known range of the species.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-51
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Jones' bush-mallow
Malacothamnus jonesii
Open chaparral and cismontane
woodlands. Elevation: 160–1,075
meters
April–
October
--/--/4.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The chaparral within the study area is likely too dense/closed.
Santa Lucia bush-mallow
Malacothamnus
palmeri var. palmeri
Dry, rocky, chaparral slopes near
the summit. Elevation: 3–670
meters.
May–July --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The chaparral within the study area is likely too dense/closed.
Oregon meconella
Meconella oregana
Open, moist places in coastal prairie and coastal scrub. Elevation: 60–640 meters.
March–May --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal
conditions.
Palmer's monardella
Monardella palmeri
Serpentine in cismontane
woodlands and chaparral.
Elevation: 90–945 meters.
June–
August
--/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soils.
Southern curly-leaved monardella
Monardella sinuata
ssp. sinuata
Sandy soils in coastal dunes, coastal scrub, chaparral, and
cismontane woodland. Elevation:
20–305 meters
April–September --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal conditions.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-52 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Woodland
woollythreads
Monolopia gracilens
Sandy and rocky soils on grassy
sites or in openings in chaparral
and cismontane woodland. Occasionally on serpentine. Elevation: 120–975 meters.
March–July --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks suitable soil conditions.
Aparejo grass
Muhlenbergia utilis
Alkaline or serpentine meadows,
seeps, marshes, swamps, and
mesic sites in chaparral, coastal
scrub, and cismontane
woodland. Elevation: 25–2,325 meters.
October–March --/--/2B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks mesic conditions.
Spreading navarretia
Navarretia fossalis
Vernal pools and ditches. Elevation: 15–850 meters. April–June FT/--/1B.1 Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area is outside the
known range of the species.
Shining navarretia
Navarretia
nigelliformis ssp. radians
Clay depressions in cismontane
woodland, valley and foothill
grasslands, and vernal pools.
Elevation: 60–975 meters.
May–July --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. The CNDDB
documents several occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. Focused surveys are needed.
Coast woolly-heads
Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata
Coastal dunes. Elevation: 0–5 meters. March–August --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks coastal dune
habitat.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-53
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Hooked popcornflower
Plagiobothrys uncinatus
Burned and disturbed sites on
sandstone outcrops and canyon
sides in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and grasslands. Elevation: 210–855 meters.
April–May --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The habitat conditions are
suitable, but the study area lacks
the necessary disturbance history.
Diablo Canyon blue
grass
Poa diaboli
Shale soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, and
coastal scrub, sometimes burned
areas. Elevation: 115–400 meters.
March–April --/--/1B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The habitat conditions are
suitable, but the study area lacks
the necessary disturbance history.
Adobe sanicle
Sanicula maritima
Moist clay or ultramafic soils in
meadows, seeps, grasslands,
chaparral, and coastal prairie.
Elevation: 0–75 meters.
April–May --/SR/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks ultramafic soil.
Chaparral ragwort
Senecio aphanactis
Drying alkaline flats in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub. Elevation: 20–1,020 meters.
February–
May
--/--/2B.2 Marginal Conditions Present;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
Suitable habitat is present;
however, the habitat lacks alkaline
conditions.
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-54 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
San Gabriel ragwort
Senecio astephanus
Steep rocky slopes in chaparral,
coastal sage scrub, and oak
woodlands. Elevation: 400–1,500 meters.
April–June --/--/4.3 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks the necessary topography.
Cuesta Pass checkerbloom
Sidalcea hickmanii ssp.
anomala
Rocky serpentine soil in closed-
cone coniferous forests and
chaparral. Elevation: 600–800
meters.
May–June --/SR/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic soils and disturbance history.
Most beautiful jewelflower
Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus
Serpentine outcrops on ridges and slopes in chaparral, grassland, and cismontane
woodland. Elevation: 90–1,040
meters.
April–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks ultramafic
soils.
California seablite
Suaeda californica
Margins of coastal saltmarshes.
Elevation: 0–5 meters.
July–
October
FE/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks coastal saltmarsh habitat.
Splitting yarn lichen
Sulcaria isidiifera
Old-growth shrubs and oaks in coastal scrub. Elevation: 20–55 meters.
N/A --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
Study area lacks coastal scrub habitat.
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-55
Table 5-4: Special-Status Plant Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Flower
Season
Legal Status Federal/
State/CRPR
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Twisted horsehair
lichen
Sulcaria spiralifera
Conifers in coastal scrub.
Elevation: 0–90 meters.
N/A --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent;
Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences within 3 miles of the study area. The study area lacks coastal scrub habitat.
Saline clover
Trifolium hyrophylum
Mesic and alkaline sites in
marshes and swamps,
grasslands, and vernal pools.
Elevation: 1–335 meters.
April–June --/--/1B.2 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does
not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks mesic alkaline sites.
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum
Tropidicarpum capparideum
Alkaline clay in valley and foothill woodlands. Elevation: 0–360 meters.
March–April --/--/1B.1 Suitable Conditions Absent; Species Absent. The CNDDB does not document any occurrences
within 3 miles of the study area.
The study area lacks alkaline
conditions.
Status Codes:
-- = no status Federal: FE = Federally Endangered; FT = Federally Threatened State: SE = State Endangered; ST= State Threatened; SR= State
Rare
California Native Plant Society (CNPS): Rank 1B = rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. Rank 2 = rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more
common elsewhere.
Rank 3 = plants that about which more information is needed. Rank 4 = a watch list plants of limited distribution.
CBR = Considered but rejected
Threat Code:
_.1 = Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) _.2 = Fairly endangered in California (20%–80% occurrences threatened)
_.3 = Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current
threats known) Rationale Terms: Species Present: Species was or has been observed in the survey area.
Suitable Conditions Present: The appropriate habitat, soils, and elevation are present in
the survey area. Marginal Conditions Present: The appropriate habitat and/or soils are present, but
other factors (past disturbances, elevation range) may preclude species occurrence.
Note(s): 1 All plant descriptions paraphrased from CNPS (2022a). 2 Suitable Conditions Absent: The survey area does not support the appropriate habitat, soils, and/or elevation for the species.
Source(s): Baldwin et al. (2012)
I I I I
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-56 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES
For the purposes of this chapter, special-status animal species are defined as the following:
Animals listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA (50 CFR
17.11 for listed animals and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species).
Animals that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under
the FESA.
Animals that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under CEQA (State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15380).
Animals listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened and
endangered under the CESA (14 CCR 670.5).
Animal species considered by the State of California/CDFW to be California Species of Special
Concern (SSC) or included on CDFW’s Watch List (WL) (CDFW 2022a).
Animal species that are fully protected in California (CFGC Sections 3511 [birds], 4700
[mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians]).
The background review identified the potential for 53 special-status animal species to occur
within and around the study area (see Table 5-5). There are CNDDB occurrences in the study
area for the following nine special-status animal species;
obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus)
crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii)
Atascadero June beetle (Polyphylla nubile)
coast range newt (Taricha torosa)
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii)
northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra)
western pond turtle (Emys marmorataI)
purple martin (Progne subis)
golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos)
There are suitable habitat conditions present, and the study area is within the range of the
following 16 additional special-status animal species:
monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus)
San Luis Obispo pyrg (Pyrgulopsis taylori)
lesser slender salamander (Batrachoseps minor)
Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii)
grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum)
ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis)
white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia)
prairie falcon(Falco mexicanus)
bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)
pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)
Townsends big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii)
western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis)
Monterey dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma macrotis Luciana)
American badger (Taxidea taxus)
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-57
Suitable habitat conditions are present in the study area for South-Central California coast
steelhead Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 9), foothill
yellow-legged frog south coast DPS (Rana boylii pop. 6), yellow warbler (Setophaga
petechia), and Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus); however, their populations have been
extirpated from the area.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-58 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Brachiopods
Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
Vernal pool habitats, including depressions in sandstone, to small
swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow
depressions with a grassy or,
occasionally, muddy bottom in
grassland.
FT/--/-- Suitable Conditions Absent. No suitable vernal pool habitat occurs in the study area.
California linderiella
Linderiella occidentalis
Seasonal ponds in grasslands,
sandstone depressions, and alluvial flats with hardpan beneath.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Absent. No suitable
vernal pool habitat occurs in the study area.
Fish
Tidewater goby
Eucyclogobius newberryi
Brackish shallow lagoons and lower
stream reaches where water is still,
but not stagnant.
FE/--/-- Suitable Conditions Absent. No suitable
brackish shallow lagoons and lower
stream reaches occurs in the study area.
South-Central California
Coast steelhead DPS
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 9
Clear, cool water with abundant in-
stream cover, well-vegetated stream
margins, relatively stable water flow, and a 1:1 pool-to-riffle ratio.
FT, CH/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. The Salinas River, Graves Creek,
Atascadero Creek, and Paloma Creek historically supported steelhead; however, now the only CNDDB
occurrence (#4) of steelhead in the
Salinas River Watershed was recorded in
Arroyo Seco and its tributaries. This
occurrence is approximately 60 miles north of the study area and may be the only remaining remnants of steelhead in
the Salinas River watershed (CNDDB
2022).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-59
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Critical Habitat - South-
Central California Coast
steelhead DPS
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 9
Critical habitat includes stream
channels within designated stream
reaches and includes lateral extent
as defined by ordinary high-water line (33 CFR 329.11).
CH/--/-- Present. The Salinas River, Graves Creek,
and Atascadero Creek are designated as
critical habitat for South-Central
California Coast steelhead DPS and falls within the Paso Robles Hydrologic Subarea 330981, which is part of the
larger Salinas Hydrologic Unit 3309
(NOAA Fisheries 2005).
Invertebrates
Obscure bumble bee
Bombus caliginosus
Open grassy coastal prairies and Coast Range meadows. Nests
underground and aboveground in
abandoned bird nests.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Present. The areas of lower-density oak savanna, annual
grassland, mixed chaparral, and coastal
sage scrub habitats in the study area
provide suitable habitat conditions for this species.
Crotch bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
Grassland and scrub habitats in
California, Nevada, and Baja California. Feeds on milkweeds,
dusty maidens, lupines, medics,
phacelias, and sages.
--/-CE/SA Suitable Conditions Present. The areas
of lower-density oak savanna, annual grassland, mixed chaparral, and coastal
sage scrub habitats in the study area
provide suitable habitat conditions for
this species. There are two historic (1959
and 1968) CNDDB occurrences (#79 and #80) mapped in the general vicinity of Atascadero. One is in the city center, and
one is 3 miles southwest of Atascadero.
Very little is known about this species,
and it is likely present in the study area.
Sandy beach tiger beetle
Cicindela hirticollis gravida
Areas adjacent to non-brackish
water along the California coast to
Mexico; inhabits sand in upper zone; larvae found in moist sand.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Absent. The coastal
habitat and soils necessary to support
this species do not occur in the study area.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-60 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Globose Dune beetle
Coelus globosus
Coastal sand dune habitat. --/--/SA Suitable Conditions Absent. The coastal
sand dune habitat necessary to support
this species does not occur in the study
area.
Monarch butterfly
Danaus plexippus
Along coast from northern
Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico.
Winter roosts in wind-protected tree groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine
and cypress), with nectar and water
sources nearby.
FC/--/SA Suitable Conditions Present; Species
Present, Winter Roosting Likely
Absent. The study area contains suitable tree groves and nectar sources to
support adults and larval butterflies;
however, it is outside of the coastal
range for winter roost sites.
Morro Bay blue butterfly
Icaricia icarioides
moroensis
Stabilized dunes and adjacent areas
of coastal San Luis Obispo and Santa
Barbara Counties; (Lupinus chamissonis) is larval food plant.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Absent. The coastal
sand dune habitat necessary to support
this species was not observed within the study area.
Atascadero June beetle
Polyphylla nubila
Very little is known about this
species. It is only known from sand dunes in San Luis Obispo County.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Present; Species
Present. Very little is known about the distribution of this species. There are two
CNDDB occurrence records in the study
area—one record is near the Salinas
River (#4) from 1991 and one is a historic
(1946) museum record with the general location of Atascadero (#2). Both occurrences were found near light sources.
Gastropods
Morro shoulderband snail
Helminthoglypta walkeriana
Restricted to coastal strand in Los
Osos and immediate vicinity of Morro Bay; inhabits duff beneath Salvia, Carpobrotus, and Ericameria.
FT/--/-- Suitable Conditions Absent; Species
Absent. The study area is located outside of the known range of the species.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-61
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
San Luis Obispo pyrg
Pyrgulopsis taylori
Freshwater habitats in San Luis
Obispo County.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Present. Suitable
aquatic habitat could potentially occur
in the study area. Very little is known
about the habitat requirements and distribution of the species.
mimic tyronia (California
brackishwater snail)
Tryonia imitator
Aquatic habitats, including brackish
marsh, estuary, lagoon, marsh and swamp, salt marsh, and wetland.
--/--/SA Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area does not contain brackish marsh, estuary, or saltmarsh wetlands.
Amphibians
California tiger
salamander
Ambystoma californiense
Vacant or mammal-occupied
burrows and other underground
retreats throughout most of year in grassland, savanna, or open
woodland habitats. Requires shallow
ephemeral or semi-permanent pools
and ponds for breeding sites.
FT, CH/ST/WL Suitable Conditions Present; Species
Absent. Although the grassland,
savanna, or open woodland habitats in the study area appear to provide
suitable habitat for the species, the
study area falls outside of the known
range of the species. The closest known
occurrences are along the southern edge of San Luis Obispo County.
Lesser slender
salamander
Batrachoseps minor
Small and thin salamander. Moist
wooded areas; restricted to small range in Santa Lucia Mountains of
San Luis Obispo County. All
occurrences documented above
1,300 feet (400 meters) in mixed oak woodland, tanbark oak forest, sycamore woodland, and California bay forest (California Herps 2022).
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. Only a
small portion of the study area, along the western edge adjacent to Falcon
Road, falls within the Santa Lucia
Mountain range that may overlap the
restricted range of this species. However, this area falls within an unincorporated portion and is not likely to be impacted.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-62 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Foothill yellow-legged
frog south coast DPS
Rana boylii pop. 6
Frequently occurs in rocky streams
and rivers with open sunny banks.
Occasionally found in pools,
vegetated backwaters, and deep shaded spring fed pools. Sea level to 6,700 feet.
PE/SE/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. An extirpated CNDDB
occurrence (#41) was recorded south of
the study area with a location reference of Santa Margarita. Expert opinion is that they were extirpated from this area
around 1975 to 1978. The only known
extant population in San Luis Obispo
County is near the northern county line (CNDDB 2022).
California red-legged frog
Rana draytonii
Aquatic habitats with little or no flow
and surface water depths to at least 2.3 feet. Presence of fairly sturdy underwater supports such as cattails.
FT, CH/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species
Present. There is suitable habitat present in the study area and one
CNDDB record (#1417) in the western
portion of the study area in an artificially
constructed pond in a private residence.
There are additional records just west of that in Morro Creek, and two additional
records at the very northern edge of the
study area in Graves and Paso Robles
Creeks. Their populations in the urban
areas are likely limited if extant due to pressures from urbanization, decreased
quality and invasion of nonnative
species such as bullfrogs and crayfish.
Critical habitat is mapped in the western
edge of the study area.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-63
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
Vernal pools in primarily grassland,
but also in valley and foothill
hardwood woodlands.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. The study area does not support
large vernal pool areas, but it does
contain seasonal ponds that may provide suitable breeding habitat adjacent to suitable upland habitat.
However, there are no known CNDDB
occurrence records in the study area.
The closest record is just south of the study area (#1326) within the Garden Farms community and the specific
location is described as a natural pond
on the Southern Pacific Milling
Company land. There are also occurrences 2 miles east of the Salinas River (#301) and 2 miles north of the study area in Templeton (#366).
Coast Range newt
Taricha torosa
Breeds in ponds, reservoirs, and
slow-moving streams. Frequents
terrestrial habitats such as oak
woodlands.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. Graves, Atascadero, and
Paloma Creeks provide suitable aquatic
habitat. There are three CNDDB
occurrences in the study area. One in Graves Creek, just south of Santa Lucia
bridge (#54) and two in a tributary to
Grave Creek in Paradise Valley (#55 and
#56). Habitat was described as high-
quality riparian with patchy residential development and consisted of coast live oak, arroyo willow, poison oak, and nonnative annual grassland.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-64 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Reptiles
Northern California legless lizard
Anniella pulchra
Sandy or loose loamy soils with high moisture content under sparse vegetation.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. There is one historic (1960)
CNDDB occurrence generically mapped
to the city center (#162) and one
immediately north of the city center,
east of US 101 (#66) found in sandy loam soil in mature coast live oak woodland
habitat interspersed with residential
landscape and single-family homes. In
general, this species is most likely to
occur in areas with loose loamy, sandy soils at lower elevations in the study area.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-65
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Western pond turtle
Emys marmorata
Quiet waters of ponds, lakes,
streams, and marshes. Typically in
the deepest parts with an
abundance of basking sites.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. There is one CNDDB
occurrence (#1156) in the urban area of
Atascadero in Atascadero Creek on the north side of US 101 and El Camino Real. In addition, there are several CNDDB
records immediately west of the study
area in the Santa Lucia Mountain range
in Morro, Toro, Old, and Santa Rita Creeks and immediately south of the study area in Trout, Santa Margarita, and
Yerba Buena Creeks. Their populations
in the study area are likely lower due to
decreased habitat suitability from urban development. Populations are threatened by lack of suitable upland
habitat due to urbanization, trash
dumping, and the presence of invasive
species, such as bullfrogs.
Coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
Frequents wide variety of habitats,
commonly occurring in lowlands
along sandy washes, coastal sage scrub, and chaparral in arid and
semi-arid climate conditions. Species
prefers friable, rocky, or shallow
sandy soils.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. There are no CNDDB
occurrence records for the species within or adjacent to the study area.
Overall, there is a gap in occurrences in
the upper Salinas River watershed, with
occurrences north of Paso Robles near
Camp Roberts, west in Morro Bay, and
east in Cholame Valley. Therefore, the probability of occurrence of this species in the study area is low, despite the
presence of potentially suitable habitat
areas, particularly in sparsely vegetated
areas along the Salinas River.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-66 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Birds
Cooper's hawk
Accipiter cooperii
Deciduous riparian woodland habitat throughout California. Nests in
deciduous, mixed-deciduous, and
evergreen forests, as well as in
suburban and urban environments.
Tends to nest in more open areas that have older and larger trees.
MBTA/--/WL Suitable Conditions Present. Despite the lack of CNDDB occurrences, the
study area provides plenty of suitable
habitat areas for this species, particularly
in the abundant oak woodlands and
annual grassland habitat that occur throughout the study area.
Tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
(Nesting colony); open water, protected nesting substrate such as cattails or tall rushes, and foraging area with insect prey.
MBTA/ST/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species Absent. While there is potentially suitable habitat in the tule marshes
around Atascadero Lake and along the
Salinas River, the level of urban
development and recreational disturbance around Atascadero Lake makes establishment of a nesting colony
unlikely. The closest CNDDB
occurrences are located east in Creston
around Franklin Lakes
Grasshopper sparrow
Ammodramus
savannarum
(Nesting) dense grasslands on rolling
hills, lowland plains, in valleys, and on
hillsides on lower mountain slopes; favors native grasslands with a mix of grasses, forbs, and scattered shrubs loosely colonial when nesting.
MBTA/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. There is
suitable grassland habitat in the study
area. The closest CNDDB record (#11) is located immediately south of the study area adjacent to Santa Margarita.
Burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
Open, dry grasslands, deserts, and scrublands. Subterranean nester, dependent on burrowing mammals.
MBTA/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present, Presence Unlikely. There is suitable grassland
habitat in the study area; however, the
closest occurrence is near Camp San
Luis Obispo and north on Camp Roberts.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-67
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Golden eagle
Aquila chrysaetos
Usually in mountainous areas with
varying vegetative cover; removed
from people. May forage in
grasslands and other open habitats. Nests on cliff edges and rarely in tall trees
MBTA/--/FP Suitable Conditions Present; Species Present. Although unlikely to occur in
the denser urban areas, there is an
occurrence in the southern portion of the study area in the Santa Lucia Mountain range near Eagle Peak (#141).
Ferruginous hawk
Buteo regalis
(Wintering) open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low
foothills, and fringes of pinyon-
juniper habitats; eats lagomorphs,
ground squirrels, and mice.
MBTA/--/WL Suitable Conditions Present. The study area contains suitable habitat (open
grasslands). This species is a winter
migrant and does not nest in the area.
Western snowy plover
Charadrius alexandrinus
nivosus
Sandy beaches, salt pond levees, and
shores of large alkali lakes. Needs
sandy, gravelly, or friable soils for nesting.
FT/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area does not contain suitable habitat
for this species and is not located on the coast.
Western yellow-billed
cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus
Forests to open riparian woodlands
with thick under story.
FT, CH/SE/-- Marginal Conditions Present. The study
area contains riparian woodlands but is outside the known extant range of this species.
White-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
Open grasslands, meadows, or
marshlands for foraging close to
isolated trees for nesting and
perching.
MBTA/--/FP Suitable Conditions Present. Despite
the lack of CNDDB occurrences, the
study area provides plenty of suitable
habitat areas for this species, particularly
in the annual grassland habitat that
occurs throughout the study area.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-68 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Southwestern willow
flycatcher
Empidonax traillii extimus
Riparian woodlands of southern
California. Breeds in relatively dense
riparian tree and shrub communities
associated with rivers, swamps, and other wetlands, including lakes and reservoirs. In most instances, dense
vegetation occurs within first 10 to 13
feet aboveground. Habitat patches
must be at least 0.25 acre in size and at least 30 feet wide.
FE, CH/SE/-- Marginal Conditions Present; Species Absent. The riparian habitat along the
Salinas River provides potentially
suitable habitat, but the study area is located outside of the known current range of this species.
California horned lark
Eremophila alpestris actia
Short grass prairies, coastal plains,
fallow grain fields, and alkali flats. Found in coastal regions from
Sonoma to San Diego County, and
west to the San Joaquin Valley.
MBTA/--/WL Suitable Conditions Present. Despite
the lack of CNDDB occurrences, the study area provides plenty of suitable
habitat areas for this species, particularly
in the annual grassland habitat that
occurs throughout the study area.
Merlin
Falco columbarius
(Wintering); nests in trees associated
with open forests adjacent with open
areas. Preys on small birds.
MBTA/--/WL Suitable Conditions Present. Suitable
habitat conditions are present, but the
study area is not located within the nesting range of this species.
Prairie falcon
Falco mexicanus
Dry, open terrain that is level or hilly
and breeds on cliffs.
MBTA/--/WL Suitable Conditions Present. This
species was present in study area.
California condor
Gymnogyps californianus
Open savannas, grasslands, and
foothill chaparral, in mountain ranges with moderate altitudes. Nests in deep canyons on rock walls with clefts.
FE, CH/SE/FP Suitable Conditions Absent. The BSA
does not contain deep canyons on rock walls with clefts for nesting.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-69
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Ocean shore, lake margins, and rivers
for both nesting and wintering. Most
nests within 1 mile of water.
FDL/SE/FP Suitable Conditions Present. Suitable
nesting conditions within the study area
are absent; however, this species has
been observed around Atascadero Lake (eBirds 2022; Morro Coast Audubon Society 2019).
Loggerhead shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
Broadleaved upland forest, desert was, Joshua tree woodland,
Mojavean desert scrub, pinyon and
juniper woodlands, riparian
woodland, and Sonoran desert scrub.
MBTA/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. This species was present in the study area.
Purple martin
Progne subis
Valley foothill and montane
hardwood forests, conifer forests,
and riparian habitats. May nest in old woodpecker cavities or in human-made structures such as bridges and culverts. Feeds on insects.
MBTA/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present; Species
Present. Sycamores within the riparian
corridors provide suitable nesting habitat, but nesting is more likely in the unincorporated areas and is less likely in
areas surrounded by residential
development. The CNDDB documents
one occurrence along Atascadero Creek (#15) and one south of the study area at Santa Margarita Ranch (#26) in sycamore trees.
California ridgeway’s (clapper) rail
Rallus longirostris
obsoletus
Pickleweed and cordgrass marshes.
Nests in marshlands near tidal
ponds, arranging plants or drift
material over nest as canopy.
FE/SE/FP Suitable Conditions Absent. The study area does not contain suitable marshlands near tidal ponds.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-70 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Yellow warbler
Setophaga petechia
Riparian associations; prefers willows,
cottonwoods, aspens, sycamores,
and alders for nesting and foraging.
MBTA/--/SSC Marginal Conditions Present; Species likely Absent. Potentially suitable
habitat is limited to the riparian areas of
the Salinas River. Nesting is unlikely, but it may be present as a transient migratory species.
Least Bell's vireo
Vireo bellii pusillus
Summer resident of southern California. Low riparian areas in
vicinity of water or in dry river
bottoms below 2,000 feet. Nests
along margins of bushes or twigs of
willow, Baccharis, or mesquite.
FE, CH/SE/-- Marginal Conditions Present. There are two CNDDB occurrences (one historical
[1946; #127] and one recent [2005; #323])
recorded in the Salinas River
approximately north of the study area.
Potentially suitable habitat is limited to the riparian areas of the Salinas River.
Nesting is unlikely, but it may be present
as a transient migratory species.
Class Aves
Other migratory bird
species (nesting)
Nonnative grassland, valley oak
woodland, central coastal scrub,
windrows, landscaping, water tanks,
and structures may provide nesting habitat.
MBTA/--/-- Suitable Conditions Present. Multiple
nesting bird species are present in the
study area.
Mammals
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
Prefers rocky outcrops, cliffs, and
crevices with access to open habitats
for foraging. Day roosts are in caves,
crevices, mines, and occasionally in hollow trees and buildings. Night roosts may be in more open sites, such as porches and buildings.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. There are
CNDDB occurrences recorded in and
just outside of the study area. There are
several structures and trees that may provide suitable roosting habitat for this species.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-71
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Townsend’s big-eared bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
Wide variety of habitats; most
common in mesic (wet) sites. May
use trees for day and night roosts;
however, requires caves, mines, rock faces, bridges, or buildings for maternity roosts. Maternity roosts are in relatively warm sites.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. No
CNDDB occurrences have been
recorded in the immediate study area,
but there is an occurrence just south of the study area. There are several structures that may provide suitable roosting habitat for this species.
Giant kangaroo rat
Dipodomys ingens
Gently sloping and level piedmont
plains and formerly areas supporting
saltbrush and perennial grasses.
Habitat dominated by introduced
annuals, with many shrubs in some areas. Prefers areas of sparse
vegetative cover and well-drained
soils and slope generally less than
9%.
FE/SE/-- Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area is outside the current range of this
species.
Western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis
Found in many open, semi-arid to
arid habitats, including conifer and
deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc.; roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees, and tunnels.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. No
CNDDB occurrences have been
recorded in the immediate study area; however, there are several structures and trees that may provide suitable
roosting habitat for this species in the
study area.
San Diego desert woodrat
Neotoma lepida
intermedia
Forest habitats of moderate canopy
and moderate to dense understory;
also in chaparral habitats. Requires
rock outcrops and rocky cliff slopes
Nests constructed of grass, feathers, etc. Population may be limited by availability of nest materials.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area is outside the current range of this
species.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-72 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
Monterey dusky-footed
woodrat
Neotoma macrotis luciana
Occurs in coastal central California in
habitats that exhibit moderate
vegetative canopy, with brushy
understory. Builds nests of sticks and leaves at base of, or within, tree or shrub, or at base of hill. Primarily
feeds on woody plants, but also eats
fungi, flowers, grasses, and acorns.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. The study
area supports suitable vegetation
conditions to support populations of this
species.
Big free-tailed bat
Nyctinomops macrotis
Rare vagrant in California, probable
resident in Texas, New Mexico, and
southern Arizona. Probably does not
breed in California. Prefers rugged, rocky canyons but will roost on buildings or in caves and trees.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area is outside the current range of this
species.
Salinas pocket mouse
Perognathus inornatus psammophilus
Annual grassland and desert shrub communities in Salinas Valley. --/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Absent. The study area is outside the current range of this species.
American badger
Taxidea taxus
Open stages of shrub, forest, and
herbaceous habitats; needs
uncultivated ground with friable
soils.
--/--/SSC Suitable Conditions Present. The study
area supports suitable soil and
vegetation conditions to support
populations of this species.
San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
Annual grasslands or grassy open
stages with scattered shrubby
vegetation; needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing and suitable prey base.
FE/ST/-- Suitable Conditions Absent. The study
area is outside the current range of this
species.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-73
Table 5-5: Special-Status Wildlife Species in the Vicinity of the Study Area
Species Name Habitat and Distribution
Legal Status Federal/State/
CDFW
Rationale for Expecting
Presence or Absence
General references: Unless otherwise noted all habitat and distribution data provided by California Natural Diversity Database
Status Codes --= No status
Federal: FE = Federal Endangered; FT= Federal Threatened; FC= Federal Candidate; FDL=Federal Delisted; PE = Proposed Endangered;
CH = Federal Critical Habitat; MBTA= Protected by Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
State: SE= State Endangered; ST= State Threatened California Department of Fish and Wildlife: SSC= California Special Concern Species; FP= Fully Protected Species; WL = CDFW Watch List species; SA= Not formally listed but included in CDFW “Special Animal” List (CNDDB 2022; CDFW 2022d).
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-74 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
5.6 Critical Habitat
SOUTH-CENTRAL CALIFORNIA COAST STEELHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
The South-Central California Coast steelhead DPS is Federally listed as threatened and is
listed as an SSC by the CDFW (CDFW 2022d). Critical habitat was designated for the species
on September 5, 2005 (NOAA Fisheries 2005). There are no CNDDB occurrences of South-
Central California Coast steelhead in the Salinas River Watershed south of Arroyo Seco and its
tributaries (CNDDB occurrence #4), but several of the creeks in the study area historically
supported populations of steelhead.
Historically (prior to the 1950s), Graves Creek supported an abundant population of steelhead
(US-LTRCD 2002). There are historic accounts that steelhead runs would start in January and
end in March and, depending on the rains, could bring steelhead upstream through May
(US-LTRCD 2002). Currently Graves Creek, Atascadero Creek, and the Salinas River are
designated as Critical Habitat for South-Central California Coast steelhead DPS. These creeks
fall within the Paso Robles Hydrologic Subarea 330981, which is part of the larger Salinas
Hydrologic Unit 3309 (NOAA Fisheries 2005).
Anthropogenic threats to steelhead in the Salinas River watershed were broken down into
four general threat categories: 1) barriers to upstream and downstream migration (roads,
dams, groundwater extraction, and sand and gravel mining); 2) agricultural conversion of
floodplain habitats; 3) recreational facilities and activities, and 4) water management
activities, including dam operations, diversions, and groundwater extractions (NOAA
Fisheries 2013). All four waterways in the study area contain identified barriers to fish passage
as mapped by FishPAD (CDFW 2022c); however, Atascadero Creek contains the highest
number with 10 barriers. These barriers range from only partial barriers to total barriers.
CALIFORNIA RED-LEGGED FROG CRITICAL HABITAT
The study area contains a small portion, approximately 3,072 acres, of Critical Habitat Unit
SLO-3 for California red-legged frog. Critical habitat areas include the upper watershed areas
of Morro and Atascadero Creeks (Figure 5-6). The small portion of Santa Margarita Creek
watershed that falls in the study area and a small corner of the Paloma Creek watershed but
does not include Paloma Creek itself. The key threats to the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of California red-legged frog in Unit SLO-3 include predation by
nonnative species, water diversion, overgrazing, and urbanization (USFWS 2010). These
activities may alter aquatic or upland habitats and thereby result in the direct or indirect loss
of egg masses or adults due to habitat modification (USFWS 2010).
5.7 Oak Woodland Resources
The study area contains a diversity of oak woodlands, including Blue Oak Woodlands, Coast
Live Oak Woodlands, Valley Oak Woodlands, and Blue-Oak Foothill Pine (Figure 5-7). There
are approximately 10,822 acres of oak woodlands mapped in the study area by the CAL FIRE
FRAP vegetation database [ds1327] (CAL FIRE 2020). Oak woodlands provide important
wildlife habitat and are an integral part of the aesthetic appeal for living in the City of
Atascadero. Table 5-6 provides a breakdown of the distribution of the different oak woodland
types by current land use designations.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-75
Table 5-6: Distribution of Oak Woodland Habitat
by Current Land Use Designation
Land Use Blue Oak Woodland
Blue Oak-Foothill Pine
Coast Live Oak Woodland Valley Oak Woodland
Agriculture 29 8
Commercial Park 6 8 2
Commercial Recreation 0
Downtown 4
General Commercial 11 37 5
High Density Residential
(16 units / acre)
7 62 34
Industrial 1 1
Medium Density Residential
(10 units / acre)
1 25 70
Mixed Use 4 0
Open Space 37 181 103 6
Public Facilities 12 130 41
Public Recreation 21 26 65 3
Right-of-Way 8 12 9
Rural Estates
(2.5 – 10 acre lot min)
810 1,407 2,749 383
Rural Residential 17 4 44
Single-Family Residential
(0.5 acre lot min)
26 94 95
Single-Family Residential
(1.0 acre lot min)
173 381 397
Single-Family Residential
(1.5 – 2.5 acre lot min)
15 389 65
Suburban Estates
(2.5 – 10 acre lot min)
161 106 103
Unincorporated 448 75 629 379
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-76
Figure 5-6: Critical Habitat
T E
CS D1
I/
'I
'Y',
(.RUZ
('
I r
SA N L U IS
OBISPO CO U N T Y
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Figure 5-6
Critical Habitat
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero Sphere of Influence
c::::::J Urban Services Line
Parks + Open Space
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
Critical Habit at
Steel head
~ Cal ifornia red-legged frog
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-77
Figure 5-7: California Vegetation - Oak Woodlands
..... ..
0.5 2 3
...
•
Miles
-•
II
Atascadero
OUR CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 5-7
California Vegetation -Oak Woodlands
Basemap Features
,--7
L __ , Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
Atascadero Sphere of Influence
c::::::J Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
Oak Woodlands Habitat
1111 Blue Oak Woodland
1111 Bl ue Oak-Foothill Pine
1111 Coastal Oak Woodland
1111 Val ley Oak Woodland
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-78 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
5.8 Minerals
The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975 requires that the State
Geologist classify land into mineral resource zones (MRZs) according to the known or inferred
mineral potential of the land (California Public Resources Code Sections 2710–2796).
The study area is in the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region.
According to Special Report 215 (SR 215): Update of Mineral Land Classification: Concrete
Aggregate in the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region,
California, the three MRZs used in the SMARA classification-designation process in the San
Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region are defined below (California
Geological Survey [CGS] 2011a):
• MRZ-1: Areas where available geologic information indicates that little likelihood
exists for the presence of significant mineral resources.
• MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicate that significant mineral deposits
are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence exists. This
zone shall be applied to known mineral deposits or where well-developed lines of
reasoning, based upon economic-geologic principles and adequate data,
demonstrate that the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral deposits is high.
• MRZ-3: Areas containing known or inferred aggregate resources of undetermined
significance.
Three aggregate-grade subdivisions were used in classifying lands as MRZ-2, including
Portland cement concrete (PCC) grade, asphalt concrete (AC) grade, and base and fill. In
classifying lands as MRZ-1 and MRZ-3, only PCC-grade criteria were considered.
According to the CGS Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Concrete-Grade
Aggregates in the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region,
California, all three MRZ zones exist within the City of Atascadero. A majority of the city is
classified as an MRZ-3 zone. There is an MRZ-2 (PCC) zone surrounding the Salinas River,
along the eastern city limit. There are several MRZ-1 zones located along the southwestern
city limit and within the central and eastern portions of the city (CGS 2011b).
CONCRETE-GRADE AGGREGATE RESOURCE SECTORS IN THE SAN LUIS OBISPO-SANTA
BARBARA P-C REGION
Sectors are described as areas that have been classified as MRZ-2 by the State Geologist, and
that have current land uses deemed compatible with potential mining based on criteria
provided by the California State Mining and Geology Board. SR 215 identifies five sectors in
the P-C Region, including Sectors A, B, C, D, and E, which are also divided into 56 subsectors.
The project site falls within subsectors A-2a, A-2b, and A-3 of Sector A. Sector A consists of
deposits in the recent river channel and adjacent floodplain along about 14 miles of the
Salinas River, from the southeastern city limits of Atascadero to the Niblick Road Bridge in
the City of Paso Robles. Sector A has been subdivided into five subsectors identified as A-1a,
A-1b, A-2a, A-2b, and A-3. The combined area of the five subsectors is 1,687 acres; estimated
resources are 48 million tons of PCC-grade aggregate (CGS 2011a).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-79
MINES IN THE SAN LUIS OBISPO-SANTA BARBARA P-C REGION
There are several mines in the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara P-C Region. According to the
California Department of Conservation (CDOC) Mines Online database, the Millhollin Pit
(Mine ID 91-40-0001) is located within the southwestern portion of the city but has been
permanently closed and reclaimed (CDOC 2016). While active, the Millhollin Pit consisted of
an open pit operation that primarily produced rock. In addition, the Sycamore Road Pit (Mine
ID 91-40-0042) is located adjacent to the western city limit and the Rocky Canyon Quarry
(Mine ID 91-40-003) is located approximately 5 miles southeast of the city and primarily
produces decomposed granite (CDOC 2016).
5.9 Groundwater Basin(s)
The following section is based on the Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan
(GSP; (Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency [ABGSA] 2022), which was
adopted on January 19, 2022.
BASIN SETTING
The Atascadero Area Groundwater Subbasin (Basin) is identified by California Department of
Water Resources (DWR) in Bulletin 118 as Subbasin No. 3-004.11 and is part of the greater
Salinas Valley Basin in the Central Coast region of California. It was discovered that the
Rinconada Fault was acting as a significant barrier to groundwater flow. As a result, in 2016,
the Basin was subdivided from the Paso Robles Area Subbasin. Currently, the Basin
encompasses a narrow structural area of approximately 19,735 acres, extending northwest
from the community of Santa Margarita at its southern end to the City of Paso Robles at its
northern end. The Basin is bounded by the Santa Lucia Range on the west. The following
includes the specific lateral boundaries of the Basin:
The northwestern, western, and southern boundaries of the Basin are defined by the contact
of Basin sediments with older, relatively impermeable geologic units, including Tertiary-age
consolidated sedimentary beds, Cretaceous-age metamorphic rocks, and granitic rock.
Along the northern portion of the eastern boundary, north of Templeton, the Rinconada
Fault defines the eastern boundary of the Basin and is assumed to form a leaky hydraulic
barrier between the Paso Robles Basin and the Basin.
Along the southern portion of the eastern boundary, south of Templeton and between
Atascadero and Creston, the Rinconada Fault lies along the Monterey Formation rocks and
other bedrock units with the Paso Robles Formation basin sediments.
The basin is comprised of flatlands ranging in elevation from approximately 700 to 1,400 feet
above mean sea level. The average annual precipitation ranges from 13 to 23 inches. The
Salinas River is the primary surface water feature within the basin. The Salinas River is an
ephemeral waterbody that loses water to the shallow aquifer during most of the year.
The Paso Robles Formation is the primary water-bearing sediment in the Basin. The other
major aquifer unit of the Basin is the Quaternary Alluvium, which overlays the Paso Robles
Formation.
Alluvium consists of alluvial (river- or stream-related) deposits that occur beneath the
floodplains of the rivers and streams within the Basin. These deposits reach a depth of
approximately 100 feet or less below ground surface and are typically comprised of coarse
sand and gravel. Alluvium is generally much coarser than the Paso Robles Formation
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-80 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
sediments, with higher permeability that results in well production capability that often
exceeds 1,000 gallons per minute. One of the principal areas of groundwater recharge to the
Basin occurs where the shallow alluvial sand and gravel beds are in direct contact with the
Paso Robles Formation.
The Basin is primarily comprised of sedimentary layers of the Paso Robles Formation that
extend from the ground surface, or the base of Alluvium, to approximately 700 to 800 feet
thick in some areas of the Basin. The formation is unconsolidated and generally poorly
sorted. It is not usually intensely deformed, except locally near fault zones. The sand and
gravel beds within the unit have a high percentage of Monterey shale gravel fragments and
generally have moderately lower permeability compared to the shallow, unconsolidated
alluvial sand and gravel beds. Typically, the formation is thick enough for water wells to
produce several hundred gallons per minute. In the area near Atascadero, the Paso Robles
Formation has been folded, exposing the basal gravel beds. With the basal gravel exposed
and in direct contact with the Alluvium, the Paso Robles Formation is recharged directly
from the Alluvium.
Numerous deposits of Older Alluvium are located throughout the Basin. These deposits are
terraces of dissected older alluvial sands and gravels. They are unsaturated and, therefore, are
not considered a principal aquifer unit within the Basin.
LAND USES WITHIN THE BASIN
The Basin includes the incorporated cities of Paso Robles and Atascadero, as well as the
unincorporated census-designated places of Santa Margarita and Templeton. Land use
categories within the Basin generally include approximately 4,106 acres of agricultural land,
2,592 acres of urban uses, and 13,192 acres of native vegetation. The primary groundwater
users in the Basin include municipal, agricultural, rural residential, small community water
systems, and small commercial entities.
WATER BUDGETS AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
As a part of the Atascadero Basin GSP, historical, current, and future water budgets were
developed using the following computer models of the Basin’s hydrogeologic conditions: a
watershed model, a soil water balance model, and a groundwater flow model. The following
includes a summary of the results of modelling:
Over a historical base period of 31 years (1981–2011), a net gain of groundwater storage of
approximately 42,300 acre-feet occurred. During this time, the average annual groundwater
storage gain was approximately 1,400 acre-feet per year (AFY).
Over the previous 5-year water budget period (2012–2016), the annual average groundwater
storage loss, or the difference between outflow and inflow to the Basin, was approximately
2,500 AFY. This reduction reflects the drought conditions that prevailed during the current
water budget period.
The projected future groundwater budget period (2020–2042) shows the Basin to be
generally in balance, with projected groundwater inflows of approximately 18,000 AFY and
projected groundwater outflows of about 17,200 AFY. The projected future surplus indicates
an average annual increase in groundwater in storage of 800 AFY.
In general, the groundwater quality in the basin is good and water quality trends are
dominantly stable.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-81
5.10 Wildfires
A wildfire is an uncontrolled spread of fire through vegetative fuels that poses danger and
destruction to property. Wildfires often start in undeveloped and public land areas, such as
national and State forest lands, but can spread to urban areas where development is more
concentrated. The predominant dangers from wildfires include injury or loss of life to people
in the affected area and destruction of vegetation, property, and wildlife. According to the
San Luis Obispo County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, the city is at an increased
risk of wildfire occurrence (Figure 5-8) (County of San Luis Obispo 2019). Wildfire and urban
fire hazards are closely related in Atascadero due to extensive residential development in
hillside areas with flammable chaparral, grassland, and oak woodland unpredictably (City of
Atascadero 2016).
WILDFIRE INFLUENCES WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
Generally, the three major factors that increase wildfire risk in a given area include fuel,
topography, and weather.
Fuel is the material that feeds a fire and is a key factor in wildfire behavior. Fuel sources are
diverse and generally include dead tree leaves, twigs, and branches to dead standing trees,
live trees, brush, and cured grasses. Additionally, fuel sources can be manmade structures,
such as homes and other associated combustibles. Chaparral vegetation burns intensely at
extremely high temperatures, making areas of the city containing this habitat susceptible to
wildfires that are difficult to extinguish.
Topography influences wildfire spread in that both fire intensity and rate of spread increase
as slopes increase due to the tendency of heat from a fire to rise. The arrangement and types
of vegetation throughout a hillside can also contribute to increased fire activity on slopes.
Within the city, the steepness of slopes generally increases with distance from the Salinas
River (City of Atascadero 2016).
Weather components such as temperature, relative humidity, wind, and lightning also affect
the potential for wildfire. High temperatures and low relative humidity dry out fuels that feed
wildfires, creating a situation where fuel will more readily ignite and burn more intensely.
Thus, periods of drought increase the threat of wildfire. Wind is the most influential weather
factor of the three and its influence can increase rates of spread regardless of temperature
and relative humidity. Maximum average summer (May–September) temperatures range
between 86°F to 92°F, but there are often multiple days with temperatures reaching over
100°F. Minimum average summer temperatures range between 49°F to 52°F, and maximum
average winter (October–April) temperatures range between 61°F to 80°F, with minimum
average winter temperatures ranging between 32°F and 41°F. The average annual wind
speeds in the city range from 4.5 miles per hour (mph) to 5.9 mph. The windiest months are
March and April, and the calmest months are August and September (Weather Atlas 2022).
Northwest afternoon winds are common in the western portion of the city due to inland
valley heating and cool air currents flowing from the ocean. These winds can cause fires to
spread and shift direction quickly and unpredictably (City of Atascadero 2016).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-82
Figure 5-8: Areas Prone to Wildfire
0.5
ro, Pudre,
Yano11e1l J,oresr
2
SA N LUIS
Atascadero
OUR C I TY, OU R P LAN
Figure 5-8
Areas Prone to W ildfire
Basemap Features
C:: ~ Atascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
c:=J Urban Services Line
Parks + Open Space
Rivers + Waterbodies
Major Roads + Freeways
SLO Local Responsibility Area
~
Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)
1111 Wildland
Fire Hazard Severity Zone (SRA & LRA)
1111 Very High
[:::J High
~ Moderate
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Lws Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-83
FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
CAL FIRE defines fire hazard severity zones (FHSZs) based on the presence of fire-prone
vegetation, climate, topography, assets at risk (e.g., high population centers), and a fire
protection agency’s ability to provide service to the area. FHSZs throughout the region have
been designated as “Very High,” “High,” or “Moderate.” Within the region, most of the area
that has been designated as a “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” is in the Santa Lucia
Mountains, which extend parallel to the coast along the entire length of San Luis Obispo
County, from Monterey County in the north to Santa Barbara County in the south. According
to the CAL FIRE FHSZ viewer (CAL FIRE 2022), the majority of land within the City of
Atascadero is considered a Very High FHSZ in a local responsibility area (LRA). Areas
immediately surrounding the city are primarily designated as a High FHSZ within a State
responsibility area (SRA) to the east, northeast, and southeast and a Very High FHSZ within
an SRA to the west, northwest, and southwest (CAL FIRE 2022).
The Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) designation is a City designation that includes a
combination of the High and Very High FHSZs within the city limits and provides for a more
cohesive boundary than the CAL FIRE FHSZ mapping for purposes of policy implementation.
5.11 Major Pollutants
WATERBODY POLLUTANTS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
There are four major watersheds located within the city, including Graves Creek watershed,
Atascadero Creek watershed, Salinas River Watershed, and the Paloma Creek watershed.
Atascadero Creek is listed on the Central Coast RWQCB Section 303(d) List of Impaired
Waters for dissolved oxygen and pathogens (e.g., fecal coliform, E. coli) and Salinas River is
listed on the 303(d) List of Impaired Waters for turbidity (RWQCB 2018). The groundwater
quality in the basin is good and water quality trends are dominantly stable (ABGSA 2022).
The Central Coast RWQCB established the following summarized water quality objectives in
the Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin (Basin Plan) for all inland surface
waters within the basin to protect the identified beneficial uses listed above (RWQCB 2019):
• Color: Waters shall be free of coloration that causes nuisance or adversely affects
beneficial uses. Coloration attributable to materials of waste origin shall not be
greater than 15 units or 10% above natural background color, whichever is greater.
• Tastes and Odors: Waters shall not contain taste or odor-producing substances in
concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors to fish flesh or other edible
products of aquatic origin, that cause nuisance, or that adversely affect beneficial
uses.
• Floating Material: Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids,
foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial
uses.
• Suspended Material: Waters shall not contain suspended material in concentrations
that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.
• Settleable Material: Waters shall not contain settleable material in concentrations
that result in deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects
beneficial uses.
• Oil and Grease: Waters shall not contain oils, greases, waxes, or other similar materials
in concentrations that result in a visible film or coating on the surface of the water or
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-84 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
on objects in the water, that cause nuisance, or that otherwise adversely affect
beneficial uses.
• Biostimulatory Substances: Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in
concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause
nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.
• Sediment: The suspended sediment load and suspended sediment discharge rate of
surface waters shall not be altered in such a manner as to cause nuisance or adversely
affect beneficial uses.
• Turbidity: Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or
adversely affect beneficial uses.
• pH: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be
depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
• Dissolved Oxygen: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved
oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 milligrams per liter at any time.
Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water
quality conditions.
• Temperature: Temperature objectives for Enclosed Bays and Estuaries are as
specified in the Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal
and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California, including any
revisions thereto.
• Toxicity: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations
which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human,
plant, animal, or aquatic life.
• Pesticides: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach
concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in
pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.
• Chemical Constituents: Where wastewater effluents are returned to land for
irrigation uses, regulatory controls shall be consistent with Title 22 of the CCR and
other relevant local controls.
• Other Organics: Waters shall not contain organic substances in concentrations
greater than standards established in the Basin Plan.
• Radioactivity: Radionuclides shall not be present in concentrations that are
deleterious to human, plant, animal, or aquatic life; or result in the accumulation of
radionuclides in the food web to an extent which presents a hazard to human, plant,
animal, or aquatic life.
The following summarized objectives from the Basin Plan apply to all groundwater resources
located in the basin (RWQCB 2019):
• Tastes and Odors: Groundwaters shall not contain taste or odor producing
substances in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.
• Radioactivity: Radionuclides shall not be present in concentrations that are
deleterious to human, plant, animal, or aquatic life; or result in the accumulation of
radionuclides in the food web to an extent which presents a hazard to human, plant,
animal, or aquatic life.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (Cortese) List is a planning tool used by the State,
local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements related to the disclosure
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-85
of information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. California Government
Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to
develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. Various State and local government
agencies are required to track and document hazardous material release information for the
Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor
database tracks DTSC cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at
hazardous waste facilities and sites with known contamination, such as Federal superfund,
State response, voluntary cleanup, school cleanup, school investigation, and military
evaluation sites (DTSC 2022). The SWRCB GeoTracker database contains records for sites that
impact, or have the potential to impact, water in California, such as Leaking Underground
Storage Tank (LUST) sites, Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program Sites (SWRCB
2022). Based on a query of the DTSC EnviroStor and SWRCB GeoTracker databases, there are
no open hazardous materials sites located within the city; however, there are 34 closed LUST
cleanup sites, two closed school investigation sites, and one closed school cleanup site within
the city (DTSC 2022; SWRCB 2022).
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-86 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
5.12 Sources
REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS
Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (ABGSA). Atascadero Basin
Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Available at: https://atascaderobasin.com/. Accessed
December 1, 2022.
Baldwin et al. 2012. The Jepson Manual. Second Edition. Berkeley, California: University of
California Press.
California Department of Conservation (CDOC). 2016. Mines Online. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html. Accessed December 1, 2022.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2005. California Wildlife Habitat Relations.
CWHR Crosswalk with CNPS Vegetation Classification. Available at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=65860&inline. Accessed December
7, 2022.
———. 2022a. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Available at:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. Accessed November 2022.
———. 2022b. Special Animals List. Last updated October. Available at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline. Accessed
November 2022.
———. 2022c. California Fish Passage Assessment Database (FishPAD) [ds69]. Available at:
https://data-cdfw.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/CDFW::california-fish-passage-assessment-
database-ds69-1. Accessed November 2022.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2020. Vegetation (fveg) -
CALFIRE FRAP [ds1327]. Available at: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/metadata/ds1327.html.
Accessed November 2022.
———. 2022. FHSZ Viewer. Available at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accesses December 2,
2022.
California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC). 2022. EnviroStor. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed December 2, 2022.
California Geological Survey (CGS). 2011a. Update of Mineral Land Classification: Concrete
Aggregate in the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region,
California. Special Report 215. 2011.
———. 2011b. Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Concrete-Grade Aggregates in
the San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Production-Consumption Region, California. Special
Report 215, Plate 1A. 2011.
California Herps. 2022. Lesser Slender Salamander Species Page. Available at:
https://californiaherps.com/salamanders/pages/b.minor.html. Accessed November 11,
2022.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-87
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022a. A Manual of California Vegetation Online.
Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society. Available at:
http://vegetation.cnps.org/. Accessed November 2022.
———. 2022b. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9-01 1.5). California Native Plant Society,
Rare Plant Program. Available at: https://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed December
10, 2022.
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2022. RareFind Species List for Atascadero,
Templeton, Creston, Santa Margarita, Lopez Mountain, San Luis Obispo, Morro Bay South,
Morro Bay North, York Mountain, Adelaida, Paso Robles, and Estrella, California U.S.
Geological Survey 7.5-Minute Quadrangle. Available at:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data. Accessed November 2022.
City of Atascadero. 2016. City of Atascadero General Plan 2025. Available at:
https://www.atascadero.org/files/CD/General%20Plan/Atascadero%20GP%202025.pdf.
Accessed December 1, 2022.
County of San Luis Obispo. 2019. San Luis Obispo County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Available at: https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Planning-
Building/Forms-Documents/Plans-and-Elements/Elements/Local-Hazard-Mitigation-
Plan/San-Luis-Obispo-County-Multi-Jurisdictional-Hazard.pdf. Accessed November 2022.
Dewitz, J., and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2021. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019
Products (ver. 2.0, June 2021): U.S. Geological Survey data release. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KZCM54. Accessed November 2022.
Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Smith, D.W., Cook, T.D., Tallyn, E., Moseley, K., and Johnson, C.B.
2016. Ecoregions of California (poster): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2016–1021,
with map, scale 1:1,100,000. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161021. Accessed
November 2022.
Morro Coast Audubon Society. 2019. Birds of Atascadero Lake. Poster Kiosk courtesy of the
Atascadero Department of Public Works and the Morro Coast Audubon Society, San Luis
Obispo County.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2021. National Centers for
Environmental Information. U.S. Climate Normals. Latest 30-year period (1991-2022) (2021
release) for Paso Robles Station. Available at: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-
climate-normals/#dataset=normals-monthly&timeframe=30&station=USW00093209.
Accessed October 2022.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA
Fisheries). 2005. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for
Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead in California; Final
Rule. Federal Register 70(170):52488–52627. September 2. Available at:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2005-09-02/pdf/05-16389.pdf. Accessed
November 2022.
———. 2013. South-Central California Coast Steelhead Recovery Plan. Long Beach, California:
National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region, California Coastal Area Office.
December. Available at: https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/17275. Accessed
November 2022.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-88 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 2018. 2018 California Integrated Report
(Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report). Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/2018_
integrated_report.html. Accessed December 2, 2022.
———. 2019. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan
/docs/2019_basin_plan_r3_complete_webaccess.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2022.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2019. State Wetland Definition and
Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State [For
Inclusion in the Water Quality Control plans for Inland Surface Waters and Enclosed
Bays and Estuaries and Ocean Waters of California]. Adopted April 2, 2019.
———. 2022. GeoTracker. Available at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed
December 2, 2022.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
2022a. State Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soils List. Available at:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/publications/query-by-state.html. Accessed November 2022.
———. 2022b. Web Soil Survey database. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, National Cartography and Geospatial Center. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed November 2022.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog; Final Rule.
Federal Register 75(51):12816–12959.
———. 2022a. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report.
Available at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/critical-habitat
———. 2022b. IPaC Resource List (Not for Consultation). Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.
Accessed November 2022.
———. 2022c. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetland Geodatabase. Available at:
http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/NWI/index.html. Accessed November 2022.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2022. National Hydrography Dataset. Available at:
https://www.usgs.gov/national-hydrography/national-hydrography-dataset. Accessed
November 2022.
Upper Salinas – Las Tablas Resource Conservation District (US-LTRCD). 2002. Upper Salinas
and Tributaries Watershed Fisheries Report and Early Actions. Report to the California
Department of Fish and Game. March 2002. Available at https://us-
ltrcd.specialdistrict.org/files/335ec4a34/Watershed_Fisheries_Report.pdf
———. 2012. Creek Stewardship Guide, San Luis Obispo County. December 2012. Available at:
https://us-ltrcd.specialdistrict.org/files/52c7f619e/CREEK-STEWARDSHIP-FINAL-WEB.pdf
———. 2014. San Luis Obispo County Watershed Management Planning Project. Phase 1.
January 2014. Available at: https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public-
Works/Current-Public-Works-Projects/SLO-Watershed/Watersheds/North-County.aspx.
Accessed November 2022.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-89
———. 2018. 2004 - Upper Salinas River Watershed Action Plan - Final Report to the State
Water Resources Control Board. State and Federal Documents Relating to Monterey and
San Luis Obispo Counties. 15. Available at:
https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/hornbeck_cgb_1/15. Accessed November 2022.
Weather Atlas. 2022. Climate and monthly weather forecast Atascadero, CA. Available at:
https://www.weather-atlas.com/en/california-usa/atascadero-climate#wind. Accessed
December 1, 2022.
Public Draft | March 2024 Existing Conditions Report
5-90 | Chapter 5: Biological Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
5.13 Acronyms and Key Terms
°F: Degrees Fahrenheit
ABGSA: Atascadero Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency
AC: Asphalt Concrete
AFY: Acre-Feet Per Year
Basin: Atascadero Area Groundwater Subbasin
BIOS: Biological Spatial Data Server
CAL FIRE: California Department of Forestry Fire Protection
CalEPA: California Environmental Protection Agency
CCR: California Code of Regulations
CDFW: California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDO: California Department of Conservation
CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act
CESA: California Endangered Species Act
CFGC: California Fish and Game Code
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations
City: City of Atascadero (entity)
CNDDB: California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS: California Native Plant Society
CRPR: California Rare Plant Rank
CWA: Federal Clean Water Act
CWHR: California Wildlife Habitat Relationships
DBH: Diameter at Breast Height
DPS: Distinct Population Segment
DTSC: California Department of Toxic Substance Control
DWR: California Department of Water Resources
FESA: Federal Endangered Species Act
FHSZ: Fire Hazard Severity Zone
FRAP: Fire and Resource Assessment Program
GIS: Geographic Information System
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | March 2024
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 5: Biological Resources | 5-91
GSP: Groundwater Sustainability Plan
HUC: Hydrologic Unit Code
IPaC: Information for Planning and Consultation
LRA: Local Responsibility Area
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MBTA: Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Mph: Miles Per Hour
MRZ: Mineral Resource Zone
NHD: National Hydrography Dataset
NLCD: National Land Cover Database
NOAA Fisheries: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service
NPPA: Native Plant Protection Act
NRCS: Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI: National Wetland Inventory
PCC: Portland cement concrete
Porter-Cologne Act: Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
RWQCB: Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAA: Streambed Alteration Agreement
SR: State Route
SRA: State Responsibility Area
SWRCB: State Water Resources Control Board
US: U.S. Route
USACE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDA: U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS: U.S. Geological Survey
US-LTRCD: Upper Salinas-Las Tablas Resource Conservation District
WDR: Waste Discharge Requirement
WOTS: Waters of the State
WOTUS: Waters of the United States
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX F
2045 General Plan Existing Conditions Report |
Chapter 6: Cultural Resources
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-1
2045 General Plan
Existing Conditions
Report
Chapter 6: Cultural Resources
tasca ero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-2 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Cultural Resources Findings
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. The plan area contains dozens of known prehistoric and historic archaeological
resources, and undoubtedly, additional resources yet to be identified. In addition, the
plan area contains archaeological resources that likely qualify as Tribal Cultural
Resources.
2. Historic and modern development has led to the loss of archaeological resources
within the plan area. The City’s current General Plan includes policies focused on the
identification and protection of archaeological resources. Specifically, Policy 6.2:
Protect Prehistoric Cultural Resources from Disturbance Associated with
Development includes the following actions:
a. Maintain a current GIS-based map of generalized areas of known
archaeological resources.
b. For discretionary projects within the generalized areas of archaeological
resources, require Phase I surveys to determine the extent and significance of
archaeological sites prior to approval.
c. For discretionary projects located in areas of known resources, require Phase II
surveys to determine the significance and mitigation requirements for
identified resources.
d. Require short and long-term mitigation measures for significant archaeological
resource sites; include avoidance of impacts, burial under sterile fill, and/or
monitoring of earthmoving activities.
e. If determined appropriate by a qualified archaeologist, actively involve Native
Americans with any work located within known archaeological sites.
f. If archaeological resources are unearthed during construction, suspend all
earth-disturbing work until appropriate mitigation is established.
These policies should be expanded to include parameters for identifying
archaeological resources in the plan area and environmental and historical factors
that elevate sensitivity for the presence of known and unknown resources. In addition,
the protection of archaeological resources should be prioritized when at all possible.
3. Multiple Native American tribal groups have ancestral ties to the plan area. Tribal
involvement with development projects should be an integral component of the
planning process, whether it be driven by law (e.g. Assembly Bill 52 consultation), or as
a good faith effort to ensure stakeholder input.
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
1. The plan area contains multiple known historic resources, including properties that
are formally listed or determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and/or the CRHR.
Noteworthy historical resources include the NRHP-listed Atascadero Printery and
Atascadero Administration Veteran’s Memorial Building (City Hall), and the NRHP-
eligible Atascadero Estates Residential historic District, among others.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-3
2. The plan area contains multiple potential historical resources that were previously
documented either as part of grassroots efforts to identify historical resources, or by
professional architectural historians in support of project-specific environmental
documentation. In the instances of grassroots survey efforts, these identified potential
resources have not been fully evaluated using appropriate historical significance
criteria for listing in the NRHP and CRHR. Notable previous studies prepared by local
advocates and other grassroots individuals include:
a. The Colony Homes List, which is a list of addresses associated with original
Colony Homes in Atascadero, was prepared by the Atascadero Historical
Society in 1994. It provides addresses but no additional documentation or
information regarding potential historic status.
b. The Atascadero’s Historic Business District document, which was prepared by
the Atascadero Main Street Design Committee in 2010, identifies and provides
historic background of notable properties in downtown Atascadero, not no
specific evaluations of significance or other findings.
c. The Atascadero Historical Report, which was prepared by an undergraduate
student at California Polytechnical State University, San Luis Obispo in 2018,
provides historic context and a historic resources survey. The document does
not include evaluations of significance or other aspects required for identifying
historical resources.
3. The City has not conducted a formal historic resources survey of the plan area or any
specific area therein. All survey efforts appear to have been conducted by various
government agencies, such as the California Department of Transportation, in
support of environmental regulatory compliance.
4. The City has no historic preservation ordinance, formal local landmarks program, or
historic resources inventory for historic resources. As such, all historical resources
within the plan area have been assessed using the eligibility criteria for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical
Resources (CRHR).
5. The City does have a Historic Sites (HS) overlay zone that can be applied to properties
with historical resources; however, the implementation and use of this zoning
category has been limited and does not appear to coincide with known historical
resources at this time.
6. The City of Atascadero 2035 General Plan provides a series of goals, policies, and
programs specific to the preservation of historic resources. The most notable
programs specific to the identification and treatment of historic resources includes,
but is not limited to:
a. Utilizing the HS overlay zone category;
b. Develop and adopt a comprehensive inventory of historic resources;
c. Update existing design guidelines and other development guidance
documents to reflect the appropriate treatment of historic resources; and
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-4 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
d. Develop a variety of local incentive programs for preserving historical
resources.
None of these programs have been implemented to date. Most of the goals, policies,
and programs specific to historical resources outlined in the 2035 General Plan should
be carried forward as part of the General Plan update.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-5
6.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses existing cultural resources within the Atascadero General Plan Update
plan area and identifies potential cultural resources constraints in the event of future
development or changes in existing land use associated with the proposed General Plan
Update. The chapter is based upon existing information gathered and analyzed by SWCA.
SWCA conducted background research from readily available sources to prepare this section
as cited in Section 6.8.
This chapter is organized into the following sections:
Section 6.1: Introduction
Section 6.2: Regulatory Setting
Section 6.3: Cultural Setting
Section 6.4: Archaeological Resources
Section 6.5: Historical Context
Section 6.6: Historic Resources
Section 6.7: Appendix A: 1994 Colony Homes List
Section 6.8: Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Section 6.9: Sources
Section 6.10: Acronyms and Key Terms
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-6 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
6.2 Regulatory Setting
FEDERAL
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Enacted in 1966 and amended most recently in 2014, the NHPA (54 United States Code [USC]
300101 et seq.) instituted a multifaceted program, administered by the Secretary of the
Interior, to encourage sound preservation policies of the nation’s cultural resources at the
federal, state, and local levels. The NHPA authorized the expansion and maintenance of the
NRHP, established the position of State Historic Preservation Officer, and provided for the
designation of State Review Boards. The NHPA also set up a mechanism to certify local
governments to carry out the goals of the NHPA, assisted Native American tribes to preserve
their cultural heritage, and created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).
Section 106
Section 106 of the NHPA (54 USC 306108) states that Federal agencies with direct or indirect
jurisdiction over federally funded, assisted, or licensed undertakings must consider the effect
of the undertaking on any historic property that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the
NRHP, and that the ACHP must be afforded an opportunity to comment, through a process
outlined in the ACHP regulations in 36 CFR 800, on such undertakings.
The Section 106 process involves identification of significant historic resources within an “area
of potential effect; determination if the undertaking will cause an adverse effect on historic
resources; and resolution of those adverse effects through execution of a Memorandum of
Agreement.” In addition to the ACHP, interested members of the public, including
individuals, organizations, and agencies (such as the OHP), are provided with opportunities to
participate in the process.
National Register of Historic Places
The NRHP was established by the NHPA as “an authoritative guide to be used by Federal,
State, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the Nation’s cultural
resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from
destruction or impairment” (36 CFR 60.2). The NRHP recognizes properties that are
significant at the national, state, and local levels. To be eligible for listing in the NRHP, a
resource must be significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or
culture. Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of potential significance must also
possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
Significance
A property is eligible for the NRHP if it is significant under one or more of the following
criteria:
• Criterion A: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of our history;
• Criterion B: It is associated with the lives of persons who are significant in our past;
• Criterion C: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-7
represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack
individual distinction; and/or,
• Criterion D: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history. Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historic figures,
properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures
that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings,
and properties that are primarily commemorative in nature, are not considered
eligible for the NRHP, unless they satisfy certain conditions. In general, a resource
must be 50 years of age to be considered for the NRHP, unless it satisfies a standard of
exceptional importance.
Integrity
In addition to meeting these criteria, a property must retain historic integrity, which is
defined in National Register Bulletin 15 as the “ability of a property to convey its significance”
(NPS 1990). To assess integrity, the NPS recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, considered
together, define historic integrity. To retain integrity, a property must possess several, if not
all, of these seven qualities, which are defined in the following manner in National Register
Bulletin 15:
• Location: the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where
the historic event occurred;
• Design: the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and
style of a property;
• Setting: the physical environment of a historic property;
• Materials: the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular
period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property;
• Workmanship: the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history or prehistory;
• Feeling: a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period
of time; and/or
• Association: the direct link between an important historic event or person and a
historic property.
STATE
The State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), a division of the California Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR), is responsible for carrying out the duties described in the
California Public Resources Code (PRC) and maintaining the California Historic Resources
Inventory and CRHR. The state-level regulatory framework also includes CEQA, which
requires the identification and mitigation of substantial adverse impacts that may affect the
significance of eligible historical and archaeological resources for applicable discretionary
projects.
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires a lead agency to analyze whether historic and/or archaeological resources
may be adversely impacted by a proposed discretionary project. Under CEQA, a “project that
may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource is a project
that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.1). Answering this
question is a two-part process: first, the determination must be made as to whether the
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-8 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
proposed project involves cultural resources. Second, if cultural resources are present, the
proposed project must be analyzed for a potential “substantial adverse change in the
significance” of the resource.
Historical Resources
According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, for the purposes of CEQA, historical
resources are:
• A resource listed in, or formally determined eligible . . . for listing in the CRHR (PRC
5024.1; California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14, Section 4850 et seq.).
• A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC
Section 5020.1(k) or identified as significance in a historic resources survey meeting
the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g).
• Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that the lead
agency determines to be eligible for national, state, or local landmark listing;
generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be historically
significant (and therefore a historic resource under CEQA) if the resource meets the
criteria for listing on the CRHR (as defined in PRC Section 5024.1; 14 CCR Section 4852).
Resources nominated to the CRHR must retain enough of their historic character or
appearance to convey the reasons for their significance. Resources whose historic integrity
(as defined above) do not meet NRHP criteria may still be eligible for listing in the CRHR.
According to CEQA, the fact that a resource is not listed in or determined eligible for listing in
the CRHR or is not included in a local register or survey shall not preclude the lead agency
from determining that the resource may be a historical resource (PRC Section 5024.1).
Pursuant to CEQA, a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource may have a significant effect on the environment
(State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)).
Substantial Adverse Change and Indirect Impacts to Historical Resources
The State CEQA Guidelines specify that a “substantial adverse change in the significance of
an historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource
would be materially impaired” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5). Material impairment
occurs when a project alters in an adverse manner or demolishes “those physical
characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify
its inclusion” or eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or local register. In addition,
pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2, the “direct and indirect significant effects
of the project on the environment shall be clearly identified and described, giving due
consideration to both the short-term and long-term effects.”
The following guides and requirements are of particular relevance to this study’s analysis of
indirect impacts to historic resources. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378,
study of a project under CEQA requires consideration of “the whole of an action, which has
the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064(d) further defines direct and indirect impacts:
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-9
(1) A direct physical change in the environment is a physical change in the
environment, which is caused by and immediately related to the project.
(2) An indirect physical change in the environment is a physical change in
the environment, which is not immediately related to the project, but
which is caused indirectly by the project. If a direct physical change in the
environment in turn causes another change in the environment, then
the other change is an indirect physical change in the environment.
(3) An indirect physical change is to be considered only if that change is a
reasonably foreseeable impact, which may be caused by the project.
Archaeological Resources
In terms of archaeological resources, PRC Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological
resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly
demonstrated that without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high
probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research
questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that
information.
(2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or
the best available example of its type.
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important
prehistoric or historic event or person.
If it can be demonstrated that a proposed non-ministerial project will cause damage to a
unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to
permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To
the extent that they cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC
Sections 21083.2(a), (b), and (c)). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(4) notes that, if an
archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological resource nor a historical resource,
the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered to be a significant effect
on the environment.
California Register of Historical Resources
Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the CRHR is “an authoritative guide in California to
be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s
historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent
prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (PRC Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1).
Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the
NRHP and California Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and higher, are automatically
included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical
Interest program, identified as significant in historical resources surveys, or designated by
local landmarks programs, may be nominated for inclusion in the CRHR. According to PRC
Section 5024.1(c), a resource, either an individual property or a contributor to a historic
district, may be listed in the CRHR if the State Historical Resources Commission determines
that it meets one or more of the following criteria, which are modeled on NRHP criteria:
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-10 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
• Criterion 1: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
• Criterion 2: It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
• Criterion 3: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or
possesses high artistic values.
• Criterion 4: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or
prehistory.
Resources nominated to the CRHR must retain enough of their historic character or
appearance to convey the reasons for their significance. Resources whose historic integrity
does not meet NRHP criteria may still be eligible for listing in the CRHR.
California Historical Landmarks
Often associated with the iconic highways signage and monument placards, California
Historical Landmarks (CHL) are the remnants of the State’s earliest program to identify and
commemorate historic resources. Established in 1931, the CHL program primarily focused on
commemorating buildings, sites, and other properties of particular historic significance
within California. Initially, the emphasis of the early CHL program was on recognizable
locations associated early California history, including missions, battlefields, settlements, and
California Gold Rush sites. These early designations did not require criteria for evaluation
significance or other metrics for determination, but was rather directed by the efforts of non-
profit organizations, such as the Native Sons of the Golden West and Native Daughters of the
Golden West. However, to give the program additional credibility, the California Historical
Landmarks Advisory Committee (now the State Historical Resources Commission) was
established, which adopted formal registration criteria in 1962 (OHP, n.d.)
To qualify was designation as a CHL, a resource must exhibit significance under one of the
following criteria:
• The resource must be the first, last, only, or most significant of its type in the state or
within a large geographical region (Northern, Central, or Southern California).
• Associate with an individual or group having a profound influence on the history of
California.
• A prototype of, or an outstanding example of a period, style, architectural movement
or construction, or is one of the more notable works or the best surviving work in a
region of a pioneer architect, designer or master builder.
Because the CHL program predates the other historic resource registration programs, only
those CHLs with a landmark number of 770 and above are automatically listed in the CRHR.
Those CHLs with earlier numbers are identified as needing future evaluation using current
practices and significance criteria to affirm historical significance and listing in the CRHR. The
CHL program is not widely used since the creation of the CHRH, and is largely limited to
environmental review of State-owned properties under Public Resources Code Section 5024
and 5024.5, although resources can still be nominated and designated
Treatment of Human Remains
The disposition of burials falls first under the general prohibition on disturbing or removing
human remains under California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) Section 7050.5. More
specifically, remains suspected to be Native American are treated under CEQA in CCR
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-11
Section 15064.5; PRC Section 5097.98 illustrates the process to be followed if remains are
discovered. If human remains are discovered during construction, no further disturbance to
the site shall occur, and the County Coroner must be notified (CCR 15064.5; PRC 5097.98).
Assembly Bill 52
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 amended PRC Section 5097.94 and added PRC Sections 21073, 21074,
21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3.
Consultation with Native Americans
AB 52 formalizes the lead agency–tribal consultation process, requiring the lead agency to
initiate consultation with California Native American groups that are traditionally and
culturally affiliated with the project, including tribes that may not be federally recognized. As
the lead agency, the City of Atascadero is required to begin consultation prior to the release
of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Section 4 of AB 52 adds PRC Section 21074(a) and (b), which address tribal cultural resources
and cultural landscapes. Section 21074(a) defines tribal cultural resources as one of the
following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects
with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of
the following:
(A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the
California Register of Historical Resources.
(B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in
subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this
paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
Section 1(a)(9) of AB 52 establishes that “a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural
resource has a significant effect on the environment.” Effects on tribal cultural resources
must be considered under CEQA. Section 6 of AB 52 adds Section 21080.3.2 the PRC, which
states that parties may propose mitigation measures “capable of avoiding or substantially
lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would
avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource.” Further, if a California Native American
tribe requests consultation regarding project alternatives, mitigation measures, or significant
effects to tribal cultural resources, the consultation shall include those topics (PRC Section
21080.3.2[a]). The environmental document and the mitigation monitoring and reporting
program (where applicable) shall include any mitigation measures that are adopted (PRC
Section 21082.3 [a]).
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-12 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
LOCAL
Neither the County of San Luis Obispo or the City of Atascadero have historic preservation
ordinances or preservation programs specific to cultural and historical resources. While the
City does not have a formal historic preservation program, there are several approved zoning
overlays and planning documents that outline specific goals and policies related to the
treatment of cultural resources within the city.
Historic Sites Overlay Zone
Initially developed in 1983, the City has integrated a Historical Site Overlay Zone (HS) category
into its municipal code. Outlined in §9-3.621, the HS overlay is applied to areas where there
are significant cultural resources, including archaeological and historical sites, and is
intended to “protect historic structures and sites by requiring new uses and alterations to
existing uses be designed with consideration for preserving and protecting” the resource.
The standards pertain to both 1) new structures and uses, and 2) modifications to historic
structures and outline the permitting and environmental review processes for each.
Archaeological Resources
Specific to archaeological resources within the HS overlay (Atascadero Municipal Code §9-
3.623), conditional use permits may only be issued if the following findings are made:
1. The site design and development as finally proposed incorporates adequate
measures to ensure the archaeological resources will be acceptably and adequately
protected; or
2. Where site design and development proposals cannot be feasibly be chanced and
intrusion into or disturbance of archaeological resources will result, that construction
will use appropriate methods to protect the integrity of the site, including possible
relocation of graves and artifacts.
Historic Resources
With conditional use permits involving historic resources – buildings, structures landmarks
and districts – within the HS overlay, may be approved if they meet one of the following
conditions (Atascadero Municipal Code §9-3.625):
a) The height, bulk, location, structural materials, landscaping and other aspects of the
proposed use will not obstruct public views of the historic structure or of its
immediate setting;
b) Any proposed alteration or removal of structural elements, or clearing of landscaping
or natural vegetation features will not damage or destroy the character of
insignificant historical features and settings;
c) Any proposed remodeling or demolition is unavoidable because it is not structurally
or economically feasible to retain or restore existing structures or features.
In practice, the HS overlay is largely unused by the City. It does not appear in any zoning map
published by the City, and communications with City Planning Staff have determined that
the usage of the HS overlay has been limited to select properties where planned
development projects have been applied for and approved. Despite this, it provides the City
with a framework and powerful tool for the preservation and management of historic and
cultural resources.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-13
City of Atascadero 2025 General Plan
The General Plan is composed of several elements, including the Land Use, Open Space and
Conservation (LOC) Element, the Circulation Element, Safety and Noise Element, and the
Housing Element. Each includes specific goals, policies, and programs that inform short and
long-term decision-making in the community.
Goals, policies, and programs pertinent to cultural resources included within the LOC
Element are listed here:
Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element
Goal LOC1: 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.
• Policy 1.1: Preserve the rural atmosphere of the community and assure “elbow room”
in areas designated for lower density development by guiding new development into
the Urban Core to conform to the historic Colony land use patterns of the City and to
respect the natural environment, hillside areas, and existing neighborhoods.
Goal LOC6: Preserve natural flora and fauna and protect scenic lands, sensitive natural
areas, historic buildings and cultural resources.
• Policy 6.1: Ensure that development does not degrade scenic and sensitive areas,
including historic sites, creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands, woodlands, hillsides and
other valuable habitats.
Program 5. Public and private development in close proximity to scenic and sensitive lands,
including creek reservations, wooded areas, flood plains, prominent view sheds and historic
sites shall be designed to minimize impacts.
Program 6. Scenic and open space easements, parklands and open space dedications shall
be required as mitigation for subdivisions and development projects that impact floodplains,
creek reservations, wooded areas, scenic backdrops, sensitive areas, historic sites, cultural
sites, and similar areas.
• Policy 6.2: Protect prehistoric cultural resources from disturbance associated with
development.
Program 1. Maintain a current GIS-based map of generalized areas of known archaeological
resources.
Program 2. For discretionary projects within the generalized areas of archaeological
resources, require Phase I surveys to determine the extent and significance of archaeological
sites prior to approval.
Program 3. For discretionary projects located in areas of known resources, require Phase II
surveys to determine the significance and mitigation requirements for identified resources.
Program 4. Require short and long-term mitigation measures for significant archaeological
resource sites; include avoidance of impacts, burial under sterile fill, and/or monitoring of
earthmoving activities.
Program 5. If determined appropriate by a qualified archaeologist, actively involve Native
Americans with any work located within known archaeological sites.
Program 6. If archaeological resources are unearthed during construction, suspend all earth-
disturbing work until appropriate mitigation is established.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-14 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
• Policy 6.3: Encourage conservation and preservation of neighborhoods, Colony
Homes and sound housing, including places and buildings of historical and
architectural significance.
Program 1. Actively utilize the Historic Overlay zoning district to protect known historic
structures, significant Colony homes and Colony sites.
Program 2. Develop a GIS based mapping inventory and protection ordinance for the
historic Colony homes
• Policy 6.4: Encourage conservation and preservation of structures and house that
have historical and architectural significance.
Program 1. Protect historic buildings and sites. Atascadero’s historic buildings and features
shall be preserved and protected in recognition of the role the community’s past plays in its
present and future. Historic overlay zoning shall be utilized to protect appropriate historic
districts.
Program 2. Utilize the State Historic Building Code to encourage rehabilitation, preservation,
restoration or relocation of historic buildings listed or deemed on the local, State or Federal
register
Program 3. Implement the Historic Site (HS) overlay zone to help preserve and protect
historic Colony homes.
A. Develop and adopt a comprehensive inventory of historic resources.
B. Identify HS overlay boundaries on zoning map.
Program 4. Implement the Historic Site (HS) overlay zone to help preserve and protect
historic Colony homes.
Program 5. Update the PD (Planned Development) overlay zone to include retention and
rehabilitation of historic resources as a primary justification for PD zoning regulation
standards
Program 6. Update the City’s Appearance Review Manual to include preservation guidelines
for preservation, rehabilitation, and maintenance of historic properties.
Program 7. Develop incentives for retaining and rehabilitating Atascadero’s historic
resources including:
A. Exceptions to development regulations;
B. Conservation Districts;
C. Staff technical assistance;
D. Program to facilitate relocation instead of demolition; and
E. Mill’s Act contracts.
2021-2028 HOUSING ELEMENT
The 2021-2028 Housing Element specifically refers to historic preservation and conservation
practices through the Historic Site (HS) and Sensitive Resources (SR) Overlay zoning
designations.
Historical Preservation
To promote the conservation, preservation, protection, and enhancement of Atascadero’s
historical and architecturally significant structures, the City adopted a Historic Site Overlay
(HS) zone. The standards are intended to protect historic structures and sites by requiring
new uses and alterations to existing uses to be designed with consideration for preserving
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-15
and protecting the historic resource. Given the quality of Atascadero’s historical and
architecturally significant structures—and the contribution of these structures to the image
and quality of life in Atascadero—the historic preservation policies and regulations are
reasonable and appropriate and do not pose an unreasonable constraint to residential
development in the City of Atascadero. No sites identified in the vacant land inventory are
subject to the HS overlay.
Goals, policies, and programs pertinent to cultural resources included within the 2021-2028
Housing Element are listed here:
Goal HOS4: Protect and conserve the existing housing stock and neighborhoods, including
the City’s affordable housing stock.
• Policy 4.1: Encourage conservation and preservation of neighborhoods and sound
housing.
• Policy 4.2: Promote and preserve affordable housing.
• Policy 4.3: Encourage conservation and preservation of houses that have historical
and architectural significance.
• Policy 4.4: Leverage state and federal loans and grants to assist in preserving existing
housing and rehabilitating unsound housing structures.
Program 4.F: Historic Building Conservation Preserve and protect homes that have
historical and architectural significance, such as the Colony homes, through continued
implementation of the Historic Site (HS) overlay zone and by maintaining a GIS-based map of
historic buildings and sites.
2000 Downtown Revitalization Plan
The City’s Downtown Revitalization Plan is an area specific plan that outlines the City’s vision
and goals for the redevelopment of downtown. Modeled after the National Trust for Historic
Preservation’s “Main Street Program,” the Downtown Revitalization Plan is centered around
the preservation and careful stewardship of the downtown area as a form of placemaking
that can incentivize the enhancement of the area’s unique character simultaneously with
economic improvement through a mixture of private, public, and non-profit support.
Specifically, the Main Street approach is based upon four key aspects: design, organization,
promotion, and economic restructuring (Crawford, Multari, Clark & Mohr 2000).
Key goals in the plan specific to the preservation of cultural resources include:
• Develop a distinctive architectural character for the downtown while allowing for
reasonable design flexibility.
• Encourage more intense development at appropriate locations within downtown.
• Create a downtown identity program that preserves the historic character of the City
• Develop a façade improvement program (loan, grants, etc.)
Downtown Design Guidelines
The City’s “Downtown Design Guidelines” is an appended document within the Downtown
Revitalization Plan that are specifically intended to 1) assist in the revitalization of downtown
Atascadero, 2) provide for infill commercial development of high architectural quality that is
compatible with existing attractive buildings, and 3) promote the conservation of reuse of
existing buildings with preferred design quality. Collectively, the design guidelines aim to
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-16 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
protect the essential architectural features of downtown and the essential architectural
features through rehabilitation and preservation to contribute further to the historic
character in downtown Atascadero.
While the Downtown Design Guidelines primarily provide a framework for new and sensitive
infill development within the downtown core of Atascadero, some guidelines related to
preserving cultural resources are outlined, in addition to adherence to the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, as published by the National
Park Service. Identified on pages 51 through 54 of the document, these guidelines are
centered around the overall goal that “when an existing structure is to be renovated or
added to, care should be taken to complete the work in a manner that respects the original
design character of the structure” (Crawford, Multari, Clark & Mohr 2000).
6.3 Cultural Setting
PREHISTORIC OVERVIEW
California prehistory is divided into three broad temporal periods that reflect similar cultural
characteristics throughout the state: Paleoindian Period (ca. 9000–6000 B.C.), Archaic Period
(6000 B.C.–A.D. 500), and Emergent Period (A.D. 500–Historic Contact) (Fredrickson 1973,
1974, 1994). The Archaic is further divided into Lower (6000–3000 B.C.), Middle (3000–1000
B.C.), and Upper (1000 B.C.–A.D. 500) Periods. These divisions are generally governed by
climatic and environmental variables, such as the drying of pluvial lakes at the transition
from the Paleoindian to the Lower Archaic period.
The study area lies in the Central Coast Archaeological Region, which is one of eight arbitrary
organizational divisions of the state (Moratto 1984). This region extends southward from
Monterey Bay through Big Sur to Morro Bay, and includes southern Santa Cruz and Santa
Clara Counties, all of San Benito and Monterey Counties, and most of San Luis Obispo County.
Several chronological sequences have been devised to understand cultural changes within
the Central Coast Region subsequent to the Paleoindian and Milling Stone Periods. The
Milling Stone Period (ca. 6500–3500 B.C.) was first described by Wallace (1955, 1978) as part of
his synthesis of earlier studies and development of a comprehensive southern California
coastal region sequence, a chronological scheme that is still widely used today. Initially,
Central Coast researchers relied on the cultural sequences developed for the San Francisco
Bay area to the north, the Central Valley to the east, and the Santa Barbara region to the
south. Breschini and Haversat (1980) proposed the Sur and Monterey Patterns to describe
Central Coast occupations dating younger than 5,000 years. Jones and Waugh (1995)
presented an integrated Central Coast sequence after the development of cultural resource
management in the 1980s and ensuing excavations of numerous archaeological sites. Three
periods are presented in their prehistoric sequence subsequent to the Milling Stone Period:
Early, Middle, and Late Periods.
More recently, Jones and Ferneau (2002:213) updated the sequence following the Milling
Stone Period, as follows: Early, Early–Middle Transition, Middle, Middle–Late Transition, and
Late Periods. We rely here on the Jones and Ferneau (2002) chronological sequence for the
Prehistoric Period within the Central Coast Region subsequent to the Paleoindian and
Milling Stone Periods. It has become apparent that the archaeology of the Central Coast
Region subsequent to the Milling Stone Period is distinct from that of the Bay Area and
Central Valley, although the region has more in common with the Santa Barbara Channel
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-17
area during the Middle and Middle–Late Transition Periods, but few similarities during the
Late Period (Jones and Ferneau 2002:213). See also Jones et al. 2007 for a similar approach.
ETHNOGRAPHY
The area was historically occupied by the Salinan, with the northernmost subdivision of the
Chumash, the Obispeño (after Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa), bordering to the south
(Gibson 1983; Kroeber 1925). However, the precise location of the boundary between the
Chumashan-speaking Obispeño Chumash and their northern neighbors, the Hokan-
speaking Salinan, is currently the subject of debate (Milliken and Johnson 2005). Jones and
Waugh (1995:8) state that “those boundaries may well have fluctuated through time in
response to possible shifts in economic strategies and population movement.” As such, a
discussion of both groups is provided below.
Salinan
The Salinan language generally has been regarded as part of Hokan linguistic stock (Hester
1978:500; Shipley 1978:86), but more recent linguistic analysis indicates Salinan has no close
relatives and no demonstrated connections to other languages (Mithun 2004:482). Mason
(1918) recorded two Salinan dialects, northern (Antoniaño) and southern (Migueleño)
divisions, associated with the people administered by the Spanish from Mission San Antonio
de Padua and Mission San Miguel Arcángel, established in 1771 and 1797, respectively.
Neophytes at Mission San Antonio included Salinan living along the coast, referred to as
“Playanos.” Little is known about Salinan names for themselves (Kroeber 1925).
The semi-sedentary Salinan occupied a rugged, mountainous area on the south-central
California coast (Kroeber 1925; Hester 1978). Heavily wooded hills and mountains of the South
Coast Ranges dominated the interior, with sheer cliffs and rocky beaches along the Pacific
coast. Salinan territory was bounded on the north by the Esselen and Costonoan, to the east
by the Yokuts, and the south by Chumashan groups. The Chumash and Esselen languages
were previously thought to be part of the Hokan linguistic family, but both are now
considered isolate stocks (Mithun 2004). The Costonoan and Yokuts languages were derived
from Penutian linguistic stock, which is widespread in central California (Shipley 1978:82–84).
The actual extent of Salinan territory is uncertain, with different ethnographers ascribing
large variations in range (see Hester 1978:500). In general, their lands included the area
between the coast and approximately 50 miles inland, from near the City of Soledad in the
Salinas River Valley in the north, southward to north of the cities of San Luis Obispo and
Morro Bay. As described by Henshaw and Kroeber (1910:145), their territory extended from the
“sea to the main ridge of the Coast Range, and from the head of the Salinas drainage to a
short distance above Soledad.”
Salinan villages were recorded near the missions and along interior drainages, with some
habitation areas along the coast (Hester 1978:501). No permanent sites were recorded in the
Coast Range, although temporary camps were likely to have existed. Their subsistence
economy was one of hunting and gathering. The surrounding environment was varied and
rich, and they exploited the mountains, foothills, valleys, and coast. As with most native
Californians, acorns were a staple food, supplemented by wild oats, sage seeds, berries,
mescal, and wild fruits. Additional resources exploited by coastal and interior groups included
large and small mammals, such as deer, bear, and rabbits, as well as fish. The full extent of
their villages is unknown, but Hester (1978:501) locates 21 from earlier records. From north to
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-18 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
south, villages along the segment route include Ginau, Atnel (near today’s King City), Tsho-
hwal, Teshaya, and Him’-se-en’ (south of Mission San Miguel).
Salinan houses were domed, up to 10 feet square, constructed of poles, and covered with tule
or rye grass (Hester 1978:501). Other structures included birthing huts, dance houses, and
semi-subterranean sweathouses, among additional communal structures. Acorns were
stored in willow-twig granaries. The Antoniaño group practiced cremation of their most
distinguished individuals. Among the Migueleño, the deceased were wrapped in skins and
their possessions burned.
A variety of tools and implements, some of which are inferred from the archaeological record
in the area, were employed by Salinan groups (Hester 1978:501). These included bows and
arrows, traps, nets, blinds, throwing stocks and slings, spears, harpoons, and hooks. Bone and
shell tools included bone awls and C-shaped shell fishhooks. Foods were processed using
stone mortars and pestles, metates, basket mortars, bedrock mortars, stone bowls, and
wooden mortars. The Salinan also made a wide variety of baskets; cooking baskets, as well as
earth ovens, were used in food preparation.
There is little recorded of Salinan subsistence economy, but they would have taken full
advantage of the plant and animal resources available in the river valley, foothills, and
mountains within their territory. They also had a stretch of coastline from which to gather
shellfish, fish, and marine mammals.
Ornaments included items made of steatite, serpentine, and abalone shell. Clothing included
basket hats, rabbitskin or otterskin cloaks, and tule aprons. The Salinan also used beads
made from mussel and abalone shell for currency and had musical instruments, such as
cocoon rattles, wooden flutes, and bone whistles.
Some of Salinan material culture was obtained through an important trade network,
established with neighboring groups (Hester 1978:500–501). In exchange for saltgrass salt,
obsidian, seeds, lake fish, and possibly tanned animal skins, Salinan groups traded shell and
shell beads with the Yokuts to the east. Shell ornaments, wooden dishes, and steatite vessels
were obtained from the Chumash to the south, but apparently, the Salinan did not trade with
a rival trade group, the Costonoan to the north.
Like other indigenous Californians living near the coastal missions, Salinan population
decreased rapidly after the arrival of the Spanish. A relatively small population to begin with,
the Salinan were decimated by diseases introduced by the missions and later settlers. By 1831,
their number was fewer than 700, and their population continued to decrease even more
rapidly after secularization of the missions (Hester 1978:503). By the turn of the twentieth
century, only three families survived within their traditional territory. The California Indian Roll
of 1928 registered only 36 Salinans, and research 5 years later could only locate one Antoniaño
family, comprised of four elderly siblings (Hester 1978:503).
Chumash
The term Chumash initially applied only to the people living on Santa Cruz Island (King
1994:6). Chumash now refers to the entire linguistic and ethnic group of societies that
occupied the coast between San Luis Obispo and northwestern Los Angeles County,
including the Santa Barbara Channel Islands, and inland to the western edge of the San
Joaquin Valley. Neighboring groups included the Salinan to the north, the Southern Valley
Yokuts and Tataviam to the east, and the Gabrielino (Tongva) to the south. Chumash place
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-19
names in the project vicinity include Pismu (Pismo Beach), Tematatimi (along Los Berros
Creek), and Tilhini (near San Luis Obispo) (Greenwood 1978:520).
The Chumash spoke six closely related Chumashan languages, which have been divided into
two broad groups—Northern Chumash (consisting only of Obispeño) and Southern
Chumash (including Purisimeño, Ineseño, Barbareño, Ventureño, and Island Chumash)
(Mithun 2004:389). While Island Chumash was the most divergent of the five southern
languages, Ventureño may have had the most internal variation, with at least six distinct
dialects. The Chumashan language currently is considered an isolate stock with a long
history in the Santa Barbara region (Mithun 2004:304).
The earliest European visits to the Chumash region began with Cabrillo, Vizcaíno, and other
naval explorers to the southern California coast in the 1500s. The first land expedition through
the area occurred in A.D. 1769 when Gaspar de Portolà led an overland expedition from the
newly established settlement at San Diego to the San Francisco Bay. The first permanent,
non-indigenous settlement in the area occurred with the founding of Mission San Luis
Obispo in 1771, and soon numerous troop and supply trains passed through Chumash lands
on the way from San Diego to more northerly missions and outposts. Within Chumash lands,
additional Franciscan missions were founded at La Purísima, Santa Ynez, Santa Barbara, San
Buenaventura, and San Fernando. When the pueblo of Los Angeles was established in 1781,
the Ventureño Chumash were recruited as laborers.
Chumash subsistence varied between coastal and inland resources, but like many
indigenous Californian groups, the acorn was a dietary staple for the mainland Chumash.
Acorns were gathered in the autumn and stored in villages, where they were ground to a
meal, leached, and then cooked daily. In addition to acorns—mainly from the coast live oak—
other nuts, such as pine nuts and walnuts, were collected. Chumash diet also included cattail
roots, fruits and pads from cactus, and bulbs and tubers of plants such as amole (Miller
1988:89). Yucca stalks were harvested and roasted, and the buds and flowers also were
gathered. Staples included small hard seeds of several annual and perennial plants, such as
grass, chia and other sages, and buckwheat. Seasonal resources included berries (blackberry,
elderberry, grape, madrone, laurel, and wild cherry), mushrooms, and cress.
The effect of mission influence upon local native populations was devastating. The
dissolution of their culture alienated them from their traditional subsistence patterns, social
customs, and marriage networks. European diseases, against which they had no immunity,
reached epidemic proportions, and Chumash populations were decimated (Johnson 1987).
The increase in agriculture and the spread of grazing livestock into their collecting and
hunting areas made maintaining traditional lifeways increasingly difficult. Although most
Chumash eventually submitted to the Spanish and were incorporated into the mission
system, some refused to give up their traditional existence and escaped into the interior
regions of the state, as refugees living with other tribes. With the secularization of mission
lands after 1834, traditional Chumash lands were distributed among grants to private owners.
Only in the area of Mission Santa Barbara and Mission San Fernando Rey de España were
several small ranchos granted to neophytes of these missions, providing a secure home and
gardens for a few people.
Most Chumash managed to maintain a presence in the area into the early twentieth century
as cowboys, farm hands, and town laborers. The Catholic Church provided some land near
Mission Santa Inés for ex-neophytes. This land eventually was deeded to the U.S. government
in 1901 as the 127-acre Santa Ynez Reservation. Since the 1970s, Chumash descendants living
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-20 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
in the City of Santa Barbara and the rural areas of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and
Ventura Counties have formed social and political organizations to aid in cultural
revitalization to protect sacred areas and archaeological sites and to petition for federal
recognition.
6.4 Archaeological Resources
Archaeological and other heritage resources can be damaged or destroyed through
uncontrolled public disclosure of information regarding their location. Sensitive information
regarding the nature and location of archaeological sites should not be disclosed to the
general public or unauthorized persons. Information regarding the location, character, or
ownership of a cultural resource is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act pursuant to
54 U.S.C. 307103 (National Historic Preservation Act) and 16 U.S.C. Section 470(h)
(Archaeological Resources Protections Act). As such, this section includes only a brief
overview of the types of resources known to occur in the plan area.
Archaeological resources are defined as the surface and subsurface remains of sites no
longer in use or maintained in which evidence of past activity is preserved, and may be either
prehistoric or historic, or both. Prehistoric examples of the types of archaeological sites that
are known to exist within the Planning Area and vicinity include:
• Lithic debris and tool scatters are characterized by the presence of tool stone
manufacturing waste flakes, core fragments, and formed flaked stone tools such as
projectile points, knives, and scrapers.
• Habitation sites are characterized by long-term, extended use, with various activity
areas, which may include evidence of food processing, tool manufacturing, and
ceremonial events.
• Temporary campsites are generally limited use sites may contain evidence of food
manufacturing or tool production.
Historic examples include:
• Remnants of historic ranches, facilities, and residences;
• Refuse pits, trash scatter, and privies;
• Stone features (walls, cairns); and
• Foundation remnants.
6.5 Historical Context
ATASCADERO
The city has its roots in the Atascadero Colony, the utopian brainchild of Edward Gardner
(E.G.) Lewis, an enterprising publisher, promoter, and land developer. For his planned
community, Lewis envisioned “a city in the country, especially adapted to the automobile,
with small orchard estates, residential section and all of the civic, educational and businesses
as well as the administrative buildings grouped into a civic center” (Petry 2012:79). The
property he selected, in northern San Luis Obispo County, was advantageously located on
the main line of the Southern Pacific Railroad, bisected by the state highway, midway
between Los Angeles and San Francisco, “the two great markets of the Pacific Coast” (Allan
2008:18).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-21
Lewis’s choice of the Atascadero region also took advantage of an exceptionally extensive
and relatively undeveloped tract of land that had historically been part of three Mexican-era
land grants: Rancho Santa Margarita and Rancho Atascadero to the south of Atascadero
Creek, and Rancho La Asunción to the north. As was the case with California ranchos in
general, cattle ranching had been the dominant land use.
By the late nineteenth century, nearly all of Ranchos Asunción and Atascadero, as well as a
portion of Rancho Santa Margarita and adjacent government land, had been acquired by
Jason H. Henry—a rancher who kept the large holdings intact. In 1913, E.G. Lewis purchased
the entire Henry Ranch, encompassing some 23,000 acres of level or gently rolling terrain
that had seldom if ever been plowed. Lewis systematically worked with a series of civil
engineers, agricultural specialists, urban planners, and other experts to lay out an entirely
new community, with roads, irrigation systems, and orchard trees established before house
construction would begin. Specific areas of the Colony were designated for particular kinds of
land uses. Beyond the downtown core, with the smaller residential parcels, two-story
Mercantile Building as the Colony’s retail center, and impressive civic buildings designed by
San Francisco-based architects Walter D. Bliss and William B. Faville (Bliss and Faville), scores
of larger, outlying “blocks” were intended for development as family-owned orchard and
farm properties (Figure 6-1) (Travis, 1960).
Figure 6-1: Civic Center of Atascadero with the Colony
Administration Building (now City Hall) at center, ca.1918
Source: California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Library, Regional
Photograph Collection
The Atascadero Colony was promoted extensively throughout the U.S., Canada, Western
Europe, and other English-speaking countries. Initially, Lewis intended for the civic core of
the Colony with its grand buildings to be completed prior to residential construction,
although the extensive construction costs of the new community required aggressive
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-22 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
marketing campaigns to begin selling the plotted residential lots (Atascadero Historical
Society, 2019). In 1914, while the Colony was still under construction, a convention was
promoted for people to visit the Colony. Temporary accommodations were set up as a tent
city and visitors were able to view the work at hand while also visiting the Colony’s sale office.
The tent city model grew over the following year while residents waited for new residences to
be constructed. The Colony, often referred to as “Atascadero Estates,” took form as residences
were constructed. In many instances, residents of the tent city first constructed garages,
chicken coops, and established gardens while waiting for their residences to be completed
(Figure 6-2). By the end of 1915, several homes were finished and the large public buildings
were coming closer to completion, including the Administration Building (now City Hall)
which would serve as the offices for the Colony Holding Corporation, sales office, community
center, and other important communal functions; and the Atascadero Printery, which
housed extensive printing press and lithographic equipment to produce the Colony’s
newspaper and promotional materials, the Illustrated Review world news publication, and
contracted printing for the San Francisco Chronicle and the Los Angeles Times (Figure 6-3)
(Travis, 1960; Mackey, 2000: 8.1).
Figure 6-2: Typical early Atascadero
Colony Residences, ca.1918
Figure 6-3: Atascadero Printery,
ca.1920
Source: California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Library, Regional Photograph Collection Source: California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Library, Regional Photograph Collection
Through 1917, Atascadero was booming as additional public, commercial, industrial and
residential developments were completed (Figure 6-4). However, following the U.S. entering
World War I, the Colony was facing new economic pressures. With ramp up in the war effort,
building supplies were in short supply and a moratorium on non-essential new construction
was in place. Additionally, plans for businesses, factories, and other industrial centers in
Atascadero were shelved, except for a few enterprises related to agriculture and food
processing. By the mid-1920s, development momentum in Atascadero had waned and the
financial challenges faced by Lewis and the Colony’s holding companies became
insurmountable (Mackey, 2000: 8.15-8.18). Lewis ultimately declared bankruptcy following an
alternative scheme for developing a new community on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in which
he used his mail order lists to actively fundraise for the project. Lewis was ultimately
convicted of using the U.S. mail to commit fraud and was imprisoned (Nayyyar, 2014:17-18).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-23
Figure 6-4: View of Atascadero, ca.1925
Source: California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Library, Regional
Photograph Collection
Following Lewis’ indictment, the attorney Oscar Willet became the administrator of the
Colony Holding Company. Contrary to the original Colony plan, Willet began selling off
company owned property for private development. During this period, there was a degree of
concentrated commercial development, particularly along the main corridors along El
Camino Real and Traffic Way, shifting from the central Mercantile Building, which had served
as a pseudo company store for the Colony. The commercial corridors developed similarly to
other communities with a variety of two-story commercial blocks, composed in common and
popular architectural styles of the period, which housed a variety of businesses, including
retail, restaurants, hotels, entertainment venues, and an increasing number of automobile
related services (Figure 6-5). Under the direction of Willet, the Colony also purchased the
community of Eaglet, which was a small town that was centered along El Camino Real and
surrounded by Colony lands. Initially, residents in Eaglet rejected the Lewis plan and the
various restrictions he had in order to develop his vision; however, with Lewis by the wayside
and Atascadero developing in a more conventional capacity during this period, Eaglet was
easily incorporated into the broader Colony community (Chung 2019:38).
The onset of the Great Depression slowed the modest development of Atascadero, although
many of the buildings and enterprises were able to continue in some capacity. In the lead up
to Word War II, the U.S. Army opened Camp Roberts, which was one of the largest training
centers on the West Coast. The influx of people and capital was a catalyst for development
during this period, with the population of the Atascadero area growing by nearly 50% over
the course of the war (Chung 2018:38–39).
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-24 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Figure 6-5: View of Atascadero along El Camino Real, ca.1945
Source: California State Library, California History Room Picture Collection
In the post-war years, Atascadero underwent a similar transformation to other communities
in California. The influx of people saw increased residential development in a series of tract
homes, while there was also an influx of both federal and state government funding. One of
the most drastic interventions was the construction of the new U.S. Highway 101. Funded by
the U.S. Government, the new highway alignment was constructed several hundred feet
west of downtown and replaced El Camino Real as the main thoroughfare, while also
increased connections between Atascadero and the rest of California through the expanding
interstate system. The California Government also invested in the community with the
construction of the Atascadero State Hospital (1954), which is a state-run forensic psychiatric
hospital located southwest of downtown Atascadero. As a major employer, the hospital
brought an influx of people into the community during this period. Additionally, private
investment and the development of other industries spurred growth in the community. The
increased diversity in the economy resulted in the construction of a variety of new property
types, including multi-family and mixed-use developments, particularly within the central
community (Chung 2018:42).
In 1979, Atascadero incorporated as an independent City and steady growth in the
community continued over the following decades. While the original vision of the Atascadero
Colony did not materialize, the lack of extremely intensive developmental pressures allowed
for steady and manageable growth in the community, which effectively preserved the
original plan for the community, including the most prominent civic buildings and spaces, as
well as some of the rural and agricultural aesthetics of the original Colony ideal (Entezari &
Nayyar 2004:18).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-25
6.6 Historic Resources
Currently, the City does not maintain a comprehensive local register or inventory historical
resources. To provide insight into the extant resources within the City’s boundaries, SWCA
architectural historians reviewed the NRHP inventory databases and files available through
the Library of Congress, as well as available California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP)
databases, namely the California Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) for San Luis
Obispo County.
KNOWN HISTORIC RESOURCES
Based upon this review of BERD entries of Atascadero and other previous studies, Atascadero
contains several known historical resources that have been identified, documented and
evaluated, in addition to several prospective resources that have been the subject of local
study. However, this section does not provide an exhaustive list of all previously identified
historical resources. Specific to BERD, which was the primary inventory source for this
investigation, is a living document that undergoes various updates as new information,
surveys, and other forms of documentation are provided to OHP. It is not a wholly
comprehensive list of historical resources, but does provide crucial insight into previous
identification efforts and some of the resources that have been evaluated for historical
significance in Atascadero.
Table 6-1 outlines those properties of historical significance within Atascadero and listed in
the BERD in San Luis Obispo County, including the resource name, address, property type,
built date, and the assigned California Historical Resource Status Code (see Appendix B for a
list of the California Historical Resource Status Codes):
Table 6-1: Previously Documented Historical Resources in Atascadero
Resource Name Address Property Type Built Date(s) Historic Status
Atascadero Printery 6351 Olmeda Avenue Building 1915–1916 Listed in NRHP and CRHR
Atascadero
Administration Veteran’s Memorial
Building (City Hall)
6500 Palma Avenue Building 1914–1918 Listed in the NRHP and CRHR, designated CHL
Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District (AERHD)*
- District 1913–1919 NRHP-eligible
Bucklin House 6905 Country Club
Drive
Building 1930 NRHP-eligible, CRHR
listed
The Doran Building 5850 El Camino Real Building 1925 NRHP-eligible
Jorgens House 5345 Magnolia Avenue Building 1918 NRHP-eligible, CRHR listed
Carlton Hotel 5995 Traffic Way Building 1929 NRHP-eligible, CRHR
listed
* Contributors to the Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District are outlined in Table 6-2.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-26 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
This is not an exhaustive list of historical resources in Atascadero. Other individual properties
were likely determined eligible for various listings through the environmental review process
for individual projects and permit applications, and may be on-file with the City’s Community
Development Department.
It should be noted that the BERD entries for Atascadero include multiple properties that
were previously documented, evaluated, and, in many instances, found to be ineligible for
listing in one or more of the relevant designation programs (see Appendix B for the full
BERD listing for properties in Atascadero). This includes prominent properties within the
community, such as the Atascadero State Hospital complex. While some of these properties
have been previously evaluated, the date of those evaluations or the focus entirely on NRHP
significance with no CRHR evaluation may mean that further evaluations may be required of
previously evaluated buildings.
Individual Property Historical Resources
The following section provides concise summary of the previously identified and well-
established historic resources in Atascadero, including dates of construction, summaries of
historical significance, and a summary of the existing historic status.
• Atascadero Administration Veteran’s Memorial Building: constructed between 1914
and 1918, the Atascadero Administration Veteran’s Memorial Building, also known as
“the Administration Building” and now Atascadero City Hall, served as the
headquarters and central offices for the Atascadero Colony and the Colony Holding
Corporation and its various subsidiaries responsible for the management and
promotion of the development. Designed by Bliss & Faville, the elaborate Renaissance
Revival style building was the centerpiece for the Colony, and has maintained its
status as the symbol for Atascadero since it’s completion (Mackey, 1975).
In 1977, the building was formally listed in the NRHP and was determined significant
for its Renaissance Revival style architecture and its role in the overall Garden City
style planning of Atascadero, as an example of work by master architects Bliss &
Faville, it’s individual association with E. G. Lewis, and for its association with the
development of Atascadero as the primary headquarters and administrative center
(Mackey, 1975). In addition to being listed on the NRHP, the building is also listed in
the CRHR and is designated as a California Historical Landmark (CHL) as No. 958
(OHP, 2022).
• Atascadero Printery: constructed between 1915 and 1916, the two-story Renaissance
Revival building was designed by Walter Bliss of Bliss and Faville for E.G. Lewis. As one
of the primary civic buildings to be constructed as part of the initial development of
the Colony, the Atascadero Printery was essential in developing promotional materials
in Lewis’ Illustrated Review, while also providing contract printing services to major
newspapers in California, which in turn partially financed development of the Colony.
The Atascadero Printery is also noted as having one of the only rotogravure press
machines in the Western U.S
In 2000, the Atascadero Printery was listed in the NRHP. It was determined significant
under Criterion A for its associations with the early development and promotion of the
Atascadero Colony. The property is assigned a period of significance spanning
between 1916 to 1924, which corresponds with its opening in 1916 and the bankruptcy
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-27
of the Colony and cessation of the Illustrated Review in 1924 (Mackey, 2000). The
property is also listed in the CRHR.
• Bucklin House: constructed in 1930, the exemplary Spanish Colonial Revival style
residence was the home for James Bucklin, a prominent attorney in Atascadero.
Documents indicate that the residence was identified as individually eligible for listing
in the NRHP in 1994, although the exact significance associated with the property is
unclear at this time (Entezari & Nayyar 2004:19). However, its significant is likely related
to its Spanish Colonial Revival Architecture (Atascadero Main Street Design
Committee 2010: 35)
• The Doran Building: the two-story commercial block constructed in 1925 for Dr. J.E.
Doran. The building, which featured three retail commercial spaces on the ground
floor and office space on the second floor, was designed by Los Angeles-based
architect O.B. Solace and is noted for its significant Neoclassical and Beaux Arts
architectural style (Atascadero Main Street Design Committee, 2010: 23). It was
determined individually eligible for listing in the NRHP in 2001 (OHP, 2022).
• Jorgens House: constructed in 1918, the Jorgens House is an original Colony residence
composed in the Craftsman style. It was identified as individually eligible for listing in
the NRHP in 1987. Although the exact significance of the building is unknown at this
time, it is potentially related to its standing. The property is also listed on the CRHR
(OHP, 2022)
• Carlton Hotel: constructed in 1928, the Carlton Hotel was originally a two-story
commercial block with commercial storefronts along the ground floor – with national
retailers Safeway, J.C. Penney, and Sprouse-Reitz – and a 52-room motel at the second
floor. The building had several names in a short period, but was ultimately named the
“Carlton Hotel” in the early 1930s after the building was purchased by Nola Tunks. The
Atascadero Inn, a prominent early hotel in the community, burned down in 1934,
leaving the Carlton as the primary and most established hotel in the Atascadero area.
The building underwent various periods of remodels in the decades following
including the addition of the corner clock tower in the 1950s. In 1995, extensive
renovations were underway, but left incomplete with exterior walls remaining. By
2004, new ownership completed the renovation, rehabilitating much of the exterior
while also adding a third floor (Atascadero Main Street Design Committee, 2010: 32).
According to BERD, the building was evaluated in 1995 as part of a review associated
with the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) which found the
Carlton Hotel to be individually eligible for listing in the NRHP and resulted in the
automatic listing of the building in the CRHR (OHP, 2022). A review of City files found
the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City and California State Historic
Preservation Officer, demonstrating that the 1995 renovation utilized the Community
Development Block Grant Program to fund the project. (City & SHPO, 1995). While the
1995 project stalled and the 2004 renovation to the building resulted in notable
alterations to the building, the Carlton Hotel is still considered a significant building in
Atascadero. While the change in historical integrity may require an updated
evaluation of historical significance in the future, the Carlton Hotel should still be
considered a historical resource until demonstrated otherwise.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-28 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Multi-Property Historical Resources
The only apparent multi-property historical resource identified at this time is the Atascadero
Estates Residential Historic District (AERHD). While this was the only apparent and
prominent historic district identified during the desktop review of historical resources, there
is the potential that other identified and unidentified potentially eligible districts may be
present in Atascadero.
Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District
Originally identified in 1987 by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and
concurred upon by the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the AERHD is
primarily defined by the original street network, infrastructure, and overall layout of the
Atascadero Colony. The district was determined to be significant as a rare example of a town
developed in the Garden City tradition; for its associations with the original developer of the
Atascadero Colony, E. G. Lewis; and as the work of master planners and architects Walter D.
Bliss and William B. Faville. As such, AERHD was determined to exhibit significance under
NRHP criteria A, B, and C with an apparent period of significance spanning between 1914 and
ca.1921 (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:1).
With various structures and sites as the primary contributors, and only a select few buildings
that also contribute, the AERHD is somewhat unconventional in that it is largely defined by
the street network with many non-contributors extending throughout the interstitial spaces.
However, despite this, the significance of the Colony plan is inherently related to the
foundational elements that were constructed during the early period of Atascadero between
1914 and the early 1920s. While much more was intended to be constructed as part of the
original Colony plan, these never came to fruition. The completed elements are largely
reflected in the contributing elements to the AERHD, which are outlined in greater detail in
Table 6-2 and the section below.
Table 6-2: Contributors to the Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District
Resource Name Address / Location Contributing Property Type Built Date(s)
Atascadero Printery 6351 Olmeda Avenue Building 1915-1917
Atascadero Administration Veteran’s Memorial Building (City Hall)
6500 Palma Avenue Building 1914-1918
Atascadero Historic Street
System
- Structure 1914-1948
Street Trees - Site 1914-1948
Community Center (Federated
Church Building)
6225 Atascadero Mall Building 1920
Atascadero Hospital 5575 Hospital Drive Building 1919-1921
The Mall Traffic Way /
El Camino Real
Structure 1914-1915
Mall Park (a.k.a. Sunken Gardens) East Mall / West Mall / Palma Avenue / El Camino Real
Site
Palma Avenue Retaining Wall Palma Avenue Structure 1916
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-29
Table 6-2: Contributors to the Atascadero Estates Residential Historic District
Resource Name Address / Location Contributing Property Type Built Date(s)
Bridge #49-100
(Magnolia Avenue Bridge/ Atascadero Creek Bridge)
State Route 41 / Atascadero Creek Structure 1921
The following provides a summary of each of the identified contributors, except for the
Atascadero Printery and Administration Building, which are outlined as individual properties
in the previous section:
• Atascadero Historic Street System: the central, defining component to the AERHD is
the street network. Constructed between 1914 and 1918, the street network was the
foundation of the Colony’s City Beautiful and Garden City plan. The network features
the formal, axial Beaux Arts plan at the civic center and the more picturesque,
curvilinear roadways that extend throughout the residential areas of the plan, which
reflect the varied topography along the hillsides and valleys Entezari & Nayyar 2014:5).
• Street Trees: an integral part of the original Colony plan was the street trees that
were incorporated. Consulting with Leonar Cotes of Morgan Hill Nurseries, Lewis and
his design team specifically identified certain trees along particular roadway types.
Along broad avenues, plane trees, walnuts, and locusts were common; whereas
residential streets featured maple, locust, ash, oaks, and others. Mature examples can
still be found throughout the street network. This includes elm, plane, locust, walnut,
eucalyptus, and Monterey Pines (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:5).
• Community Center (Federated Church Building): constructed between 1920 and
1921, the Federated Church Building was the central social and meeting space in the
Colony, providing recreation and reception spaces that catered to a number of social
organizations in addition to the general Colony residents. The building also featured
the Federated Church function, was a multi-denominational church space that
catered to the community at large. While the building has been altered and is now
part of a larger church complex, it is still considered a contributor to the AERHD
(Entezari & Nayyar 2014:9–10).
• Atascadero Hospital: constructed between 1919 and 1921, the Atascadero Hospital
was designed as part of the original Colony plan. While the building has undergone
several alterations and additions since its construction and uses have changed, it still
is found to contribute to the AERHD (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:9).
• The Mall: constructed between 1914 and 1915, the Mall is the central component to the
AERHD and the civic center of the original Atascadero Colony Plan. Designed by
Walter Bliss and organized in the Beaux Arts style, the Mall includes the parallel
streets of East and West Mall, which extend northeast from El Camino Real and adjoin
in a horseshoe turnaround. The streets bound a series of central landscape
progression, which also includes the Administration Building and sunken Gardens as
the civic center of the former Colony design. While the Atascadero Middle School has
disrupted the alignment of East Mall, the general configuration remains and is
considered contributing to the AERHD (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:6–7).
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-30 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
• Mall Park (AKA Sunken Gardens): constructed in 1918, Mall Park, also known as the
Sunken Gardens, is the central city park located directly south across from the
Atascadero Administration Building. Designed in concert with the Administration
Building, Mall Park is a formal urban park that features several contributing features,
including the sunken gardens and fountain set at the center of the park that divides
the open expanses of lawn, the corner fountains, various statues, and mature trees,
including cedars (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:6–7).
• Palma Avenue Retaining Wall: constructed in 1916 and located along the north side
of Palma Avenue between Traffic Way and Rosario Avenue, the stone retaining wall is
noted for its square stone construction and association with the original Colony street
network (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:10).
• Magnolia Avenue/ Atascadero Creek Bridge: constructed in 1921, the Magnolia
avenue/ Atascadero Creek Bridge is a reinforced concrete arch bridge that was
designed as the formal entry into the Atascadero and its formal Beaux-Arts plan.
Designed by Warren B. Burch, an engineer with both the City and County of San Luis
Obispo, the bridge is specifically aligned on axis with the Administration Building to
force perspective of those crossing the bridge and mark the transition to-and-from
the formal civic center space from the curvilinear and more picturesque quality of the
residential neighborhoods (Entezari & Nayyar 2014:6).
POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCES
In addition to known historic resources, there are several properties that have been identified
over the years that have the potential to be considered historic resources. Often identified
through grass roots efforts to document the history of Atascadero, these properties do not
appear to have been formally documented or evaluated for historical significance by people
who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in history or
architectural history, but documented by enthusiastic members of the general public and
important non-profit organizations, namely the Atascadero Historical Society.
The following section provides a summary of these previous studies, as well as a discussion of
those properties that have been identified that have the potential to be historic resources.
Previous Studies
Colony Homes List (1994)
In 1994, the Atascadero Historical Society compiled a list of original Colony Homes within
Atascadero. In addition to providing specific addresses, the list compiles additional
information, including ownership, although it’s unclear if that is historic ownership related to
the original purchase of the property or current. Additional information is provided in the list,
although no key or legend was available at this time to provide further insight as to what the
data associated with each property listing may mean. Furthermore, it is unclear if the Colony
Home List is a transcription of a historical document showing all homes, or a
contemporaneous survey of existing Colony homes throughout Atascadero (Atascadero
Historical Society, 1994).
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-31
Atascadero Main Street Design Committee, “Atascadero’s Historic Business District”
(December 2010)
The Atascadero Main Street Design Committee worked alongside the Atascadero Historical
Society to prepare a document that outline the history of Atascadero and, specifically, the
development of the historic commercial core that developed during the 1920s along El
Camino Real and Traffic Way and expanded over the following decades. In addition to
identifying the most noteworthy extant buildings of the Colony-era, the document provides a
summary of early buildings in downtown Atascadero. This is often done in an informational
way and does not provide specific addresses or evaluations of historical significance, but the
context and background information regarding each potential resource within downtown
Atascadero is beneficial for future assessments and evaluations (Atascadero Main Street
Design Committee, 2010).
Alyssa Chung, “Atascadero Historical Report,” prepared for the City of Atascadero
(2018)
In 2018, an undergraduate student at California Polytechnical University, San Luis Obispo
(Cal Poly) prepared a historical planning document for the City as part of their coursework in
the university’s City and Regional Planning program. The document is essentially a
chronological historic context that draws upon a variety of primary and secondary sources.
While the document does outline a pedestrian survey component and identifies those
properties within their relevant chronological context, the methodology behind
identification, evaluation, and any other framework guidance for assessing significant
resources under historical themes is not included. While the context contains comprehensive
and concise information about the history of Atascadero and its overall development, the
survey component appears to build upon previous documentation alone, including the 2010
“Atascadero’s Historic Business District” report. It appears that the author verified if these
previously identified buildings and structures were still extant, but did not provide
information regarding specific address, evaluation criteria, integrity thresholds, or other tools
necessary for identifying historical resources (Chung, 2018).
List of Potential Resources
The following provides a synthesis of those properties identified, but not formally evaluated,
as part of these previous studies. While not necessarily historic resources under CEQA, these
properties will likely warrant special planning consideration and be treated as potential
historic resources until full evaluations of significance can be determined by a qualified
architectural historian. These potential historic resources are outlined in Table 6-3, which
provides the resource name, address, property type, and date of construction. It should be
noted that most of the potential resources outlined are located within downtown
Atascadero, which suggests that there may also be the potential for an associated historic
district. This too should be taken into consideration in future planning efforts and
environmental review.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-32 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 6-3: Potential Historic Resource in Atascadero identified in Previous Studies
Resource Name Address/ Location
Contributing Property
Type
Built
Date(s)
Jason H. Henry House 2930 Ramona Road Building ca.1880
Ewalt House 6205 Alcantara Avenue Building 1917
Eaglet Arcade Building 8400 El Camino Real Building ca.1918
Hire-Johnson Building 5950 El Camino Real Building 1923
U.S. Post Office Building 5850 El Camino Real Building 1924
Bakery Building 5905 El Camino Real Building 1924
Old fire House 5815 Traffic Way Building 1925
Winter & Ward Garages 5650 El Camino Real Building 1928
Keetch Building 5760 El Camino Real Building 1929
Scott Bungalow 5465 El Camino Real Building 1929
Bucklin Office 5932 Entrada Avenue Building 1932
Safeway/Sprouse-Reitz
Building
5805 El Camino Real Building ca.1940
Greyhound Bus Depot 5855 El Camino Real Building ca.1940
McKelvey Plumbing 5570 El Camino Real Building ca.1940
Savings Office Building 5825 Traffic Way Building ca.1960
Gas Station 6040 El Camino Real Building ca.1960
Grisanti Hardware Building 5825 Traffic Way Building 1961
In addition to the properties identified in Table 6-3, there are likely dozens of original Colony
residences throughout Atascadero, as suggested in the 1994 list prepared by the Atascadero
Historical Society, which may qualify as historical resources. While a full review of these
addresses included in the list was not conducted as part of this effort, the list is included as
an appendix item for reference and review (see Appendix A for 1994 Colony Homes List).
These residences, if extant, should be given special consideration as part of future planning
process and environmental reviews, and treated as potential historic resources until they can
be documented and evaluated by a qualified architectural historian to confirm historic
status.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-33
6.7 Appendix A: 1994 Colony Homes List
p
•
5245 Aleioo <H:!3 Piezsor. :;p b-Z-15
-19
er-3 15 ·l\
,,
CP 8-JO-t; p
6500 .O. l.cant~ri& lJX-42. R. :w. Lane C?
CP ll-Z~-15
< 9
2600 ,\-:<iill:l 46 2
3:25 .'\re.ill~ 2.,'1-20 L C • l•, Hiller ~ -;..1
367~ J.r.ilill.! 17-42 "'er~ ;(<n<l ~A
J(U5 A1vJ.:,: .La 1;-23 C:H~!'.!..~r .'\N -L8
2eGf AJ:l;__ •• A 3-l ' ( lLi:3-ot'1 l·U,
Page 2 of 23
4500 Ardilla 2-16 H. M. Wood AN 3-14-24 p
5546 Arroyo Ave R-13 Sloan CP p
6685 Atascadero ZA-12 Dr. J. E. Littlefield CP 2-3-15 p
6700 Atascadero CB-7 Marguerite A. Trav_is CP p
7820 Atascadero QB-3 Chas. S. Taber CP p
8020 Atascadero CC-55 M. J. Dixon CP 3-18-16 p
8100 ·Atascadero CC-51 A.H. Coombs AN -19 p
8200 Atascadero CC-47 Miss Matilda McIntyre . AN -19
8800 Atascadero 6-2 MA
9000 Atascadero 12-4 Calvert AN 10 -16 p
9360 Atascadero 12-lA Albright MA
9480 Atascadero 12-1 W. B. Jones GP 6-2-15 p
5409 Bajada MA-10 St . Crig L 3-11-16 p
5405 Bajada EA-19 Geo. B. Lewis L 3-11-16 p
Page 3 of 23
5455 Bajada EA-2 Dr. James H. Jackson
5550 Bajada G. A. Friess AN -19
5755 Bajada DA-9 Branaman Apts CP p
5845 Bajada DA-lA J. A. Anderson -Moved from No. Hwy p
5285 Barrenda Q-30 J. G. Barnard GP 6-8-15 p
5290 Barrenda Q-20 Sexton
'-., 5 304 Barrenda Q-29 E. P. Thomas CP • 6-2-15 p
.I
. ,
5315 Barrenda Q-30B Frank B. Martin CP 8-2-16 p I ~
I!
5334 Barrenda Q-28A L. K. Jordan GP 6-3-15 I p I
5339 Barrenda Q-31 V. X. Lyon CP 6-2-15 p
5392 Barrenda DA-7 p
5393 Barrenda DA-25 Appleton p
6305 Buena H-1 Mrs . E. B. Taylor CP 7-24-16 p
5205 Capistrano AP-40 Wm. F. Ryder p
Page 4 of 23' .
5210 Capistrano AP-39 Mrs. William Grilley AN 3-26-21
5385 Capistrano AP-49 Mary Sawyer CP 3-18-17 p
5401 Capistrano AP-50 Palms
9435 Carmel 101~1 L.B. Mack CP 11-27-16 p
8355 Carmelita HC-7 Carruth AN 5-9-24 p
9205 Carmelita KC-7 DeGolier -21 p
9400 Carmelita 14-27 James Hanna MA
9455 Carmelita 14-29 Miller -21
7665 Castano MC-15 Rudolph Reich CP p
7865 Castano MC-24 Lucy Murray CP p
5300 Cascabel 16-ZOA Carlton B. Breese MA
14855 Chispa 103-2 Mrs. Sallie M. K~ith AN -19
6020 Conejo 23~7A N. A. Hasher CP p
8300 Coromar 7-26 Septimus Martin AN -19
', Page 5 of 23
8405 Coromar 7-5B Remodeled barn of Patterson House
8505 Coromar 7-5C Patterson AN -16 p
8730 Coromar 7-33H
8825 Coromar 7-:-34C Blessing
7600 Cortez MC-12A F. A. Kimmell CP 4-9-15 p
7740 Cortez MC-6 p
7820 Cortez MC-2 T. A. Thompson MA
Cortina Poole MA
7115 Cristobal NB-14 Bonibell Slagg GP p
7150 Cristobal OB-15 Cyrus Skinner • GP 10-2-14 p
7305 Cristobal NB 16 & 17 Miss Kinder AN -19
7850 Curbaril FC-12 AN
7880 FC-11 Mrs. Mary R. Howard GP p
8085 Curbaril OB-2 McClellan p
Page 6 of 23
8755 Curbaril HA-30 Miss Mercie K. Worsfold CP 7-24-16 p
8945 Curbaril GA-2 Ellen and Vest;; Tibbetts p
.8955 GA-5 Kratz AN -17 p
8985 Curbaril GA-7 J. H. Magee CP 10-19-15 p
9225 Curbaril B-lA Amanda Hurst CP 9-25-15 p
9230 Curbaril MC-47 L. N. Kline CP p
4835 Del Rio 22~5 C.H. Willy GP 3-20-16 p
5200 Dolores FA-19 J. S. Donnell L 3-11-16 p
5275 Dulzura EA-16 Emma S. Nichols AN 2-22-24
1535 El Camino 49-25B J.C. Morton CP 8-2,...16 p
1625 El Camino 49-27 H. G. Terrell CP 2-19-16 p
1800 El Camino 48-3 Albert Rhordorf GP 9-23-15 p
2115 El Camino 22-8 S. N. Palms AN 10-24-19 p
2605 El Camino 22-15 T. s. Bennet AN -17 p
Page 7 of 23
2705 El Camino 22-16 Henry Boerner CP 10-16-17 p
2900 El Camino 23-1 p
3055 El Camino 19-92 Miss M. S. Devereaux L 3-11-16 p
3155 El Camino 19-94 Bacher
3320 El Camino 18-9 23 p
3405 El Camino 19-99 A. L. Hess CP 9-21-16 p
3650 El Camino 18-5 Bovee p
3655 El Camino 19-104 Creasy AN 6-3-21
3755 El Camino 19-106 Foster MA
4625 El Camino NC-65 Merri gold AN 7-13-17 p
4650 El Camino 2-3 Mrs. A. M. Reinhold ,CP 2-19-16 p
5065 El Camino RA-20 Evans p
5205 El Camino RA-13 Bishop p
5365 El Camino RA-5 A. W. B. Perrine CP 7-24-16 p
Page 8 of 23
7470 El Camino TA-3 Fred Lappin AN 3-18-16 p
7575 El Camino HA-13 11-29-21 p
7605 El Camino HA~12 Henry Pysher CP p
7735 El Camino HA-8 E. V. Dorn CP 6-23-15 p
7830 El Camino SA-12 Sophie Feuss L 3-11-16 p
7900 El Camino SA-13A August Heintz CP 11-8-15 p
7965 El Camino HA-3 Mrs. H. G. Moore CP 1-12-16 p
8740 El Camino 7-3 G. B. Chandler CP 6-15-16 p
8800 El Camino 7-2 Kate Baldwin AN -19
8900 El Camino 7-1 R. W. Goeb CP 11-5-15 p
920"0 El Camino 10-5 C. A. Carlson GP 2-14-16 p
10850 El Camino 35-4 G. T. Harrison 1. 3-11-16 p
5225 Ens.enada AP-12 Emory Longmire AN 1-31-19
5265 Ensenada AP-14 Curneen AN 11.,.4-21
-Page 9 Of 23
5385 Ensenada AP-20 Blanchard
5440 Ensenada AP-4 McClure AN -19
5450 Ensenada AP~3 Frank Brentengle AN 7-25-24 p
5080 Fresno PA-19 Balderson AN 8-23-18 p
5220 Fresno PA-10 Voak p
5280 Fresno PA-9 Fenny p
5405 Fresno MA-20 23
5430 Fresno PA-22 Leopold Radke CP p
7100 Graves Creek Rd 24-30 Gill 20
4635 Hidalgo I-8 Chase AN 6-3-21
4660 Hidalgo K-19 Hartranft p
4700 Hidalgo K-21 McDougal p
4705 Hidalgo I-5 Jack Prosser CP 4-2--15 p
4768 Hidalgo K-24 Libbey MA
5309 Honda DA-32 A. R. Kay
5330 'Honda Q-J3 J. A. Summafrank
8735 .Junipero MC-94A Murphy ·-Mov~d from WA-14
I/
8740 Junipero MC-144 James H. Carr
8780 Junipero MC-140 Wm. Jones
\
6200.Los Gatos 15-49 George . N. Allen
11305 Los Palos Rd. 79-49, DL -F. Q. Darnons
5165 Magdalena F-16 H. i. Floaten
j
5185 Magdalena F-15 B. D. Conrad
5345 Magnolia F-8 I. L. Mitchell
5385 Magnolia F-4 H. E. Mitchell
6200 Marchant UA-13 W. B. Ewalt
6300 Marchant UA-6 Montgomery
6455 Marchant TA-37 Capt. C. A. Smede
Page 10 of 23
AN 1-31-19
CP 12-24-15 p
p
AN -19
L 3-11-16 p
AN 7-19-21
AN 11-4..:.21.
GP 10-10-14 p
GP 10-10-14 p
CP -11-28-14 p
GP -10-10-14 p
GP 1-30-16 p
GP p
AN 7-12-21
Page 11 of 23
8205 Marchant 6-7 . Malcolmson MA
8420 Marchant CC-9 Miss Belle J. All~n AN 6-3-21
8885 Marchant 6-9 Dr. Lillian Miller MA
5360 Marquita NA-6 A Chas. Odin AN 10-5-17 p
3400 Maricopa 17-9 J. A. Hier Johnson AN 10-27-21
3950 Maricopa 17-21 Standley p
'" 5385 Marquita PA-4 p
5~25 Marquita PA-2 Bentley AN 3 -16
5460 Marquita NA-12 ~:.!Ell!!.-.. Howe 19 p
5140 Mercedes F-23A W. A. Brown CP 10-10-14 p
4835 Miramon J-9 Rasmussen p
4965 Miramon J-4 ·Grabenstein L 3-11-16
5055 Miramon J-2 Jennie James Polke
5095 Miramon J-1 Hobbs MA
Page 12 of 23
2500 Monterey Rd 24-8 Crook AN. 10-21-21
3850 Monterey Rd 17-4 C. A. Miller CP p
3900 Monterey Rd 17-3 MA
3990 Monterey Rd 17-1
7300 Morro Rd RB-13 Mrs. Mary McMaster -CP p
8580 Morro Rd GC-6 Dr. B. H. Pelton CP p
9085 Morro Rd JC-3 MA
6390 Navajoa ZA-6 Mrs. E.M. and J.C. Tyler CP p
7100 Navajoa SB-17 E.T. Willis CP p
7200 Navajoa SB-16 N~ K. McClellan CP p
7710 Navajoa SB-6 E. M. Osburn CP p
7800 Navajoa SB-4 Moon Moved from DC-34 L 3-11-16 p
5570 Nogales OA-2 W. H. Engle CP 2-3-15 p
4820 Obispo 49-33 Oldson Moved from 18-2 p
Page 13 of 23
9950 Old Morro Rd East 32-12A J. J. Sonunerfeld CF p
5100 Olmeda QA-37 Northrup CP 9-11-15 p
5160 Olmeda QA-41 E. C. Peterson CP 2-3-15 p
5220 Olmeda QA-44 J . T. Wilson CP 4-:-9-15 p
5290 Olmeda QA-49 S. W. Hesse CF 11-15-16 p
5315 Olmeda NA-7A W. K. Bancroft CP 2-1-15 p
5345 Olmeda NA-7 Mrs. F . .E. Taylor CP 8""'."26-15 p
5380 Olmeda QA~55
5q05 Olmeda NA-5 Mrs. H. A. Shotwell CP 7-7-15 p
.5420 Olmeda QA-58 Marshall p
5450 Olmeda QA-60 Chamberlin 18 p
5460 Olmeda QA-60A Mrs . M. G. Lewis CP 18 p
5035 Palma QA-31 C. S. Cornelius CP 4:-20-15
5125 Palma QA-27 J. F. Brittian CP· 4-8-15 p
Page 14 of 23
5165 Palma QA-24
5245 Palma QA-19 C.H. Phettiplace CP 10-23-16 p
5280 Pal.ma RA-38 Mrs. Showalter AN 10 -16 p
5340 Palma RA-41 J . W. Francis CP 4-8-15 p
5345 Palma QA-13 J. T. Wilson L 3-11-16
5360 Palma RA-42 J. W. Barrett GP 9-28-15 p
5385 Palma QA-10 Cyr
5495 Palma QA-4 ·ndsey L 3-11-16
4400 Portola 16-8 W.W. Calder GP 7-15-17 p
4805 Portola 3-9 Sigsbee MA
5000 Portola 16-5 Oakes p
5305 Portola 3-lOB E. L. Vail AN 10--16 p
5490 Portola 16-3 Armstrong p
6 ~ Portola 4-10 Holden MA
Page 15 of 23
6275 Portola 4-9 C. L . .Mccready 21 p
6495 Portola 4-8 Walter Mccready AN 10-24-19
6450 Portoia 15-6 Fortney p
6400 Portola 15-6 AN 11-4-21
6606 Portola 15-4A W. L. Head AN 11-4-21
7010 Portola 5-6 & 6C Dr. Sarah Brooke CP p
7200 Portola 5-7B Beal ·:Andrus CP p
7250 Portola 5-8 Mrs. M. C. Langmaid CP p
:::::, <.9 7350 Portola 5-10 N. > a,
B. Johnson CP p
>-;:
...I> 0 0.. a. ""
>. C"') 7400 ·Portola 5-lOA D. Hinman AN -19 C: 0
re 2 . 0.. a, E -ci: OU :., ai 7475 Portola 5-1 u ~ C: "' :a. ::: .
:C~
7856 Portola KC-10 Latham p
8475 Portola 6-12 Mrs . Katherine Rathfon AN 6-3-21
't 8625 Portola 7-31A . G. Williams CP p
Page 16 of 23
8665 Portola 7-32 E. L. Higgins p
8780 Eortola 10-9 ==:,,:: Frandsen · p
2930 Ramona 18-14A Henry Ranch p
4980 Rosario T-14 Pysher AN 17 p
4990 Rosario T-14A p
5000 Rosario R-12 AN 17 p
5020 Rosario R-11 M. G. Lewis AN 6-3-21 p
5080 Rosario R-~7 H. H. Stuart L 3-11-16
5530 Rosario MA-7 Mrs. W. I. Thompson L 3-11-16 p
5540 Rosario MA-6 Delia Holden CP 2-10-17 p
5570 Rosario MA-2 L. D. Beckwith CP 5-14-15 p
5672 Posario NA~l3 Mrs. E. C. Lewis -Remington CP 5-21-15 p
5680 Rosario NA-13 so . John J . Roth CP 5-3-16 p
5705 Rosario LA-19 Mary A. Andrews AN 3-14-24
~
..
Page 17 of 23
5735 Rosario LA-20 Dr. J.B. Banker CP p
5763 Rosario LA-21 E. C. Sears CP 10-24-16 p
5800 Rosario QA-1 Kase CP p
5825 Rosario LA-22B R. P. O'Connor CP 9-22-16 p
7555 San Andres BB-1 Tedford AN 11-28-21
8255 San Andres UA-34 Belden AN 21
8400 San Andres OB-18 C. G. Wheeler CP 3-31-16 p
6240 San Anselmo 17-lA Watson p
5560 San Benito 22-17 J. C. Huber CP 11-4-15 p
8425 San Clemente 5-SA Miss B. F. Amsbury CP p
7500 San Gabriel 31-2 Eisenbise p
7505 San Gabriel 14-24 Lester Guy 23 p
9080 San Gabriel 34-9 Thomas N. Henry AN 11-4-21
'
7205 San Gregorio 52-2 ~Rude Newton CP p
Page 18 of 23 .
4800 San Jacinto NC-6 Warren Morris AN 6-3-21
5245 San Jacinto FA-30 Alice Schlosser and Mrs. Jones AN 7-19-21
5295 San Jacinto FA-32
8950 San Marcos 15-41 Townsend p
5675. San Pedro V-19 p
5685 San Pedro V-18 p
5703 San Pedro V-17 V. B. French CP ·P
5735 San Pedro V-16 E. D. Jarvis CP p
5790 San Pedro T-9 Lawrence Hess AN 9-2-16
4650 San Vicente Y-4 Chase MA
9840 Santa Clara 102-16 & 17 Benj Leibenburger CP 2-3-15 p
6843 Santa Lucia HB-29 Mrs. Eugene Davis CP p
8600 Santa Lucia 3-13A Paul Junker AN 1-13-24
.•
Page 19 of 23
9900 Santa Lucia 16-33 B. H. Smith 20 p
10855 Santa Lucia 28-12 Martin MA
12505 Santa Lucia 57-8 Reis MA
13600 Santa Lucia 55-51 Leigh AN 6-3-21
8455 Santa Rosa 12-9 Mendham AN 10-31-19
8711 Santa Rosa 10-16 Chas. A. Oliva CP p
6205 Santa Ynez ZA-7 Carrie E. Williams CP 9-25-18 p
6820 Santa Ynez DB-4 Armstrong p
6875 Santa Ynez CB-13 Mrs. E. B. Long CP 2-3-15 p
6980 Santa Ynez DB-1 Filley AN 17
7030 Santa Ynez TB-15 Mrs. S. W. Thornton CP p
7050 Santa Ynez TB-15 Dr. E. A. Berry CF p
7450 Santa Ynez TB-11 Dave H. Barry L 3-ll--:i6 p
7805 Santa Ynez SB-21 Mrs. Grace Snyder GP 8-6-15 p
y
Page 20 of 23
8450 Santa Ynez GC-8 Nelson MA
7105 Santa Ysabel KA-8 Dr. Urey p
7255 Santa Ysabel KA-4
7285 Santa Ysabel IA-14 Alberta Wagner CP 7-3-15 p
7351 Santa Ysabel IA-11 J. t. Nicholson CP 2-2-15 p
7379 Santa Ysabel IA-9 Nellie C. Miller CP 2-2-15 p
7393 Santa Ysabel IA-8 F. A. Cola GP 2-2-15 p
7406 Santa Ysabel JA-22 ·Minnie Koenig CP p
7535 Santa Ysabel GA-llB C. E. Swerdfeger AN 12 19
6889 Serra BB-4A John Seibold L 3-11-16 p
7590 Sinaloa HA-17 H. T. Brown CP 9-1-15 p
7650 Sinaloa HA-19 Miss Julia C. Down AN 19
7685 Sinaloa HA-42
7805 Sinaloa HA-3S-W. A. Moore-GP ·s-8-16 p
..
Page 21 of 23
7835 Sinaloa HA-37 W. A. Moore CP 8-8-16 p
7865 Sinaloa HA-36 Dr. M. Goether • CP 6-18-15 p
7880 Sinaloa HA-27 Julia A. Kunkee CP 6-6-16 p
7340 Sornbrilla IA-17 Mrs. H. R. Eaton L 3-11-16 p
4480 Sycamore I-12 F. I. Willard L 3-11-16 p
4595 Sycamore H-10 Mrs. A. L. Adams p
4620 Sycamore A. T. Russell MA
4645 Sycamore H~8 Mary Andrews L 3-11-16 p
4715 Sycamore H-5 AN 10 24
4955 Sacamore G-5B A. L .. Van Brakle L 3-11-16 p
4965 Sycamore G-5A Gertrµde Kendig L 3-11-16 p
5000 Sycamore J~l8 Walters MA
7285 Sycamore SP-11 Clay MA
3210 Traffic Way y21 -2 Webber MA
Page 22 of 23
4650 B Traffic Way W-13 T. G. Ford cp· 2-13-16 p
4650 A Traffic Way W-14 L. E. Van Ness CP 4-21-16
5050 Traffic Way Q-63 W. H. Harrison CP 6-28-16 p
5070 Traftic Way Q-64 Della Callahan CP 8-26-15 p
5110 Traffic Way Q-68 MA
5120 Traffic Way Q-71 Rebecca Lindsay p
5300 Traffic Way DA-30 Jessie Nicholson CP 6-12-16 p
5390 Traffic Way DA-26 Emmons AN 3-25-16 p
5935 Traffic Way LA-24A F. 0. Engstrum CP 6-8-15 p
5516 Tunitas LA-7 Hastie CP 18 p
5534 Tunitas LA-9 p
5540 Tunitas LA-10 p
5561 Tunitas LA-47 C.H. Branham CP 7-9-15 p
5573 Tunitas LA-49 Louis Cohen CP 7-12-15 p
Page 23 of 23
5579 Tunitas LA-50 p
5590 Tunitas LA-23 Moon p
5595 Tunitas LA-26 Roy Clarke AN 6-3-21
7345 Valle D-71 Mayer
7385 Valle D-73 Mrs. Nancy K. Ellis CP p
S9~cf
~Violeta IB-1 Dr. Carl H. Bryant AN 7-12-21 p
7790 Yesal MC-68 W. L. G,unn CP 1-21-16 p
11600 Viejo Camino 66-Hubbard 16
Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-56 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Primary I I Property Aliases and Alias I .. : .. , I I I I I I Other I I Parent I Assoc I Parcel I I Owner! Construction I I Date I Export
Number OTIS ID Number Name Types St Name City County Zip Vicinity Geography Evaluation Info District Resources Num MilePost ship Year(s} oCode Modified Date
427404,Relate
689993 Atoscadero City t-all Penthouses ATASCADERO S3n Luis Obispc 6Y, 02J'03/2011, FEMA07050 4/\ c Resource 3/10/2020 9/23/2022
ATASCADERO ESTATES
RESIDENTIAL hlSTORIC 40-3422-001, Survey 2S2, 0 6/04/1987, 3422-0005-9999 I 2S2,
487972 90605 DISTRICT !\umber ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/)987, FHWA870506A 1913-1919 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
40-3422-0Ql ,•,Survey 202, 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-0001 I 2D2,
487989 90625 HISTORIC STREET SYSTEM !\umber ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 487972 M 7914-7948 o3512.0d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
40-3422-001 ,survey
!\umber I
ATASCADERO BIBLE 202, 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-0009 I 2D2,
487995 90632 FEDERATED CHURCH BUILDING CJ-UACHAOther Name 6225 ATASCADERO MALL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 06/04/)987, FHWA870506A 487972 p 1920 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04,~987, 3422-0009-0000 6Y,
487960 90593 5205 CAPISTRAI\O ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A p 1918 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 0'6/041~987, 3422-0008-0000 I 6Y,
487900 90588 5210 CAPISTRAI\O ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FH'NA870506A p 1918 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04/1987, 3422-0010-0000 I 6Y,
487901 90589 5225 Cl,PISTR/\1\0 /\T/\SC/\DERO S/\N LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A p 1935 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04.'7987, 3422-0012-0000 I 6Y,
487904 90592 5385 CAPISTRAI\O ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/)987, FHWA870506/\ p 1917 c35120do 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04/1987, 3422-0007-0000 6Y,
487898 90586 5400 CAPISTRAI\O ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A p 1935 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04M87, 3422-0011-0000 I 6Y,
487903 90591 5401 CAPISTRAI\O ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A p 1918 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
491390 94685 BUCKLIN HOUSE 6905 COUNTRY CLUB DR ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 2S2, 02/28/1995, FHW/',950113B 1930 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
TEMPLETON 6Y, 0'6/04/i987, 3422-0018-0000 I 6Y,
487968 90601 CRESTON RD ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO RD (Ccrridor) 06/04/1987, FH'NA870S06A p 1920 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
Map Reference 1' t,TASC/\DER
B3,,Fieldwork Nbr I OCREEK 6Y, 12;)0/2001, DOE-40-0l-0020-0000 I
565947 132096 BRIDGE .,t49-24 Post Mile 16.13r•Other El Camino Real ATASCADERO San Luis Obispo 93422 (Ccrridor) 6Y, 12/10/2001, FHWA011003C 1915 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hospital Main
681447 Hospital Complex~ 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 045-461-002 11954-2005 o35120d6 12/18/2019 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Ad m in
707637 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707639 /,tascadero State Hosp /\dmin 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017. Cl,GEN_2016_0317_002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
t\tascadero State Hosp Barber
707653 S1"'1op< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 17/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Cliriic
707671 Area< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero .San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707672 Conference Room-=-10333 El Camino Real Atascacero S3n Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/20'22
Atascadero State Hosp Graphic
707703 Arts< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707736 Maintenance Office< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/\GEN_2016_0317_002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
At3scadero St3te Hosp Mtc.
707739 Storage·~ 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707769 Personnel< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
At.ascadero State Hosp
707770 Personnel< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CJ,GEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
At3scadero St3te Hosp
707772 Pharmacy< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero S3n Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
r,tascadero State Hosp
707786 Storerocm \/Varer,cuse.-: 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2077, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707787 Storeroom Main< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707789 Storeroom Main New< 10333 El Camino Re.ii Atascaoero S3n Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6174/2022 9/23/2022
707804 At3scadero St3te Hosp Unit 74< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Uri it 14
707805 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/\GEN_2016_03l7_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
6.8 Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-57
A ppendix B Atascadero BERO Entries
Primary Property Aliases and Alias St I I I I I I Other I I Parent I Assoc I Parcel I I Owner! Construction I I Date I Export
Number OTISID Number Name Types Number St Name City County Zip Vicinity Geography Evaluation Info District Resources Num MilePost ship Vear(s} oCode Modified Date
707819 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 18< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017. C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Ur.it 18
707820 Annex·~ 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 M4/2022 9/23/2022
707821 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 19< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_201G_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 19
707822 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 6/i4/2022 9/23/2022
707823 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 2< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 28
707836 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707837 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 29< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
7078"38 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 3< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317 _002 61i4/20'2.2 9/23/2022
707839 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 30< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707853 Vocational Ed.< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707854 Vocational Shop< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016-0317 _002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707650 Auditorium< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_:2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707668 Atascadero State Hosp Chapel< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017. C/\GEN_2016_0317 _002 6;i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Core
707675 (Mcdular 2)•< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6,~4/2022 9/2:3/2022
707682 Atascadero .State Hosp Corricors 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2077, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 M4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero .State Hosp Corrie or
707684 VI/est< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Gym
707707 bldgl03<. 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017. C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Hosp.
707709 Info. Dept.< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707732 Atascadero State Hosp Kitchen< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CA·GEN_201G_0317 _002 M4/2022 9/2:3/2022
707734 Atascadero State Hosp Laundry< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Mtc.
707748 vva rehouse< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Phoenix
707773 cam pus< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707782 Rehabilitatior, Unit < 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4.I2022 9/23/202.2
Atascadero .State Hosp .Staff
707784 Hallway II< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_201G_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707802 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 13< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/\GEN_2016_0317 _002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
707807 Atascadero State Hosp ur,it 15< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707825 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 21< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_201G_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero .State Hosp Unit 22
707827 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707832 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 26< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 27
707834 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real 1-\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017. CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707841 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 32< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707843 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 34< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 9
707850 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Visiting
707852 Rm.Small< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017. C/\GEN_2016_0317_002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Hosp.
707857 Po lice< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707642 Admission< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_201G_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Central
707665 .Supply 903< 10333 El Camino ReJI Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Central
707667 Supply Ster.< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-58 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Appendix B Atascadero BERO Entries
Primary Property Aliases and Alias St I I I I I I Other I I Parent I Assoc I Parcel I I Owner! Construction I I Date I Export
Number OTISID Number Name Types Number St Name City County Zip Vicinity Geography Evaluation Info District Resources Num MilePost ship Vear(s} oCode Modified Date
Atascadero State Hosp core
707674 (Modularl)< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017. C/,GEN_2076_0317 _002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
/..\tascadero State Hosp Corric or
70768.3 Main< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23,'2022
Atascadero State Hosp Dining
707701 Rooms< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero .State Hosp Nev .. ,;
707751 Treatment Area< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707765 Ata:.cadero State Hosp Office< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CACEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Patient
707767 Property< 10333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispc 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Program
707774 Office< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero .San Luis Obispc 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707776 Protective Services< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016-0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp School
70778.3 Area< 10333 El Camino Real /\tcscacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CACEN_2076_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 12
707799 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2077. C/\GEN_2016_0377 _002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Unit 13
707801 Annex·, 70333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707808 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 16< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Ur.it 16
707810 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707824 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 20< 10333 El Camino ~eel Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23./2022
707826 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 22< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707833 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 27< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707835 Atascadero State Hosp Ur.it 28< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0377_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707840 Atascadero State Hosp Ur,it 31< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 111'20/2017, CACEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707842 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 33< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero .San Luis Obispc 93422 GYM, 11/201'2077, CA·GEN_2016_0317 _002 M 4/2022 9/23/2022
707844 Atascadero .State Hosp Unit 4< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707849 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 9< 10333 El Camino Real /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Ver,ding
707851 Room< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Adm in
707627 (Stand Comp)•' 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 61i4,I2022 9/23/202.2
707628 Atascadero State Hosp Ad min< 10333 El Camino Real J-\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707647 /\omission /,ddition<. 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/\GEN_2076_0317 _002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Canteen
707662 Storage< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CACEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Ho5p Cer1tral
707663 Nursing< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero .San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6,~4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero .State Hosp Hosp.
70 7713 Info. Dept.< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016-0317_002 G,i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp Ice
707714 Rocm•, 10333 El Camino Real /\tcscacero San Luis Obispc 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CACEN_2•.)76_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atcscadero State Hosp Mtc.
707744 Storeroom< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017. C/\GEN_2076_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707762 Nutriticnal Service$•~ 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_()02 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
Atascadero State Hosp
707764 Occupational Health< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/231'2022
Atascadero State Hosp Psych.
707778 Tech School< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 GYM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0377_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707794 /\tascadero State Hosp Uri it 1"'"• 10333 El Camino Real At.ascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2077. C/\GEN_2076_0377_002 6;74/2022 9/23/2022
707795 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 10< 10333 El Camino ~eal Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, ll/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_Q02 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707796 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 11< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 GYM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707797 Atascadero .State Hosp Ur.it 12< 10333 El Camino ReJI Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/,GEN_2016_0317 _002 61i4/2022 9/23/2022
707812 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 17< 10333 El Camino l=(eal /\tascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 111'20/2017, CACEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
6.8 Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-59
Appendix B Atascadero BERO Entries
Primary Property Aliases and Alias St I I I I I I Other I I Parent I Assoc I Parcel I I Owner! Construction I I Date I Export
Number OTISID Number Name Types Number St Name City County Zip Vicinity Geography Evaluation Info District Resources Num MilePost ship Vear(s} oCode Modified Date
Atascadero State Hosp u r,it 17
707813 1,nnex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017. C/,GEN_2076_0317 _002 6,14/2022 9/23/2022
Mascadero State Hosp Unit 23
707828 Annex< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23,'2022
707829 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 23< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 111'20/2017, CAGEN_2076_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707830 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 24< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, Cl,GEN_2016_0317_002 6/i4/2022 9/23/2022
7078.31 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 25< 70333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707845 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 5< 70333 El Camino Real Atascaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
707846 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 6< 10333 El Camino Real At.iscaoero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317 _002 6/14/2022 9m12022
707847 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 7< 10333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, C/\GEN_2016..0317_002 6114/2022 9/23/2022
707848 Atascadero State Hosp Unit 8< 70333 El Camino Real Atascacero San Luis Obispo 93422 6YM, 11/20/2017, CAGEN_2016_0317_002 6/14/2022 9/23/2022
530495 167406 2800 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93422 6Y, 08/07/2007, FCC070606L p 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40·01·0003-0000 I
566085 132043 5550 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/70/2001, FHWA011003C 030-187-040 p 1930 c35120d6 4/51'2018 9/231'2022
6Y, 12.,~0/2001, DOE-40-01-0004-0000 I
566086 132044 5570 EL CAMINO RE/,L /\T/\SC/\DERO 5/\N LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12.,~0/2001, FHWA011003C 030-781-044 p 1923 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40-01-0005-0000 I
566087 132045 5660 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/70/2001, FHW/\011003C 030-181-047 p 1940 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40·01-0006-0000 I
566089 132047 5680 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/70/2001. FHWA011003C 030-181-035 p 1928 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001 .. DOE-40-01-0007-0000 I
566092 132050 5760 EL CAMINO ><EAL ATASCADE><O SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/10/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-052 p 1929 03512.0dt 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y. 12/70/2001, DOE-40-01-0008-0000 I
566096 132054 5800 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12.,~0/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-030 p 1949 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
3S, 12/10/2001, DOE-40-01-0009-0000 I
566098 132056 THE DORAN BUILDl"-G 5850 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 35, 12/10/2001, FI-WA011003C 030-181-033 p 1925 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/70/2001, DOE-40-01-0010-0000 I
566110 132068 5880 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADEl'/0 SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/10/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-013 p 1925 ~7fl I o351 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40·01·0011-0000 I
566111 132069 5900 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/70/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-014 p 1923 7f2 I 0351 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40·0Hl012·0000 I
566113 132071 5920 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y. 12/70/2001, FHWA011003C 030-781-015 p 1922 120d6 I o3, 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12.,~0/2001, DOE-40-01-0013-0000 I
566774 132072 6040 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y. 12/70/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-001 p 1957 l20d6 I c3 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2007, DOE-40-01-0014-0000 I
566117 132075 6322 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/10/2001, FHWA011003C 030-181-030 p 1922 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/70/2001. DOE-40-01-0015-0000 I
566119 132077 6405 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/10./2001, FHWA011003C 030-344-009 p 1941 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40·0Hl017-0000 I
S66124 132082 6450 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12.,~0/2001, FHWA011003C 030-191-016 p 1946 8a2 0351 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12.,~0/2001, DOE-40-01-0016-0000 I
566121 132079 6455 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/70/2001. FHWA011003C 030-344-033 p 1942 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y. 12/70/2001. DOE-40-01-0018-0000 I
566127 132085 6490 EL CAMINO RE/\L /\T/\SCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12/10/2001, FHWA011003C 030-191-017 p 1948 8a2 0351 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
40-3422-00l>Survey
!\umber I
ATASCADERO
OUTPATIENT 2D2, 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-0008 I 202,
487994 90631 ATASCADERO HOSPITAL CUI\ 1c ,,other Name 5575 HOSPITAL DR ATASCA DERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 487972 C 1919-1921 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
ATASCADERO JUNIOR HIGH
541121 156699 SCHOOL 6501 LE\/vlSAVE ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93422 6Y, 11/09/2005. FHWA050912A 029-337-001 D 1947 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
6Y. 06/04/1987. 3422-0015-0000 I 6Y,
487965 90598 5125 MAG DALEN/\/\ VE /\T /\SCAD ERO San Luis Obispo 93423 06/04/1987, FH\/s'A870506A 1918 o35120d6 6/18/2020 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04M87, 3422-0013-0000 I 6Y,
487962 90595 5165 MAGDALENA AVE ATASCADERO San Luis Obispo 93423 06/04/7987, FHWA870506A 1920 c35120d6 6/18/2020 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/041~987, 3422-0014-0000 I 6Y,
487963 90596 5185 MAGDALENA AVE ATASCADERO San Luis Obispo 93423 06/04/1987, FH'NA870S06A 1925 o35120d6 6/18,'2020 9/231'2022
40-3422-001 ASU rvey 2s2, 06/04/1987, 3422-0006-0000 I 2s2,
487897 90585 JORGEI\S HOUSE !\umber 5345 MAGNOLIA AVE ATASCA DERO San Luis Obispo 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 28-381-25 1918 o35120d6 6/18/2020 9/23/2022
6Y, 06/04/1987, 3422-0016-0000 I 6Y,
487966 90599 5140 MERCEDES AVE ATASCADERO San Luis Obispo 93423 06/04/7987, FHW/\870506/\ l \!18 c35120d6 61i8/2020 9/23/2022
Appendix B: Atascadero BERD Entries
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-60 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Appendix B Atascadero BERO Entries
Primary Property Aliases and Alias St I I I I I I Other I I Parent I Assoc I Parcel I I Owner! Construction I I Date I Export
Number OTISID Number Name Types Number St Name City County Zip Vicinity Geography Evaluation Info District Resources Num MilePost ship Vear(s} oCode Modified Date
Atascadero
666240 l,tascadero Readiness Center J\rmory11Qther Name 6105 OlmecaAve Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 7 K. 07/75/2016, US/\...2016_0603_001 1950 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
1S,01/02/2004, NPS-00001368-0000 I
2D2, 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-0007 12D2,
40-3422-001 '-Survey 06/04/7987, FHWA870506A 2D2,
!\umber I MASONIC 12/06/1994, HUD9410248 I 2S,
487993 90630 ATASCADERO PRINTERY TEMPLE,Other Name 6351 OLMEDA AVE ATASCADERO San Luis Obispc 93422 12/01/2000, NPS-00001368-0000 I 3S, 487972 1915-1917 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/2.3/202.2
STOI\E MASONRY RETAINING 40-3422-001 A Survey 2D2, 06/0417987, 3422-0005-0010 I 2D2,
487996 90633 WALL !\umber P/1LM/1AVE /1TASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 06/04/1987, FHVI/A870506A 487972 u 1916 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
40-3422-001, Survey
!\umber I
ATASCADERO
COLONY.,otr,er Name
I The Adm inistraticn lCL, 08/16/1983, SHL-0958-0000 15,
Building, Atascadero ll1i7/I977, 3422-0001-0000 I 15,
Colonyi,Official 11,~7/1977, I\PS-77000336-000012D2,
t-istoric Name 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-00061 2D2,
VETERAN'S ATASCADER 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 3S,
Atascadero Administration M EMORIAL OCREEK 12/28/1984, 619.0-84-HP-40-001 J 7K,
421404 18660 Veteran's Memorial Bid ADMINISTRATION 6500 PALMA AVE ATASCADERO San Luis Obispo 93422 (Ccrridor) 02/03/2011. FEM/10705041\ 487972 1914-1918 c35120d6 8il/2022 9/23/2022
675772 11255 Santa Lucia Rd Atascacero San Luis Obispc 93422 6Y, 12/21/2017, FHWA.2017_1204_001 054-271-004 1960 4/17/2018 9/23/2022
6Y, 12/10/2001, DOE-40-01-0019-0000 J
565944 132093 6205 SANTA YNEZ ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93423 6Y, 12.,~0/2001, FHWA011003C 030-281-036 p 1918 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
ATASCADER 2D2, 06/04/1987, 3422-0005-0003 J 2D2,
40-3422-001 A Survey OCREEK 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 7 R,, 3422-
421405 18661 BRIDGE .tt49-l00 !\umber SR41 /\TASC/\DERO SAN LUIS OBISPO X (Corridorj 0002-0000 487972 002 053 0 R41 MP16.' s 1921 o35120d6 4/S/2018 9/23/2022
SPRR CO
421406 18662 BRIDGE .tt49-101 SR4l ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO X (Ccrridor) 7N,, 3422-0003-0000 002 053 0 R41 MP17. s 1902 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
SALINAS
421407 18663 BRIDGE .tt49-l02 SR41 ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO X RIVER 7N,, 3422-0004-0000 0 02 053 0 1'<41 MP 18. 5 1933 c35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
TEMPLETON 6Y, 06/04/1987, 3422-0017-0000 I 6Y,
487967 90600 SR41 ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO RD (Ccrridor) 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A p 1930 o35120d6 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
40-3422-001~Survey EL CAMINO 2D2, 06/0417987, 3422-0005-00041 2D2,
487991 90628 THE MALL !\umber TP/1FFICVN /\TASC/\DEPO SAN LUIS OBISPO PEAL 06/04/1987, FHWA870506A 487972 M 1914-1915 o3S120d6 4/S/2018 9/23/2022
S29981 168122 5440 TRAFFIC WY ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93422 6Y, 09/25/2007, HUD070911B 029-062-013 p 1950 o36ll9c3 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
252, 09,11/1995, H UD941024A J 7J,
493247 97294 CARL TON HOTEL 5995 TRAFFIC'NY ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 93422 09/27,1995, 537.9-40-0003 p 1929 4/S/2018 9/23./2022
471778 70093 16575 WALNUT ST ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO 6Y, 03/1M991, HUD910219D u 1940 4/5/2018 9/23/2022
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-61
6.9 Sources
REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS
Allan, L. W. 2008. Atascadero: The Vision of One, the Work of Many. N.P.: Miracle Book
Company.
Breschini, Gary S., and Trudy Haversat. 1980. Preliminary Archaeological Report and
Archaeological Management Recommendations for CA-MNT-170, on Pescadero Point,
Monterey County, California. Archaeological Regional Research Center, Cabrillo College.
California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). 2022. “San Luis Obispo County.” California
Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD). Updated September 23. Available at:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338. Accessed November 21, 2022.
———. n.d. “California Historical Landmarks by County – San Luis Obispo.” Available at:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21484. Accessed November 21, 2022.
City of Atascadero and the California State Historic Preservation Officer (City & SHPO). 1995.
“Memorandum of Agreement Between the City of Atascadero and the California State
Historic Preservation Officer, Regarding the Rehabilitation of the Carlton Hotel, 5995
Traffic Way, Atascadero, Submitted to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.”
October 19. Available at:
http://records.atascadero.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=64961&page=1&cr=1,
accessed November 28, 2022.
Crawford, Multari, Clark & Mohr. 2000a. “Atascadero Downtown Revitalization Plan.” Prepared
for the City of Atascadero Community & Economic Development Department. July.
Adopted by City Council on July 25, 2000, Resolution #2000-031. On-file at the City of
Atascadero.
Entezari, Genevieve and Margo Nayyar (Entezari & Nayyar). 2014. “Historic American Building
Survey Written Historical and Descriptive Data – Mercedes Avenue Streetscape Between
Serena Court and Magdalena Avenue, Atascadero, San Luis Obispo County, California,”
HABS No. CA-2904. Prepared for the National Park Service, Pacific West Regional Office.
November. Available at:
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/master/pnp/habshaer/ca/ca4100/ca4170/data/ca4170data.pdf.
Accessed November 21, 2022.
Fredrickson, David A. 1973. Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.
———. 1974. Cultural Diversity in Early California: A View from the North Coast Ranges.
Journal of California Anthropology 1(1):41–53.
———. 1994. Archaeological Taxonomy in Central California Reconsidered. In Toward a New
Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A. Bennyhoff
and David A. Fredrickson, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 93–103. Contributions of the
University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 52. Berkeley.
Gibson, Robert O. 1983. Ethnogeography of the Salinan People: A Systems Approach.
Master's thesis, California State University, Hayward.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-62 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Greenwood, Roberta S. 1978. Obispeño and Purisimeño Chumash. In California, edited by
Robert F. Heizer, pp. 520–523. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C.
Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Henshaw, Henry W., and Alfred L. Kroeber. 1910. Salinan Family. In California, edited by F. W.
Hodge, p. 415. Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico, Vol. 2, Bureau of American
Ethnology Bulletin 78, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Hester, Thomas R. 1978. Salinan. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 500-504.
Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Johnson, John R. 1987. Chumash Social Organization: An Ethnohistoric Perspective.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California,
Santa Barbara.
Jones, Terry L. 2000. Climate and Vegetation. In Cross Creek: An Early Holocene/Millingstone
Site, edited by Fitzgerald, R. T. California State Water Project, Coastal Branch Series Paper
No. 12. San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society.
Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer A. Ferneau. 2002. Deintensification along the Central California
Coast. In Catalysts to Complexity, Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited
by Jon M. Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, pp. 205-232. Perspectives in California
Archaeology Vol. 6. Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Jones, Terry L., and Georgie Waugh. 1995. Central California Prehistory: A View from Little
Pico Creek. Perspectives in California Archaeology 3. Institute of Archaeology, University of
California, Los Angeles.
Jones, Terry L., Nathan E. Stevens, Deborah A. Jones, Richard T. Fitzgerald, and Mark G.
Hylkema. 2007. The Central Coast: A Midlatitude Milieu. In California Prehistory:
Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp.
125–146. Alta Mira Press, New York.
King, Chester D. 1994. Native American Placenames in the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area, Agoura Hills. Topanga Anthropological Consultants, California.
Kroeber, Alfred L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology
Bulletin 78, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Mackey, Marjorie R. 1975. “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: The
Administration Building – Atascadero Colony.” NRHP No.77000336. U.S. Department of
the Interior, National Park Service. September 14. Listed November 17, 1977. Available at: .
Accessed November 21, 2022.
———. 2000. “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: Atascadero Printery.”
NRHP No.00001368 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. February 15.
Listed December 1, 2000. Available at:
https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/00001368. Accessed November 21, 2022.
Mason, J. Alden. 1918. The Language of the Salinan Indians. University of California
Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 14, No. 1. Berkeley.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 6: Cultural Resources | 6-63
Miller, Bruce W. 1988. Chumash: A Picture of Their World. Sand River Press, Los Osos,
California.
Milliken, Randall and John R. Johnson. 2005. An Ethnogeography of the Salinan and Northern
Chumash Communities–1769 to 1810. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
Submitted to California Department of Transportation, District 5. On file at SWCA
Environmental Consultants, South Pasadena, California.
Mithun, Marianne. 2004. The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Originally published 1999.
Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Petry, David. 2012. The Puritan Ice Companies: The Ice Empire of California’s Central Coast.
Charleston, South Carolina: The History Press.
Shipley, William F. 1978. Native Languages of California. In California, edited by Robert F.
Heizer, pp. 80–90. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant,
general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Wallace, William J. 1955. A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal
Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214–230.
———. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In California, edited by Robert
F. Heizer, pp. 25–36. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant,
general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
6-64 | Chapter 6: Cultural Resources City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
6.10 Acronyms and Key Terms
AB-52 Assembly Bill 52
AERHD Atascadero Estate Residential Historic District
BERD California Built Environment Resource Directory
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CHL California Historical Landmark
CHSC California Health and Safety Code
CHRIS California Historic Resources Information System
CalPoly California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DPR California Department of Parks and Recreation
HS Historic Site (referring to Atascadero overlay zoning designation)
LOC Land Use, Open Space and Conservation
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
NPS National Park Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OHP California Office of Historic Preservation
PRC California Public Resources Code
SHPO California State Historic Preservation Officer
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX G
Noise Impact Analysis
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
N OISE I MPACT
A NALYSIS
F O R
C ITY OF A TASCADERO
G ENERAL P LAN U PDATE &
C ORRESPONDING Z ONING
C ODE U PDATE
APRIL 2026
PREPARED BY:
75 HIGUERA STREET, SUITE 105
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
AIR QUALITY & NOISE CONSULTING
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Proposed City of Atascadero General Plan Update ....................................................................................................... 1
Existing Setting .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Acoustic Fundamentals ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Sound Propagation & Attenuation........................................................................................................................ 3
Human Response to Noise .................................................................................................................................... 4
Existing Noise Environment .................................................................................................................................. 5
Noise Sources ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................................................... 15
Federal ................................................................................................................................................................16
State .................................................................................................................................................................... 16
City of Atascadero General Plan ......................................................................................................................... 18
City of Atascadero Municipal Code .....................................................................................................................20
Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................................................................ 21
Significance Threshold Criteria ................................................................................................................................ 21
Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................... 21
Relevant Proposed 2045 GPU Goals and Policies ................................................................................................... 22
Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................................... 24
References ................................................................................................................................................................... 33
List of Tables
Table 1. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise Recommended Criteria for Evaluation of Increases in Ambient
Noise Levels ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
Table 2. Summary of Short-Term Measured Ambient Noise Levels .............................................................................. 7
Table 3. Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-1 ................................................................. 8
Table 4. Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-2 ................................................................. 9
Table 5. Existing Roadway Traffic Noise Levels & Contour Distances ......................................................................... 11
Table 6. Existing Railroad Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................................................. 11
Table 7. State of California Land Use Compatibility Noise Criteria .............................................................................. 17
Table 8. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure — Transportation Noise Sources........................................................ 19
Table 9. Allowable Noise Exposure — Stationary Noise Sources1 ............................................................................... 19
Table 10. City of Atascadero Municipal Code Exterior Noise Level Standards1 ........................................................... 20
Table 11. City of Atascadero Municipal Code Interior Noise Level Standards1 ........................................................... 20
Table 12. Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Transportation Noise Sources ................................................... 23
Table 13. Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Non-Transportation Noise Sources ........................................... 23
Table 14. Typical Individual Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................................ 25
Table 15. Predicted Railroad Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................................................ 27
Table 16. 2045 GPU Buildout Roadway Traffic Noise Levels & Contour Distances ..................................................... 28
Table 17. Traffic Noise Levels - Existing Compared to 2045 GPU ................................................................................ 29
Table 18. Summary of Groundborne Vibration Levels and Potential Effects .............................................................. 31
List of Figures
Figure 1. Common Noise Levels ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Ambient Noise Measurement Locations ........................................................................................................ 6
Figure 3. Existing Major Transportation Noise Contours ............................................................................................. 12
Figure 4. Future Noise Contours – Major Surface Transportation Noise Sources ....................................................... 30
Appendices
Appendix A Noise Modeling
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
ii
LIST OF COMMON TERMS AND ACRONYMS
ADT
ANSI
Average Daily Traffic
Acoustical National Standards Institute, Inc.
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB Decibels
dBA A-Weighted Decibels
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GPU General Plan Update
Hz Hertz
HVAC Heating Ventilation & Air Conditioning
in/sec Inches per Second
Ldn Day-Night Level
Leq Equivalent Sound Level
Lmax Maximum Sound Level
ppv Peak Particle Velocity
UPRR Union Pacific Railroad
U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
ZCU Zoning Code Update
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
1
INTRODUCTION
This report provides a discussion of existing conditions, applicable regulatory framework, and an analysis
of noise and groundborne vibration impacts associated with the proposed City of Atascadero 2045
General Plan Update (2045 GPU) and corresponding Zoning Code Update (ZCU).
PROPOSED CITY OF ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
The 2045 GPU is a long-range policy document that provides context and establishes guidance for
decision-making, design and development of new projects, conservation of natural resources, promotion
of economic development, improvements to mobility and infrastructure systems, expansion of public
services, and enhancement of community amenities. The 2045 GPU identifies year 2045 as a horizon year;
however, the City recognizes that not all initiatives and goals in the 2045 GPU may be achieved by 2045.
The Zoning Code implements the General Plan and provides an administrative and development
framework for parcels throughout the City. The Zoning Code will be revised to accommodate new General
Plan Placetypes and will incorporate administrative and process updates aligned with General Plan
policies, existing city processes, and permit streamlining directives.
EXISTING SETTING
Acoustic Fundamentals
Noise is generally defined as sound that is loud, disagreeable, or unexpected. Sound is mechanical energy
transmitted in the form of a wave because of a disturbance or vibration. Sound levels are described in
terms of both amplitude and frequency.
Amplitude
Amplitude is defined as the difference between ambient air pressure and the peak pressure of the sound
wave. Amplitude is measured in decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale. For example, a 65 dB source of sound,
such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB
(i.e., doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by 3 dB). Amplitude is interpreted by the
ear as corresponding to different degrees of loudness. Laboratory measurements correlate a 10 dB
increase in amplitude with a perceived doubling of loudness and establish a 3 dB change in amplitude as
the minimum audible difference perceptible to the average person.
Frequency
The frequency of a sound is defined as the number of fluctuations of the pressure wave per second. The
unit of frequency is the Hertz (Hz). One Hz equals one cycle per second. The human ear is not equally
sensitive to sound of different frequencies. For instance, the human ear is more sensitive to sound in the
higher portion of this range than in the lower and sound waves below 16 Hz or above 20,000 Hz cannot
be heard at all. To approximate the sensitivity of the human ear to changes in frequency, environmental
sound is usually measured in what is referred to as “A-weighted decibels” (dBA). On this scale, the normal
range of human hearing extends from about 10 dBA to about 140 dBA. Common community noise sources
and associated noise levels, in dBA, are depicted in Figure 1.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
2
Figure 1. Common Noise Levels
Source: Caltrans 2022
Common Outdoor Noise Level Common Indoor
Activities (dBA) Activities
@) LRock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300m ( 1000 ft) J
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) J (@)
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft), ® l Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft)
at 80 km (50 mp~ ® l Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area , Daytime J
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m ( 100 ~ @ l Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft)
Commercial Area ~ormal Speech at 1 m (3 ft)
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) ® Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime ® Dishwasher Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime ® Theater, Large Conference
Quiet Suburban Nighttime Room (Background)
® Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night,
® Concert Hall (Background) -
Broadcast/Recording Studio
®
Lowest Threshold of Human I 0 Lowest Threshold of Human
Hearing Hearing
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
3
Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are logarithmic units, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary
arithmetic. Under the decibel scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3-dB increase. In other
words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound
level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. For example,
if one automobile produces a sound level of 70 dB when it passes an observer, two cars passing
simultaneously would not produce 140 dB; rather, they would combine to produce 73 dB. Under the
decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together would produce an increase of 5 dB.
Sound Propagation & Attenuation
Geometric Spreading
Noise sources are generally characterized as either a localized source (i.e., point source) or a line source.
Examples of point sources include construction equipment, vehicle horns, alarms, and amplified sound
systems. Examples of a line sources include trains and on-road vehicular traffic. Sound from a point source
propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern.
For a point source, sound levels generally decrease (attenuate) at a rate of approximately 6 decibels for
each doubling of distance from the source, depending on ground surface characteristics. For acoustically
hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receiver), no excess ground
attenuation is assumed. Parking lots and bodies of water are examples of hard surfaces which generally
attenuate at this rate. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground
surface between the source and the receiver, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an
excess ground-attenuation value of 1.5 decibels per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When soft
surfaces are present, the excess ground attenuation for soft surfaces generally results in an overall
attenuation rate of approximately 7.5 decibels per doubling of distance from the point source.
On-road vehicle traffic consists of several localized noise sources on a defined path, and hence can be
treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source
propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels for
line sources attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 decibels for each doubling of distance for hard sites
and approximately 4.5 decibels per doubling of distance for soft sites.
Atmospheric Effects
Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm
conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels can be increased at
large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) from the highway due to atmospheric temperature inversion
(i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and
turbulence can also have significant effects.
Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially attenuate
noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the
object and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods)
and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often
constructed between a source and a receiver specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
4
sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in minimum 5 dB of noise reduction. Taller
barriers provide increased noise reduction.
Noise reductions afforded by building construction can vary depending on construction materials and
techniques. Standard construction practices typically provide approximately 15 dBA exterior-to-interior
noise reductions for building facades, with windows open, and approximately 20-25 dBA, with windows
closed. With compliance with current building construction and insulation requirements, exterior-to-
interior noise reductions typically average approximately 25 dBA. The absorptive characteristics of interior
rooms, such as carpeted floors, draperies and furniture, can result in further reductions in interior noise.
Human Response to Noise
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to
individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual
physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and
contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from
interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand
concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels. When
community noise interferes with human activities or contributes to stress, public annoyance with the
noise source increases. The acceptability of noise and the threat to public well-being are the basis for land
use planning policies preventing exposure to excessive community noise levels.
Unfortunately, there is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or of the
corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. This is primarily because of the wide variation
in individual thresholds of annoyance and habituation to noise over differing individual experiences with
noise. Thus, an important way of determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is the
comparison of it to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called “ambient”
environment. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the
less acceptable the new noise will be judged. Regarding increases in A-weighted noise levels, knowledge
of the following relationships will be helpful in understanding this analysis:
Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dB cannot be
perceived by humans;
Outside of the laboratory, a 3 dB change is considered a just-perceivable difference;
A change in level of at least 5 dB is required before any noticeable change in community
response would be expected. An increase of 5 dB is typically considered substantial;
A 10-dB change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would
almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.
A limitation of using a single noise-level increase value to evaluate noise impacts, as discussed above, is
that it fails to account for pre-development noise conditions. With this in mind, the Federal Interagency
Committee on Noise (FICON) developed guidance to be used for the assessment of project-generated
increases in noise levels that take into account the ambient noise level. The FICON recommendations are
based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by aircraft
noise. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts,
these recommendations are often used in environmental noise impact assessments involving the use of
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
5
cumulative noise exposure metrics, such as the average-daily noise level (i.e., CNEL, Ldn). FICON-
recommended noise evaluation criteria are summarized in Table 1 (FICON 2000).
Table 1. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
Recommended Criteria for Evaluation of Increases in Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient Noise Level Without Project Increase Required for Significant Impact
< 60 dB 5.0 dB, or greater
60-65 dB 3.0 dB, or greater
> 65 dB 1.5 dB, or greater
Source: FICON 2000
As depicted in Table 1, an increase in the traffic noise level of 5.0, or greater, would typically be considered
to result in increased levels of annoyance where existing ambient noise levels are less than 60 dB. Within
areas where the ambient noise level ranges from 60 to 65 dB, increased levels of annoyance would be
anticipated at increases of 3 dB, or greater. Increases of 1.5 dB, or greater, could result in increased levels
of annoyance in areas where the ambient noise level exceeds 65 dB. The rationale for the FICON-
recommended criteria is that as ambient noise levels increase, a smaller increase in noise resulting from
a project is sufficient to cause significant increases in annoyance (FICON 2000). These criteria are
commonly applied for analysis of environmental noise impacts.
Existing Noise Environment
Ambient Noise Monitoring
Short-term (10-minute) and long-term (24-hours) noise level measurements were conducted from
October 10, 2022, through October 13, 2022, for the purpose of documenting and measuring the existing
noise environment at various locations throughout the City. Measurement locations were selected near
major noise sources and other locations of interest within the community.
Short-Term Ambient Noise Measurements
Twenty-eight short-term measurement were conducted. Short-term ambient noise measurement
locations and corresponding measured average-hourly noise levels (in dBA Leq) are summarized in Table
2. Noise measurement locations are depicted in Figure 2.
As noted in Table 2, measured daytime noise levels ranged from approximately 40 to 73 dBA Leq. Ambient
noise levels are largely influenced by vehicle traffic on area roadways. To a lesser extent, aircraft
overflights and other noise sources within the community (e.g., landscaping, industrial activities,
construction activities) also contribute to the ambient noise environment.
Long-Term Ambient Noise Measurements
Two long-term measurements were conducted, which are identified as LT-1 and LT-2 in Figure 8-2. Noise
measurement location LT-1 was located approximately 110 feet from U.S. Highway 101, near San Palo
Road. Noise measurement location LT-2 was located approximately 500 feet from U.S Highway 101 and
300 feet from El Camino Real. Measured ambient noise levels for noise measurement locations LT-1 and
LT-2 are summarized in Tables 3 and 4, respectively.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
6
Figure 2: Ambient Noise Measurement Locations
Refer to Tables 2, 3, and 4 for corresponding noise measurement data.
TE M PLET ON
CS D
LOJPodrn.s
NoHonur Fo.• tt
S.i.N LUIS
081SPO COU~TY
II II
Planning Area
Sa5emap Features
C°."J Al=oderor' U ~w mil$
D UrbanRese,veU ne(SOI)
-~a_forRoads•FrQ4Ways:
Rrver5, 4 waterbodie5
0
0
City Parks and Open Space
Surrounding ct· servlco Dtsrnds ,es and Community
Short-Term (ST} Measurement
Long-Term (LT) M easurement
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
7
Table 2. Summary of Short-Term Measured Ambient Noise Levels
Measurement Location Measurement
Period Primary Noise Sources Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
October 10, 2022
ST1 7800 Del Rio Road 10:41 – 10:51 Birds, Electrical Equipment 44.3
ST2 Apple Valley Park 11:03 – 11:13 Birds, Traffic, People Walking on Path 45.3
ST3 5400 Santa Cruz Road 11:50 – 12:00 Distant Traffic, Birds 57.7
ST4 San Benito Elementary School 12:10 – 12:20 Birds, Truck Passby 50.3
ST5 Monterey Road Elementary School 12:32 – 12:42 Traffic, Birds 63.2
ST6 The Lakes Lake 12:57 – 13:07 Birds 41.5
ST7 High School Hill Road 15:08 – 15:18 Traffic, Dogs 52.6
October 11, 2022
ST8 Hope Lutheran Church 10:02 – 10:12 Traffic, Propeller Plane Overflight, Dogs, Birds 50.7
ST9 9600 Atascadero Avenue 10:26 – 10:36 Traffic, Birds 60.5
ST10 Paloma Creek Park 10:47 – 10:57 Distant Traffic, Children, Birds 44.4
ST11 Heilmann Regional Park 11:10 – 11:20 Traffic, Golf Cart, Birds, Squirrels 40.4
ST12 8500 El Corte Road 11:31 – 11:41 Traffic 52.5
ST13 Pueblo Avenue/Sombrilla Avenue 11:53 – 12:03 Traffic, Conversation, Propeller Plane Overflight, Dogs 53.5
ST14 7700 Aragon Road 12:16 – 12:26 Dogs, Birds 49.6
ST15 7100 Sycamore Road 12:40 – 12:50 Traffic, Birds, Children, Sheep/Goat 64.7
ST16 5454 CA-41 Parking 13:03 – 13:13 Traffic 64.8
ST17 Traffic Way Park 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 57.8
October 12, 2022
ST18 12500 CA-41 10:51 – 11:01 Traffic 67.9
ST19 Atascadero Lake Park 11:25 – 11:35 Traffic 63.9
ST20 Nogales Avenue/Lobos Avenue 11:56 – 12:06 Traffic, Birds, Dog, Distant Power Tool 53.4
ST21 3300 El Camino Real 12:19 – 12:29 Traffic 68.2
ST22 1000 San Ramon Road 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 71.2
ST23 6000 San Gabriel Road 14:06 – 14:16 Traffic, Propeller Plane Overflight 56.8
October 13, 2022
ST24 10700 El Camino Real 10:40 – 10:50 Traffic 66.9
ST25 8965 El Camino Real 11:00 – 11:10 Traffic 71.7
ST26 Sunken Gardens 11:22 – 11:32 Traffic, Water Fountain 58.3
ST27 4890 Alamo Avenue 11:45 – 11:55 Dogs, Vehicle Passby 56.0
ST28 6050 Marchant Avenue 12:56 – 13:06 Traffic 73.1
Noise measurements were conducted from October10, 2022 to October 13, 2022. Refer to Figure 2 for noise measurement locations.
I I I I
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
8
Table 3. Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-1
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
14:00 77.4
15:00 77.6
16:00 77.9
17:00 78.6
18:00 78.7
19:00 77.1
20:00 75
21:00 74.3
22:00 73.5
23:00 72.5
0:00 69.5
1:00 69.5
2:00 68.4
3:00 69.4
4:00 71.8
5:00 75.4
6:00 79
7:00 80.5
8:00 80.2
9:00 78.4
10:00 77.8
11:00 77.7
12:00 77.7
13:00 78
Notes: Average-daily noise level measured 81 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Refer to Figure 2 for noise measurement locations.
82
80 --a-78 -
QJ ---
...J 76 <( co 74 " -72 QJ > QJ 70 ...J
QJ .!!! 68 0 z 66
64
62
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ .;-; .:0 ,:..: 00 6-i 0 ~ r-i m 0 M N ro ~ .,., <D ,-... 00 0\ 0 ~ r-i m M M M M M M N N N N M M M M
Measurement Hour
(October 12, 2022 to October 13, 2022)
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
9
Table 4. Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-2
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
15:00 55.7
16:00 57.5
17:00 54.9
18:00 53.3
19:00 53.8
20:00 52
21:00 51.2
22:00 50.3
23:00 49.7
0:00 48.1
1:00 48.6
2:00 47.5
3:00 47.7
4:00 49.3
5:00 49.3
6:00 53.9
7:00 53.5
8:00 52.7
9:00 52.4
10:00 54.5
11:00 55.8
12:00 53.4
13:00 52
14:00 52.3
Notes: Average-daily noise level measured 57 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Refer to Figure 2 for noise measurement locations.
82
80
~ -0-78 -., ----
....J 76 <t: ca 74 "C -72 Q) > Q) 70 ....J
Q) -~ 68 0 z 66
64
62
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 .,f .:,; u:i r:..: cici 6-i 0 .:..; r-i m 0 .--i N m .,f U") ID r--00 0) 0 .:..; r-i m .--i .--i .--i .--i .--i .--i N N N N .--i .--i .--i .--i
Measurement Hour
(October 12, 2022 to October 13, 2022) I
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
10
As noted in Tables 3, measured ambient noise levels at location LT-1 ranged from approximately 68 dBA
Leq during the nighttime hours to a high of approximately 81 dBA Leq, during the daytime hours. Average-
daily noise levels at location LT-1 measured 81 dBA CNEL/Ldn. As noted in Tables 4, measured ambient
noise levels at location LT-2 ranged from approximately 48 dBA Leq during the nighttime hours to a high
of approximately 58 dBA Leq during the daytime hours. Average-daily noise levels at location LT-2
measured 57 dBA CNEL/Ldn. In general, nighttime noise levels are typically 5-10 dB lower than daytime
noise levels.
Noise Sources
Surface Transportation Sources
Roadway Vehicular Traffic
As noted earlier in this report, noise from vehicular traffic on area roadways is a primary source of ambient
noise in the City. Major sources of roadway traffic noise within the City of Atascadero include United
States Highway 101 (US-101) and State Route 41 (SR-41). To a lesser extent, other major roadways, such
as El Camino Real, also contribute to ambient traffic noise levels. Existing noise-sensitive land uses located
along these traffic corridors consist predominantly of residential land uses the nearest of which are
generally located approximately 50 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline of US-101 and approximately
27 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline of SR-41. Other noise-sensitive land uses generally located
along these corridors include, but are not limited to, places of worship, hotels, and recreational uses.
Traffic noise levels were calculated using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Noise
Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) based on average-daily traffic (ADT) volumes obtained from the
traffic analysis prepared for the 2045 GPU/ZCU (CCTC 2025). Predicted existing traffic noise levels and
distances to traffic noise contours for major roadway segments are summarized in Table 5. Based on the
modeling conducted, existing traffic noise levels along area roadways range from approximately 61 to 79
dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline. Existing transportation noise contours for major
roadway segments within the City of Atascadero are depicted in Figure 3.
Railroad Traffic
The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) runs north-south through the City near the western City limits with a
portion of the tracks adjacent to Traffic Way. Depending on demand, approximately five trains pass
through the City on a daily basis. including three freight trains and two passenger trains (Amtrak Coast
Starlight). Existing noise-sensitive land uses located along the UPRR corridor consist predominantly of
residential land uses the nearest of which are generally located approximately 25 feet from the UPRR
track centerline. Other nearby noise-sensitive land uses include Chalk Mountain Golf Course, which is
located approximately 70 feet from the track centerline.
Existing train noise levels and distance to noise contours are summarized in Table 6. Based on a
conservative estimate of 5 trains per day, average-daily noise levels along the railroad corridor would be
approximately 66 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the rail corridor centerline. Train noise events can also be a
source of intermittent noise, including noise generated by locomotive engines, wheel squeal, and warning
horns. These instantaneous noise events can contribute to increased levels of annoyance to occupants of
nearby noise-sensitive land uses. Existing transportation noise contours within the City of Atascadero are
depicted in Figure 3.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
11
Table 5. Existing Roadway Traffic Noise Levels & Contour Distances
Roadway Segment
ADT
Volumes
CNEL at 50 ft.
from Near-
travel-lane
Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contour
(Feet from Road Centerline)
70 65 60
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd. 55,000 78.7 313 670 1,441
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd. to Curbaril Ave. 55,000 78.7 313 670 1,441
US-101: Curbaril Ave. to SR-41 55,000 78.7 313 670 1,441
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 63,000 77.5 261 557 1,196
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd. 63,000 77.5 261 557 1,196
US-101: San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd. 63,000 77.5 261 557 1,196
US-101: del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd. 65,000 77.6 266 568 1,221
US-101: San Ramon Rd to Vineyard Rd. 65,000 77.6 262 558 1,221
SR-41: Atascadero Ave. to Curbaril Ave. 10,200 67.3 WR 95 201
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave. 11,100 67.6 WR 100 212
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave. 13,700 66.1 WR 80 169
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave. to Mercedes Ave. 6,300 66.3 WR 68 145
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave. 5,600 67.7 WR 85 182
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd. 10,200 66.0 WR 98 295
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave. 11,100 66.3 WR 105 321
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave. to Highway 41 13,700 61.1 WR WR 100
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd. 6,300 63.9 WR 65 184
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd. to Santa Barbara Rd. 5,600 63.4 WR 59 164
Traffic volumes were derived from the traffic analysis prepared for this project (CCTC 2025). Does not include shielding from intervening
structures or terrain.
WR= Contour is located within road right-of-way
Table 6. Existing Railroad Traffic Noise Levels
Train Type
Number of
Trains/Day
CNEL at 100 feet
from Railroad
Track Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contours (feet)
from Railroad Track Centerline
70 65 60
Freight & Passenger 5 66 51 108 233
UPRR freight trains distributed equally over a 24-hour period. Does not include shielding provided by intervening terrain or structures.
Does not include shielding from intervening structures or terrain. Projected railroad noise contours are depicted in Figure 8-3.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
12
Figure 3. Existing Major Transportation Noise Contours
Predicted noise contours do not include shielding from intervening structures or terrain.
@ ~
Los Padres
Nacional Forest
------======Miles ---------------------------------------
SAN LUIS
OBISPO COU NTY
m
Atascadero
OUR C ITY. OUR PLAN
Planning Area
Basemap Features
C"_-J Atascadero City Limits
D Urban Reserve Line {SOI)
-Major Roads • Freeways
Rwers • Waterbodies
City Parks and Open Space
-~;:~i;~:;t~i;!ies and Community
Noise level
CNEL
in dB(A)
<= 65
<= 70
> 70
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
13
Non-Transportation Sources
Within the City, major non-transportation noise sources consist predominantly of industrial and
commercial land uses. Many industrial processes produce noise, even when the best available noise
control technology is applied. Noise exposures within industrial facilities are controlled by federal and
state employee health and safety regulations (i.e., regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor [OSHA] and the California Division of Occupational Safety
and Health [Cal-OSHA]). Exterior noise levels that affect neighboring parcels are typically subject to local
standards. Commercial, recreational, and public facility activities can also produce noise that may affect
adjacent noise-sensitive land uses. These noise sources can be continuous or intermittent and may
contain tonal components that are annoying to individuals who live nearby. For instance, emergency-use
sirens and backup alarms are often considered nuisance noise sources but may not occur frequently
enough to be considered incompatible with noise-sensitive land uses. In addition, noise generation from
fixed noise sources may vary based upon climate conditions, time of day, and existing ambient noise
levels.
From a land-use planning perspective, stationary-source noise control issues focus on two goals: (1)
preventing the introduction of new noise-producing uses in noise-sensitive areas; and (2) preventing
encroachment of noise-sensitive uses upon existing noise-producing facilities. The first goal can be
achieved by applying noise performance standards to proposed new noise producing uses. The second
goal can be met by requiring new noise-sensitive uses near noise-producing facilities include noise-
reduction measures to ensure compliance with noise performance standards. Each of these goals stresses
the importance of avoiding the location of new uses that may be incompatible with adjoining uses.
The following discussions of existing non-transportation noise sources in the community are intended to
be representative of the sources and relative noise levels associated with such uses. The average-hourly
noise levels (in dBA Leq) discussed for these sources provide an indication of the noise levels that can
generally be expected to occur over an extended period of time. The Leq noise levels do not necessarily
reflect possible intermittent high noise levels associated with the various uses but are useful for general
planning purposes. Actual noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive receptors will vary depending on the
operational characteristics of the facility, meteorological conditions, and the physical landscape.
Non-transportation noise sources within the City consist predominantly of commercial and industrial uses.
To a somewhat lesser extent, other non-transportation noise sources would also include
automotive/equipment repair and maintenance facilities, and construction activities. Noise levels
associated with some of the more common non-transportation noise sources located throughout the
community are discussed in more detail, as follows:
Commercial and Industrial Uses
Within the City planning area, commercial and industrial land uses are located primarily along major
roadway and the UPRR corridor. Noise sources commonly associated with these land uses include truck
traffic, loading dock activities, heavy-equipment operation, and building mechanical systems. There are
no major industrial and commercial operations within the community (i.e. recycling centers, truck
distribution centers, and food and agricultural products processing) and primary noise sources are
associated with vehicle transportation along Highway 101, Highway 41, and El Camino Real. Various other
activities, such as loading dock activities, can result in temporary or intermittent increases in ambient
noise levels. In general, noise levels associated with these uses can range from approximately 55 to 85
dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
14
Noise levels associated with commercial and industrial land uses can vary depending on various factors,
including site conditions, equipment operated, and the specific activities being conducted. As a result,
actual noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive receptors varies depending on the above-mentioned
conditions and other influences, such as location, distance from source, shielding provided by intervening
terrain and structures, and ground attenuation rates. For this reason, noise generated by proposed
commercial and industrial uses currently requires a site-specific analysis and compliance with municipal
code standards.
Other Non-Transportation Noise Sources
Various other non-transportation noise sources can contribute to noticeable increases in ambient noise
levels. Such sources would include, but are not limited to, recreational uses or events, particularly those
that utilize amplified sound systems (e.g., sporting events, concerts, festivals, public actions,
animal/vehicle exhibitions, etc.); automotive repair facilities; building mechanical systems, and landscape
maintenance activities. Noise generated by such sources are often directional and can vary depending on
site and operational characteristics.
Concerts and Live Music
Outdoor live music, festivals, and concert events are hosted at several locations within the City; such as,
the Atascadero Lake Park, the Sunken Gardens, and The Plaza. Noise levels associated with live music and
concerts can vary depending on musical style (e.g., rock, pop, metal, hip-hop, classical, etc.) and
amplification. Additionally, noise generated from amplification (speakers) is directional, which can greatly
affect operational noise levels at offsite locations.
Landscape Maintenance
Landscape maintenance activities often result in sporadic and intermittent increases in ambient noise
levels. Equipment used for landscape maintenance often include the use of power mowers and leaf
blowers. Leaf blowers and gasoline-powered lawnmowers can result in intermittent noise levels of up to
approximately 100 dBA at 3 feet (EPA 1971). Resultant exterior noise levels could reach intermittent levels
of approximately 75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The use of leaf blowers, particularly when used during the more
noise-sensitive evening and nighttime hours, may result in increased levels of annoyance.
Automotive Maintenance & Repair
Typical automotive maintenance and repair activities often include the use of pneumatic tools, air
compressors, and power generators. Other equipment operations such as the use of power hand tools
(e.g., sanders, drills, grinders, pneumatic wrenches, etc.), typically generate a lesser degree of noise. The
use of air compressors, power generators, and pneumatic tools can generate noise levels of up to
approximately 85 dBA at 50 feet. Noise levels generated by the use of hand-held tools, such as sanders,
drills, and grinders, typically average between 63 and 87 dBA at 3 feet. The use of multiple hand tools,
such as grinders being used on metal, can generate levels of 87 to 97 dBA at 3 feet (EPA 1971, FHWA
2008). Noise levels associated with these facilities would be dependent on the specific activities
performed and source/facility characteristics.
Building Mechanical Systems
The majority of electrical and mechanical equipment in buildings is used for air circulation systems.
Mechanical systems may also include pumping systems, elevators and escalators, and various other
material conveyance systems. Much of this equipment is located in mechanical equipment rooms or in
areas that provide shielding from direct public/personnel exposure (i.e., above ceilings, in walls, or behind
enclosures.) Equipment located within exterior areas can result in increases in ambient noise levels,
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
15
particularly when located in unshielded areas and within line-of-sight of nearby receptors. Such
equipment would include air-conditioning units, cooling towers, compressors, fans/turbines, electrical
transformers, chillers, and pumps. Noise levels associated with these sources can vary depending on the
specific equipment being operated, facility/equipment design, and operational characteristics. Typical
noise levels associated with building mechanical equipment can range from less than 50 to 110 dBA at 3
feet, with the highest noise levels reaching approximately 85 dBA at 50 feet from the source.
Construction Activities
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending upon the nature or phase (e.g.,
demolition/land clearing, grading, and excavation, erection) of construction. Noise generated by
construction equipment, including pile drivers, material handling equipment, pavers, jackhammers, and
portable generators, can result in intermittent and prolonged increases in ambient noise levels. Although
construction noise impacts are generally short-term, they can result in increased levels of annoyance to
occupants of nearby residential dwellings. In general, noise levels generated by construction activities can
range from approximately 71 to 83 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the source.
Noise-generating construction activities are currently regulated through implementation of the City’s
Noise Control ordinance, which generally limits these activities to the less noise-sensitive daytime hours
(City of Atascadero 2022).
Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses that would result in noise
exposure that could cause health-related risks to individuals. Places where quiet is essential are also
considered noise-sensitive uses. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for
increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Other land uses
such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are also considered potentially sensitive to
increases in exterior noise levels. School classrooms, places of assembly, hotels, libraries, and other places
where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses. The following
noise-sensitive land uses have been identified within the City of Atascadero:
Residential land uses, including single-family units and multi-family units
Schools
Atascadero State Hospital
Assisted living/care facilities
Places of worship
Hotels and lodging
Community parks
Public Library
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, and local governments have established noise standards and guidelines to protect citizens
from potential hearing damage and various other adverse physiological and social effects associated with
noise. Those regulations most applicable to the community are summarized, as follows:
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
16
Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
In 1974, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Noise Abatement and Control published
a report entitled Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and
Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Although this document does not constitute EPA regulations
or standards, it is useful in identifying noise levels at which increased levels of annoyance would be
anticipated. Based on an annual-average day-night noise level (expressed as Ldn or DNL), the document
states that “undue interference with activity and annoyance” will not occur if outdoor noise levels in
residential areas are below 55 dBA Ldn and indoor levels are below 45 dBA Ldn (EPA 1974).
Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines for the acceptability of
residential land uses are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 24, Part 51, “Environmental
Criteria and Standards.” These guidelines identify a noise exposure of 65 dBA Ldn, or less, as acceptable.
Exterior noise levels of 65 to 75 dBA Ldn are considered normally acceptable, provided appropriate sound
attenuation is provided to reduce interior noise levels to within acceptable levels. Exterior noise levels
above 75 dBA Ldn are considered unacceptable. The goal of the interior noise levels for residential, hotel,
and hospital/nursing home uses is 45 dBA Ldn. These guidelines apply only to new construction supported
by HUD grants and are not binding upon local communities.
Train Horn Rule
Under the federal train horn rule (49 CFR Part 222), locomotive engineers must begin to sound train horns
at least 15 seconds, and no more than 20 seconds, in advance of all public grade crossings. In general,
depending on train speed, train horns are often sounded within one-quarter mile of a grade crossing.
Local communities may reduce the effects of train horns by establishing “quiet zones”, which typically
incorporate measures to reduce public risk caused by the absence of horn sounding (FRA 2026). No
railroad quiet zones were identified in the City.
State
California Building Code
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations contains standards for allowable interior noise levels
associated with exterior noise sources (California Building Code, 1998 edition, Volume 1, Appendix
Chapter 12, Section 1208A). The standards apply to new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses,
and dwellings other than detached single-family residences. The standards state that the interior noise
level attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room. Proposed multi-
family residential structures to be located where the CNEL exceeds 60 dBA shall require an acoustical
analysis showing that the proposed building design would achieve the prescribed allowable interior noise
standard.
State of California General Plan Guidelines
The State of California General Plan Guidelines, published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research (OPR), provides guidance for the acceptability of new land uses within specific noise
environments. The goal of these recommended noise standards is, in part, to allow for a “normally
acceptable” interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. For instance, assuming an average exterior-to-interior
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
17
noise reduction of 15 dBA (with windows partially open), an exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL for
residential land uses, or less, would be sufficient to achieve an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. Higher
exterior noise levels may be allowed provided that noise-reduction measures are incorporated to achieve
acceptable interior noise levels. Within “conditionally acceptable” exterior noise environments,
conventional construction with incorporation of fresh air circulation systems sufficient to allow windows
to remain closed would normally suffice. Compliance with current building code requirements and with
windows closed, exterior-to-interior noise reductions typically average approximately 25 dBA, or more.
The State’s guidelines can be modified to reflect communities’ sensitivities to noise. The State
recommended noise criteria for land use compatibility are summarized in Table 7 (State of California
2017).
Table 7. State of California Land Use Compatibility Noise Criteria
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Interpretation
Residential – Low Density Single
Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes
Normally Acceptable
Specified land use is satisfactory, based
upon the assumption that any buildings
involved are of normal conventional
construction, without any special noise
insulation requirements.
Residential – Multiple Family
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels
Conditionally Acceptable
New construction or development
should be undertaken only after a
detailed analysis of noise reduction
requirements and needed noise
insulation features included in the
design.
Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator
Sports Normally Unacceptable
New construction or development
should generally be discouraged. If new
construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise
reduction requirements must be made
and needed noise insulation features
included in the design.
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables,
Water Recreation, Cemeteries
Clearly Unacceptable
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
18
Office Buildings, Business
Commercial and Professional New construction or development
should generally not be undertaken
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
Source: California OPR 2017
City of Atascadero General Plan
The Atascadero General Plan Safety and Noise Element, Chapter IV, Section B, identifies exterior average-
daily noise standards for the primary purpose of ensuring the compatibility of proposed land uses within
exterior noise environments and ensure that noise levels at adjacent land uses do not exceed acceptable
levels. These standards are also designed to protect existing land uses, including transportation and
industry, from encroaching on urban uses. The City’s existing General Plan noise standards for
transportation and stationary (non-transportation) noise sources are summarized in Table 8 and Table 9,
respectively (City of Atascadero 2002).
The City’s Current General Plan presents five goals for the Noise Element (City of Atascadero 2002):
SFN 6 — Protect the citizens of Atascadero from harmful and annoying effects of exposure to
excessive noise.
SFN 7 — Protect the economic base of Atascadero by preventing incompatible land uses from
encroaching upon existing or planned noise-producing uses.
SFN 8 — Preserve the tranquility of residential areas by preventing the encroachment of noise-
producing sources.
SFN 9 — Educate residents of Atascadero concerning the effects of exposure to excessive noise
and the methods available for minimizing such exposure.
SFN 10 — Avoid or reduce noise impacts through site planning and project design, giving second
preference to the use of noise barriers and/or structural modifications to buildings containing
noise-sensitive land uses.
The following policies have been adopted by the City to accomplish the goals presented in the Noise
Element (City of Atascadero 2002):
Policy 1. The noise standards in this chapter represent maximum acceptable noise levels. New
development should minimize noise exposure and noise generation. The City shall maintain a
Noise Ordinance that implements the requirements of the Noise Element.
Transportation Noise Sources:
Policy 2. New development of noise-sensitive land uses shall not be permitted in areas exposed
to existing or projected future levels of noise from transportation noise sources which exceed 60
dB or CNEL (70 Ldn/CNEL for playgrounds and neighborhood parks) unless the project design
includes effective mitigation measures to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas and interior
spaces to or below the levels specified for the given land use in Table 8.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
19
Policy 3. Noise created by new transportation noise sources, including roadway improvement
projects, shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the levels specified in Table 8 within the outdoor
activity areas and interior spaces of existing noise sensitive land uses.
Table 8. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure — Transportation Noise Sources
Land Use
Outdoor Activity Areas1 Interior Spaces
(Ldn/CNEL dB) (Ldn/CNEL dB) (Leq, dB)2
Residential 603 45 --
Transient Lodging 603 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 603 45 --
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls, Office Buildings 603 -- 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums -- -- 45
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 -- --
1. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standards shall be applied to the property line of the
receiving land use.
2. As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
3. Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dB Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best-
available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise
level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.
Source: City of Atascadero 2002
Stationary Noise Sources:
Policy 4. New development of noise-sensitive land uses shall not be permitted where the noise
level due to existing stationary noise sources will exceed the noise level standards of Table 9
unless effective noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the
development to reduce noise exposure to or below the levels specified in Table 9.
Policy 5. Noise created by new proposed stationary noise sources or existing stationary noise
sources which undergo modifications that may increase noise levels shall be mitigated so as not
to exceed the noise level standards of Table 9 on lands designated for noise-sensitive uses. This
policy does not apply to noise levels associated with agricultural operations.
Table 9. Allowable Noise Exposure — Stationary Noise Sources1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2 50 45
Maximum Level (dB)2 70 65
Maximum Impulse Level (dB)3 65 60
1. As determined at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the
standards may be applied on the receptor side of the noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures.
2. Sound level measurements shall be made with slow meter response.
3. Sound level measurements shall be made with fast meter response.
Source: City of Atascadero 2002
Existing and Cumulative Noise Impacts
Policy 6. The City shall consider implementing mitigation measures where existing noise levels
produce significant noise impacts to noise sensitive land uses or where new development may
result in cumulative increases of noise upon noise-sensitive land uses.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
20
City of Atascadero Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code (Title 9, Planning and Zoning, Chapter 14, Noise) includes various provisions
intended to protect community residents from prolonged unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sound
levels that are detrimental to the public health, welfare, and safety, or are contrary to the public interest.
Examples of noise sources subject to the City’s municipal Code include, but are not limited to, industrial
and commercial machinery and equipment, pumps, fans, compressors, generators, air conditioners, and
refrigeration equipment (City of Atascadero 2026).
Noise sources associated with construction-related activities are typically exempt from the City’s
ordinance provided that the activities do not take place before the hours of seven a.m. or after nine p.m.
or by special permit from the Community Development Director. Various other activities are also exempt,
including, but not limited to, school entertainment and athletic events, mobile sources associated with
agricultural activities, and emergency response activities (City of Atascadero 2026).
In addition, the City’s Noise Ordinance sets exterior and interior (Title 9, Sections 9-14.05 and 9-14.06,
respectively) noise level standards. The City’s exterior and interior noise level standards are summarized
in Table 10 and Table 11, respectively. The exterior noise level standards are applied at the property line
of the receiving land use. Where practical, the microphone shall be positioned three to five feet above
the ground and away from reflective surfaces. The interior standards applied within the affected dwelling
unit, when both the source and receiver are residential land uses. The reported interior noise level shall
be determined by taking the arithmetic average of the readings taken at the various microphone locations
(City of Atascadero 2026).
Table 10. City of Atascadero Municipal Code Exterior Noise Level Standards1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2, 3 50 45
Maximum Level (dB)2, 3 70 65
1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any
noise, on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level when measured
at any affected single or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to exceed the noise level
standards as set forth in the table.
2. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard
shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
3. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of
speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
Source: City of Atascadero 2026
Table 11. City of Atascadero Municipal Code Interior Noise Level Standards1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2, 3 40 35
Maximum Level (dB)2, 3 60 55
1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any
noise, on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level when measured
at any affected single or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to exceed the noise level
standards as set forth in the table.
2. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard
shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
3. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of
speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
Source: City of Atascadero 2026
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
21
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the
environment if the project would result in:
1: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
2: Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or , where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels?
Substantial increases in ambient noise levels that would exceed applicable City of Atascadero’s noise
standards would be considered to have a potentially significant impact. The City’s General Plan
transportation noise standards are summarized in Table 8. The City’s General Plan noise standards for
non-transportation noise sources are summarized in Table 9. The City’s Municipal Code exterior and
interior noise standards for non-transportation noise sources are summarized in Tables 10 and 11,
respectively. For purposes of this analysis, substantial increases in average-hourly ambient noise levels
attributable to non-transportation noise sources would be based on an increase of 5 dBA, or greater.
Increases in transportation noise levels that would exceed the FICON average-daily noise thresholds
identified in Table 1 would be considered substantial.
The nearest active public airport to the City of Atascadero is the Paso Robles Municipal Airport, located
approximately 10 miles to the north. The nearest private airports include the Santa Margarita Ranch
Airport located approximately 2.4 miles south of the City and the Oak Country Ranch Airport located
approximately 5.6 miles northwest of the City. The City of Atascadero is not located within two miles of
nearby airports or within the airport planning area of the Paso Robles Municipal Airport (City of Paso
Robles 2004, SLOALUP 2026). As a result, no impact is anticipated to occur with regard to the exposure of
sensitive receptors to aircraft noise levels. Therefore, impacts related to exposure to aircraft noise are not
discussed further in this report.
METHODOLOGY
A combination of existing literature and general application of accepted noise thresholds was used to
determine the impact of ambient noise levels resulting from and on development within the 2045 GPU
Planning Area. Short- and long-term impacts associated with transportation and non-transportation noise
sources were qualitatively assessed based on potential increases in ambient noise levels anticipated to
occur at noise-sensitive land uses. Traffic noise levels along major area roadways were estimated using
the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108.) The FHWA modeling was based
upon the Calveno noise-emission factors for automobiles and medium- and heavy-duty trucks. Input data
used in the model included average-daily traffic volumes, day/night percentages of automobiles and
medium and heavy trucks, vehicle speeds, ground attenuation factors, roadway widths, and ground
elevation data. Traffic volumes for major roadway segments within the City were derived from the traffic
analysis prepared for this project (CCTC 2045).
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
22
Predicted train noise levels and corresponding distances to noise contours for the UPRR railroad corridor
were calculated in accordance with the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment guidance (FTA 2018). Train noise levels were quantified taking into account
passenger and freight train traffic along the UPRR corridor, with the sounding of train horns.
RELEVANT PROPOSED 2045 GPU GOALS AND POLICIES
The 2045 GPU includes numerous goals and policies that would reduce noise impacts on sensitive
receptors. Some of the most relevant of these goals and policies include, but are not limited to, the
following:
Goal SEP-5: Neighborhoods that maintain a strong quality of life while supporting a vibrant and thriving
economy.
Policy SEP-5.1: Noise Ordinance. Maintain and update the City’s Noise Ordinance to balance the
economic, social, and rural vision of Atascadero.
Action A: Update the Noise Ordinance to incorporate construction best management practices
to minimize construction noise when construction activities would be located within 1,000 feet
of noise-sensitive land uses.
Action B: Update the Noise Ordinance to add conditions that would allow for temporary
increases in noise in certain locations, such as Downtown, mixed-use areas, key commercial
nodes, and parks, to accommodate special events. Encourage and allow these uses with
appropriate noise thresholds.
Action C: Require projects to reduce noise exceeding the City’s maximum allowable exterior
and interior noise standards, unless exceptions are granted.
Policy SEP- 5.2: Land Use Compatibility. Prevent noise-sensitive land uses from encroaching upon
existing or planned noise-producing uses, such as permitted industrial businesses and commercial
activities, to allow businesses enterprises to thrive.
Policy SEP-5.3: Residential Noise Reduction. Preserve the tranquility of rural single-family residential
areas by preventing the encroachment of noise-producing uses.
Policy SEP-5.4: Site Planning. Avoid or reduce noise impacts through site planning, project design,
and implementation of the California Building Code and Health and Safety Code.
Action A: Consider updating the Municipal Code to provide options for new development to
provide buffers other than sound walls when required.
Policy SEP-5.6: Transportation Noise. Reduce the impacts of transportation-related noise.
Action A: Avoid new development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or
projected future levels of noise from transportation noise sources which exceed the City’s
“normally acceptable” noise standards for land use compatibility unless the project design
includes effective measures to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas and interior spaces to or
below the “conditionally-acceptable levels,” as specified for the given land use in Table 12.
Action B: Work with Caltrans to evaluate and develop traffic noise mitigation programs along
Highway 101 and State Route 41.
Policy SEP-5.7: Stationary Noise. Reduce the impacts of stationary noise sources.
Action A: Avoid new development of noise-sensitive land uses where the noise level due to
existing stationary noise sources will exceed the noise level standards of Table 13 unless
effective noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the
development to reduce noise exposure to or below the levels specified in Table 13.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
23
Action B: Require mitigation of noise created by new proposed stationary noise sources or
existing stationary noise sources which undergo modifications so such uses do not to exceed
the noise level standards of Table 13 on properties designated for noise-sensitive uses.
Action C: Maintain exceptions for Agricultural activities within the Agricultural land use
designations during reasonable hours.
Action D: Work with private parties to reduce or mitigate noise exceeding allowed levels from
existing industrial and commercial stationary-noise sources that impact nearby noise-sensitive
land uses.
Table 12. Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Transportation Noise Sources
Noise Sensitive Land Use
Interior Occupied
Spaces (dBA)
Outdoor
Activity Areas
(dBA)1 CNEL Leq6
Residential 454 -- 652,3
Mixed-Use Residential 454 -- --
Convalescent Care Facilities, Hospitals 454 -- 702,3
Transient Lodging 45 -- 652,3
Schools, Libraries, Museums and Places of Worship -- 45 --
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks -- -- 705
Office Buildings -- 45 703
1. To be applied at outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be
applied at the property line of the receiving land use.
2. Where it is not possible to reduce exterior noise levels to 65 dBA CNEL, or less, an exterior noise level of 70 dBA CNEL may be allowed
provided that an acoustical analysis has been prepared for the project to identify available exterior noise-reduction measures to be
incorporated and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. For multi-family development, the exterior noise standard may
be applied at a designated on-site outdoor common-use area in lieu of individual unit patios or balconies.
3. Where outdoor activity areas are not included in the project design, only the interior noise level standard shall apply.
4. In locations where railroad noise is the predominant noise source, the interior noise standard for residential land uses shall be reduced by
5 dB to account for the increased potential for sleep disruption to building occupants.
5. Where quiet is a basis for use.
6. This standard is intended to apply to land uses with operational hours predominantly during the daytime hours. The interior noise standard
applies to a typical worst-case hour during the period of use.
Table 13. Maximum Allowable Noise Standards for Non-Transportation Noise Sources
Daytime
7:00 AM to 7:00 PM
Evening
7:00 PM to 10:00 PM
Nighttime
10:00 PM to 7:00 AM
Exterior Noise Standards1,2
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dBA)3,5 55 50 45
Maximum Level (Lmax dBA)4,5 75 70 65
Interior Noise Standards6
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dBA)3,5 45 40 35
Maximum Level (Lmax dBA)4,5 60 55 45
1. As determined at the outdoor activity area of the receiving noise-sensitive land use. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is
unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use. In the event the measured
ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise
level.
2. Exterior noise standards are to be applied in noise-sensitive outdoor activity areas. Excludes mixed-use residential and school playgrounds.
3. Leq = Average or “Equivalent” noise level during the worst-case operational hour of use. Sound level measurements shall be made with
slow meter response.
4. Lmax = Highest measured sound level occurring during a given interval of time (e.g., 1 hour). Sound level measurements shall be made with
fast meter response.
5. Where the noise source in question consists of speech or music, or is impulsive in nature, or contains a pure tone, the noise standards are
reduced by 5 dB.
6. As determined within occupied areas of the receiving noise-sensitive structure. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds
the applicable noise level standard the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
24
Goal MO-1: A safe, multimodal, interconnected, and efficient circulation system that serves all community
members
Policy MO-1.2: Multimodal Options. Increase pedestrian and bicycle connections and safety between
residential areas and commercial areas along major corridors, parks and recreation opportunities, and
neighboring communities.
Policy MO-1.3: Regional Facilities. Provide regional roadway facilities that minimize through-
traffic intrusion on local streets and mitigate impacts on local traffic.
Policy MO-1.4: Congestion Management and Trip Reduction. Encourage mixed-use and jobs
focused infill development that is served by multi-modal facilities to support reductions in
regional and local vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Policy MO-1.6: Truck Routes. Ensure the new and existing business that use large trucks as a core
part of their operations, more than just routine delivery, minimize maintenance impacts on City
infrastructure and noise impacts on residents.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact N-1: Would the General Plan result in exposure of persons or generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
Short-term construction and long-term operational noise impacts associated with future development are
discussed as follows:
Short-term Exposure to Construction Noise
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending upon the nature or phase (e.g.,
demolition/land clearing, grading and excavation, erection) of construction. Noise generated by
construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach
high levels. Temporary increases in ambient noise levels, particularly during the nighttime hours, could
result in increased levels of annoyance and potential sleep disruption. Although noise ranges were found
to be similar for all construction phases, the grading phase tends to involve the most equipment and
resulted in slightly higher average-hourly noise levels. Typical noise levels for individual pieces of
construction equipment and distances to predicted noise contours are summarized in Table 14. As
depicted, individual equipment noise levels typically range from approximately 74 to 88 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Typical operating cycles may involve 2 minutes of full power, followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower settings.
Intermittent noise levels can range from approximately 77 to 95 dBA Lmax, the loudest of which include
the use of pile drivers and impact devices (e.g., hoe rams, impact hammers).
Assuming a construction noise level of 88 dBA Leq and an average attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling
of distance from the source, exterior noise levels at sensitive receptors located within approximately
1,330 feet of the construction activity could reach and/or exceed 60 dBA Leq. Depending on distances from
nearby noise-sensitive land uses, the specific construction activities conducted, and intervening shielding,
construction activities may result in temporary and periodic increases in ambient noise levels at nearby
receptors. Of particular concern, are activities that occur during the evening and nighttime hours,
however, construction activities in the City of Atascadero are generally permitted between 7:00 a.m. and
9:00 p.m., and construction occurring outside of these hours requires approval from the Community
Development Director pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code (Atascadero Municipal Code Section 9-
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
25
14.03(c)). If construction activities occur during more noise-sensitive hours, these activities may result in
increased levels of annoyance and potential sleep disruption to occupants of nearby residential dwellings.
As a result, because such increases could result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project and could result in exposure
of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance or of applicable standards of other agencies or neighboring jurisdictions, this impact is
considered potentially significant.
Table 14. Typical Individual Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA)
50 feet from Source
Distance to Noise Contours
(feet, dBA Leq)
Lmax Leq 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA
Air Compressor 80 76 105 187 334
Auger/Rock Drill 85 78 133 236 420
Backhoe/Front End Loader 80 76 105 187 334
Blasting 94 74 83 149 265
Boring Hydraulic Jack/Power Unit 80 77 118 210 374
Compactor (Ground) 80 73 74 133 236
Concrete Batch Plant 83 75 94 167 297
Concrete Mixer Truck 85 81 187 334 594
Concrete Mixer (Vibratory) 80 73 74 133 236
Concrete Pump Truck 82 75 94 167 297
Concrete Saw 90 83 236 420 748
Crane 85 77 118 210 374
Dozer/Grader/Excavator/Scraper 85 81 187 334 594
Drill Rig Truck 84 77 118 210 374
Generator 82 79 149 265 472
Gradall 85 81 187 334 594
Hydraulic Break Ram 90 80 167 297 529
Jack Hammer 85 78 133 236 420
Impact Hammer/Hoe Ram (Mounted) 90 83 236 420 748
Pavement Scarifier/Roller 85 78 133 236 420
Paver 85 82 210 374 667
Pile Driver (Impact/Vibratory) 95 88 420 748 1,330
Pneumatic Tools 85 82 210 374 667
Pumps 77 74 83 149 265
Truck (Dump/Flat Bed) 84 80 167 297 529
Sources: FTA 2018, FHWA 2008
Proposed General Plan Policies that Provide Mitigation
Proposed 2045 GPU Policy SEP-5.1, Action A, would require the update of the City’s Noise Ordinance to
incorporate construction best management practices to minimize construction noise when construction
activities would be located within 1,000 feet of noise-sensitive land uses.
Due to the short-term and intermittent frequency of construction noise, and the required compliance
with the City’s municipal code and 2045 GPU SEP-5.1, Action A, construction noise level increases would
not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance. As a result, this impact would be considered less
than significant.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
26
Long-term Exposure to Non-Transportation Noise
The proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would primarily facilitate new residential, commercial, and industrial land
uses within the city limits. Potential noise/land use conflicts would occur at the interface between planned
residential and commercial land uses due to noise sources typically associated with commercial and
industrial activities, such as rooftop-mounted HVAC equipment, delivery trucks, car washes,
equipment/vehicle repair, and amplified sound. The City’s existing General Plan includes noise standards
for non-transportation noise sources (see Table 9). In addition, the City’s Municipal Code also includes
noise standards for non-transportation noise sources (see Tables 10 and 11). Depending on the uses
proposed and the location of nearby noise-sensitive land uses, predicted non-transportation levels could
potentially exceed the City’s noise standards and, therefore, would be considered to have a potentially
significant impact.
Proposed General Plan Policies that Provide Mitigation
The proposed 2045 GPU includes numerous goals and policies that would help to further reduce criteria
noise impacts on receptors. Relevant policies include policies: SEP-5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7. Compliance
with these policies and the City’s noise ordinance would ensure specific projects adhere to the Municipal
Code and would mitigate any significant nuisance noise from commercial activities, rooftop-mounted
HVAC equipment, delivery trucks, car washes, and amplified sound. Therefore, implementation of the
2045 GPU/ZCU would not result in ambient noise level environments at noise-sensitive uses that exceed
the City’s maximum allowable noise exposure standards set forth in Table 5. Consequently, future
noise/land use conflicts between planned residential and commercial land would be less than significant.
Long-term Exposure to Transportation Noise
Major noise sources in the planning area consist predominantly of vehicle traffic on area roadways. Major
roadway segments in the City include, but are not limited to, US-101, SR-41, and El Camino Real. In
addition, as noted earlier in this report, rail traffic along the UPRR also contributes to transportation noise
levels in the community. Roadway traffic noise and UPRR noise impacts are discussed in greater detail, as
follows:
Roadway Traffic Noise
Traffic noise levels were estimated using the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction model (FHWA-RD-
77-108) for existing and future cumulative (year 2045) conditions. Predicted future cumulative traffic
noise levels and distances to projected noise contours are summarized in Tables 16. It is important to note
that predicted noise contours are approximate and do not take into account shielding or reflection of
noise due to intervening terrain or structures. As a result, predicted noise contours should be considered
to represent bands of similar noise exposure along roadway segments, rather than absolute lines of
demarcation. Although these predicted noise contours are not considered site-specific, they are useful for
determining potential land use conflicts.
Predicted increases in future cumulative traffic noise levels, in comparison to existing traffic noise levels,
are summarized in Table 17. Under future cumulative conditions with buildout of the 2045 GPU/ZCU and
in comparison, to existing conditions, the 2045 GPU/ZCU would contribute to significant increases in
traffic noise levels along various roadway segments, including potions of U.S. Highway 101 (Refer to Table
11). In addition, depending on the type of land uses developed and location, future development could
be exposed to traffic noise levels in excess of the City’s current noise standards for land use compatibility
(refer to Table 8). As a result, exposure to vehicular traffic noise on area roadways would be considered a
potentially significant impact.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
27
Railroad Traffic Noise
The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) runs north-south through the City near the western City limits with a
portion of the tracks adjacent to Traffic Way. Depending on demand, approximately five trains pass
through the City on a daily basis. including three freight trains and two passenger trains (Amtrak Coast
Starlight). By year 2045, freight trains traveling along this corridor could potentially increase, depending
on future demand. However, projected future train volumes along the UPRR are currently not available.
Predicted train noise levels and distance to noise contours are summarized in Table 16. Based on a
conservative estimate of 5 trains per day, average-daily noise levels along the railroad corridor would be
approximately 66 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the rail corridor centerline. Train noise events can also be a
source of intermittent noise, including noise generated by locomotive engines, wheel squeal, and warning
horns. These instantaneous noise events could contribute to increased levels of annoyance to occupants
of nearby noise-sensitive land uses. Although the proposed 2045 GPU/ZCU would not result in an increase
in train traffic, the development of future land uses near the train tracks, and could be exposed to train
noise levels in excess of the City’s current noise standards for land use compatibility (refer to Table 5).
Land uses permitted along the rail corridor under the proposed 2045 General Plan are primarily industrial
and employment-oriented uses, similar to existing development patterns. Existing residential areas
located near the rail corridor would generally remain the same as today, and the proposed 2045 General
Plan does not designate new residential land uses immediately adjacent to the tracks. Some development
could continue to occur on underutilized parcels. As a result, exposure to railroad traffic noise levels would
be considered a potentially significant impact.
Table 15. Predicted Railroad Traffic Noise Levels
Train Type
Number of
Trains/Day
CNEL at 100 feet
from Railroad
Track Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contours (feet)
from Railroad Track Centerline
70 65 60
Freight & Passenger 5 66 51 108 233
UPRR freight trains distributed equally over a 24-hour period. Does not include shielding provided by intervening terrain or structures.
Does not include shielding from intervening structures or terrain. Projected railroad noise contours are depicted in Figure 4.
Proposed General Plan Policies that Provide Mitigation
The proposed 2045 GPU includes numerous goals and policies that would help to reduce potential
transportation noise impacts to noise-sensitive land uses. Relevant policies include, but are not limited to,
policies: SEP-5.2, SEP-5.3, SEP-5.4, SEP-5.6; as well as, MO-1.2, MO-1.3, MO-1.4, AND MO-1.6.
Implementation of the proposed 2045 GPU policies would reduce potential transportation noise impacts.
Future development projects would be required to analyze project-related noise impacts and incorporate
necessary noise-reduction measures. Noise-reduction measures typically implemented to reduce traffic
noise include increased insulation, setbacks, and construction of sound barriers. Additional policies have
been proposed to promote alternative means of transportation and to minimize noise impacts to
residents associated with heavy truck traffic. Implementation of these policies and actions will help to
reduce impacts associated with future development. In addition, the 2045 GPU includes noise standards
for transportation noise sources (refer to Table 12). With implementation of the proposed 2045 GPU
policies, this impact would be considered less than significant.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
28
Table 16. 2045 GPU Buildout Roadway Traffic Noise Levels & Contour Distances
Road Segment
ADT
Volumes Speed
CNEL at 50ft. From
Near travel-lane
Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contour (feet)
70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd. 63,000 65 79.3 341 731 1,573
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd. to Curbaril Ave. 64,000 65 79.4 345 739 1,589
US-101: Curbaril Ave. to SR-41 63,000 65 79.3 341 731 1,573
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 73,000 65 80 376 806 1,735
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd. 72,000 65 79.9 373 799 1,719
US-101: San Anselmo Rd. to del Rio Rd. 68,000 65 79.6 359 769 1,655
US-101: Del Rio Rd. to San Ramon Rd. 70,000 65 79.8 366 784 1,687
US-101: San Ramon Rd. to Vineyard Rd. 71,000 65 79.8 369 791 1,703
SR-41: Atascadero Ave. to Curbaril Ave. 13,900 45 68.6 56 116 246
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd. to Curbaril Ave. 13,400 45 68.5 55 113 241
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave. 17,500 35 67.2 WR 94 199
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave. to Mercedes Ave. 8,300 45 67.5 WR 81 175
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd. to Mercedes Ave. 7,700 55 69.1 WR 105 226
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd. to Del Rio Rd. 13,900 45 67.3 WR 130 401
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd. to Rosario Ave. 13,400 45 67.2 WR 126 387
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave. to Highway 41 17,500 25 62.2 WR WR 126
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd. 8,300 45 65.1 WR 81 241
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd. to Santa Barbara Rd. 7,700 45 64.8 WR 76 224
Traffic volumes were derived from the traffic analysis prepared for this project (CCTC 2025). Does not include shielding provided by intervening terrain or structures.
Predicted 2045 roadway traffic noise contours for US-101 and SR-41 are depicted in Figure 4.
WR = Contour is located within road right-of-way
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
29
Table 17. Traffic Noise Levels - Existing Compared to 2045 GPU
Roadway Segment
CNEL at 50 feet from Near-Travel-Lane Centerline Potentially
Significant?1 Existing Conditions 2045 GPU Buildout Increase
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd. to Santa Rosa Rd. 78.7 79.3 0.6 No
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd. to Curbaril Ave. 78.7 79.4 0.7 No
US-101: Curbaril Ave. to SR-41 78.7 79.3 0.6 No
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 77.5 80.0 2.5 Yes
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd. 77.5 79.9 2.4 Yes
US-101: San Anselmo Rd. to del Rio Rd. 77.5 79.6 2.1 Yes
US-101: Del Rio Rd. to San Ramon Rd. 77.6 79.8 2.2 Yes
US-101: San Ramon Rd. to Vineyard Rd. 77.6 79.8 2.2 Yes
SR-41: Atascadero Ave. to Curbaril Ave. 67.3 68.6 1.3 No
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd. to Curbaril Ave. 67.6 68.5 0.9 No
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave. 66.1 67.2 1.1 No
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave. to Mercedes Ave. 66.3 67.5 1.2 No
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd. to Mercedes Ave. 67.7 69.1 1.4 No
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd. to Del Rio Rd. 66.0 67.3 1.3 No
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd. to Rosario Ave. 66.3 67.2 0.9 No
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave. to Highway 41 61.1 62.2 1.1 No
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd. 63.9 65.1 1.2 No
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd. to Santa Barbara Rd. 63.4 64.8 1.4 No
1. Traffic noise levels were calculated based on traffic volumes derived from the traffic analysis prepared for this project, refer to Table 16 (CCTC 2025).
2. Significant increases are based on the following thresholds (Refer to Table 1):
5.0, or greater, where the existing noise level is less than 60 dBA
3.0, or greater, where the existing noise level is 60-65 dBA
1.5, or greater, where the existing noise level is greater than 65 dBA
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
30
Figure 4. Future Noise Contours – Major Surface Transportation Noise Sources
Predicted noise contours do not include shielding from intervening structures or terrain.
TEMPLETON
CS D
Los-PodTC'S"
National Forest
Planning Area
Basemap Feature~ ·mits
,--J Atascadero City ~1 (SOI)
--Urban Reserve Lme
CJ Majo, Ooads • F,eeways
Rivers• Waterbod1es e
nd Open Spac City Parks a _ _ d Community rrounding_C1t1es an
-~~rvice Districts
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
31
Impact N-2: Would the General Plan result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
The effects of ground vibration can vary from no perceptible effects at the lowest levels, low rumbling
sounds and detectable vibrations at moderate levels, and slight damage to nearby structures at the
highest levels. At the highest levels of vibration, damage to structures is primarily architectural (e.g.,
loosening and cracking of plaster or stucco coatings) and rarely results in structural damage. The effects
of ground vibration are influenced by the duration of the vibration and the distance from the vibration
source.
There are no federal, state, or local regulatory standards for vibration. However, various criteria have
been established to assist in the evaluation of vibration impacts. For instance, Caltrans has developed
vibration criteria based on human perception and structural damage risks. For newer structures, Caltrans
considers a peak-particle velocity (ppv) threshold of 0.5 inches per second (in/sec) to be the level at which
architectural damage (i.e., minor cracking of plaster walls and ceilings) to normal structures may occur.
Below 0.10 in/sec there is “virtually no risk of ‘architectural’ damage to normal buildings.” Damage to
historic or ancient buildings could occur at levels of 0.08 in/sec ppv. In terms of human annoyance,
continuous vibrations in excess of 0.1 in/sec ppv are identified by Caltrans as the minimum level
perceptible level for ground vibration. Short periods of ground vibration in excess of 0.2 in/sec ppv can be
expected to result in increased levels of annoyance to people within buildings (Caltrans, 2020).
Groundborne vibration sources located within the City that could potentially affect future development
would be primarily associated with construction activities. With the exception of pavement breaking and
pile driving, construction activities and related equipment typically generate groundborne vibration levels
of less than 0.2 in/sec, which is the architectural damage risk threshold recommended by Caltrans. Based
on Caltrans measurement data, use of off-road tractors, dozers, earthmovers, and haul trucks generates
groundborne vibration levels of less than 0.10 in/sec, or one half of the architectural damage risk level, at
10 feet. The highest vibration level associated with a pavement breaker was 2.88 in/sec at 10 feet. During
pile driving, vibration levels near the source depend mainly on the soil’s penetration resistance as well as
Table 18. Summary of Groundborne Vibration Levels and Potential Effects
Vibration Level
(in/sec ppv) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings
0.006-0.019 Threshold of perception; possibility of intrusion. Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of any type.
0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible. Recommended upper level of the vibration to which
ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected.
0.10
Level at which continuous vibrations begin to
annoy people.
Virtually no risk of “architectural” damage to normal
buildings.
0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in buildings (this
agrees with the levels established for people
standing on bridges and subjected to relative
short periods of vibrations).
Threshold at which there is a risk of “architectural”
damage to fragile buildings.
0.4-0.6 Vibrations considered unpleasant by people
subjected to continuous vibrations and
unacceptable to some people walking on
bridges.
Potential risk of “architectural” damage may occur at
levels above 0.3 in/sec ppv for older residential
structures and above 0.5 in/sec ppv for newer
structures.
The vibration levels are based on peak particle velocity in the vertical direction for continuous vibration sources, which includes most
construction activities.
Source: Caltrans 2020
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
32
the type of pile driver used. Impact pile drivers tend to generate higher vibration levels than vibratory or
drilled piles. Groundborne vibration levels of pile drivers can range from approximately 0.17 to 1.5 in/sec
ppv. Caltrans indicates that the distance to the 0.2 in/sec ppv criterion for pile driving activities would
occur at a distance of approximately 50 feet. However, as with construction-generated noise levels, pile
driving can result in a high potential for human annoyance from vibrations, and pile-driving activities are
typically considered as being potentially significant if these activities are performed within 200 feet of
occupied structures (Caltrans, 2020). As a result, depending on the activities conducted and distance to
nearby sensitive land uses, short-term exposure to vibration levels would be considered a potentially
significant impact.
Proposed General Plan Policies that Provide Mitigation
Proposed 2045 GPU Policy SEP-5.1, Action A, would require the update of the City’s Noise Ordinance to
incorporate construction best management practices to minimize construction noise when construction
activities would be located within 1,000 feet of noise-sensitive land uses. This policy would also help to
reduce potential nuisance-related vibration impacts to nearby sensitive land uses.
In addition, standard construction best management practices, such as maintaining equipment in good
working condition, locating stationary equipment away from sensitive receptors, and avoiding
high-vibration construction methods where feasible, would help reduce groundborne vibration levels
during construction. Compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance, which generally limits construction
activities to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; Atascadero Municipal Code Section 9-14.03(c)), would
reduce the potential for construction-related groundborne vibration to affect nearby sensitive receptors
during nighttime periods when occupants are more likely to be present and disturbance would be more
noticeable.
Due to the short-term nature of construction vibrations, the intermittent frequency of construction
vibrations, and the required compliance with the City’s hourly restrictions related to construction
activities, construction vibration level increases will not result in exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration that would result in a significant increase in annoyance. By restricting
the hours of construction to avoid vibrations during times when it could potentially be more of a nuisance,
the impact of new construction vibration is reduced to a less-than-significant level through the application
of the 2045 GPU’s mitigating policies.
Noise Impact Analysis AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update & Corresponding Zoning Code Update April 2026
33
REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020. Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration
Guidance Manual.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. EIR/EA Annotated Outline.
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2017. General Plan Guidelines. Available at website url:
https://opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html
Central Coast Transportation Consultants (CCTC). July 11, 2025. Memorandum: Atascadero General Plan Update-
Transportation (CEQA).
City of Atascadero. June 25, 2002. Atascadero General Plan 2025. Available at Website url:
https://www.atascadero.org/service/planning-documents-resources
City of Atascadero. Accessed: February 21, 2026. Atascadero Municipal Code. Available at Website url:
https://ecode360.com/AT4901.
City of Paso Robles. November 16, 2004. Airport Master Plan Update. Available at website url:
https://www.prcity.com/355/Airport-Master-Plan-Update
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). December 8, 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model, version 1.1.
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). October 22, 2000. Discussion of Methodologies of Measuring
Noise Impact.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Accessed: February 21, 2026. Train Horns and Quiet Zones. Website url:
https://railroads.dot.gov/railroad-safety/divisions/crossing-safety-and-trespass-prevention/train-horn-
rulequiet-zones.
San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission (SLOALUC). Accessed: February 21, 2026. Airport Land Use
Plans. Available at Website url: https://sloairport.com/airport-land-use-commission-aluc/
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact
Assessment.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1971. Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations,
Building Equipment, and Home Appliances.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1974. Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public
Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety.
APPENDIX A
Noise Modeling
Segment
% of
LDA
Day
% of
MDT
Day
% of
HDT
Day
% of
LDA
Evenin
g
% of
MDT
Evenin
g
% of
HDT
Evenin
g
% of
LDA
Night
% of
MDT
Night
% of
HDT
Night
Total
% Lanes
Speed
Limit AHW
US-101 Santa Barbara Rd to Santa Rosa Rd 71.28 0.85 6.09 11.87 0.05 0.19 8.82 0.1 0.75 100 4 65 41
US-101 Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 71.28 0.85 6.09 11.87 0.05 0.19 8.82 0.1 0.75 100 4 65 41
US-101 Curbaril Ave to SR-41 71.28 0.85 6.09 11.87 0.05 0.19 8.82 0.1 0.75 100 4 65 41
US-101 SR-41 to Traffic Way 74.63 0.63 2.58 12.42 0.04 0.08 9.23 0.08 0.31 100 4 65 41
US-101 Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd 74.63 0.63 2.58 12.42 0.04 0.08 9.23 0.08 0.31 100 4 65 41
US-101 San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd 74.63 0.63 2.58 12.42 0.04 0.08 9.23 0.08 0.31 100 4 65 41
US-101 Del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd 74.63 0.63 2.58 12.42 0.04 0.08 9.23 0.08 0.31 100 4 65 41
US-101 San Ramon Rd to Vineyard Rd 74.79 0.6 2.42 12.45 0.03 0.08 9.25 0.07 0.31 100 4 65 41
SR-41 Atascadero Ave to Curbaril Ave 73.87 2.26 1.75 12.3 0.13 0.05 9.14 0.28 0.22 100 2 45 18
SR-41 Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 73.87 2.26 1.75 12.3 0.13 0.05 9.14 0.28 0.22 100 2 45 18
SR-41 US 101 to Atascadero Ave 73.87 2.26 1.75 12.3 0.13 0.05 9.14 0.28 0.22 100 2 35 18
SR-41 Santa Ysabel Ave to Mercedes Ave 73.87 2.26 1.75 12.3 0.13 0.05 9.14 0.28 0.22 100 2 45 18
SR-41 Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave 73.87 2.26 1.75 12.3 0.13 0.05 9.14 0.28 0.22 100 2 55 18
SR-41 El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd 75.51 1.56 0.64 12.57 0.09 0.02 9.34 0.19 0.08 100 4 45 30
SR-41 El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave 75.51 1.56 0.64 12.57 0.09 0.02 9.34 0.19 0.08 100 4 45 30
SR-41 El Camino Real: Rosario Ave to Highway 41 75.51 1.56 0.64 12.57 0.09 0.02 9.34 0.19 0.08 100 4 25 30
SR-41 El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd 75.51 1.56 0.64 12.57 0.09 0.02 9.34 0.19 0.08 100 4 45 30
SR-41 El Camino Real: San Diego Rd to Santa Barbara Rd75.51 1.56 0.64 12.57 0.09 0.02 9.34 0.19 0.08 100 4 45 30
Road Segment
ADT
Volumes Speed
CNEL at 50ft. From
Near travel-lane
Centerline
CNEL Contour
70
CNEL Contour
65
CNEL Contour
60
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd to Santa Rosa Rd 55000 65 78.7 313 670 1441
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 55000 65 78.7 313 670 1441
US-101: Curbaril Ave to SR-41 55000 65 78.7 313 670 1441
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 63000 65 77.5 261 557 1196
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd 63000 65 77.5 261 557 1196
US-101: San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd 63000 65 77.5 261 557 1196
US-101: Del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd 65000 65 77.6 266 568 1221
US-101: San Ramon Rd to Vineyard Rd 65000 65 77.6 262 558 1200
SR-41: Atascadero Ave to Curbaril Ave 10200 45 67.3 NA 95 201
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 11100 45 67.6 NA 100 212
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave 13700 35 66.1 NA 80 169
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave to Mercedes Ave 6300 45 66.3 NA 68 145
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave 5600 55 67.7 NA 85 182
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd 10200 45 66.0 NA 98 295
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave 11100 45 66.3 NA 105 321
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave to Highway 41 13700 25 61.1 NA NA 100
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd 6300 45 63.9 NA 65 184
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd to Santa Barbara Rd 5600 45 63.4 NA 59 164
CNEL Contour
70
CNEL Contour
65
CNEL Contour
60
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd to Santa Rosa Rd 63000 65 79.3 341 731 1573
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 64000 65 79.4 345 739 1589
US-101: Curbaril Ave to SR-41 63000 65 79.3 341 731 1573
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 73000 65 80 376 806 1735
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd 72000 65 79.9 373 799 1719
US-101: San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd 68000 65 79.6 359 769 1655
US-101: Del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd 70000 65 79.8 366 784 1687
US-101: San Ramon Rd to Vineyard Rd 71000 65 79.8 369 791 1703
SR-41: Atascadero Ave to Curbaril Ave 13900 45 68.6 56 116 246
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 13400 45 68.5 55 113 241
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave 17500 35 67.2 NA 94 199
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave to Mercedes Ave 8300 45 67.5 NA 81 175
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave 7700 55 69.1 NA 105 226
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd 13900 45 67.3 NA 130 401
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave 13400 45 67.2 NA 126 387
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave to Highway 41 17500 25 62.2 NA NA 126
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd 8300 45 65.1 NA 81 241
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd to Santa Barbara Rd 7700 45 64.8 NA 76 224
Distance to CNEL Contour (feet)
Road Segment
ADT
Volumes Speed
CNEL at 50ft. From
Near travel-lane
Centerline
Roadway Segment
Existing
Conditions
2045 GPU
Buildout Increase
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd to Santa Rosa Rd 78.7 79.3 0.6
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 78.7 79.4 0.7
US-101: Curbaril Ave to SR-41 78.7 79.3 0.6
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 77.5 80.0 2.5
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd 77.5 79.9 2.4
US-101: San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd 77.5 79.6 2.1
US-101: Del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd 77.6 79.8 2.2
US-101: San Ramon Rd to Vineyard Rd 77.6 79.8 2.3
SR-41: Atascadero Ave to Curbaril Ave 67.3 68.6 1.3
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 67.6 68.5 0.9
SR-41: US 101 to Atascadero Ave 66.1 67.2 1.1
SR-41: Santa Ysabel Ave to Mercedes Ave 66.3 67.5 1.2
SR-41: Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave 67.7 69.1 1.4
El Camino Real: San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd 66.0 67.3 1.3
El Camino Real: Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave 66.3 67.2 0.9
El Camino Real: Rosario Ave to Highway 41 61.1 62.2 1.1
El Camino Real: Highway 41 to San Diego Rd 63.9 65.1 1.2
El Camino Real: San Diego Rd to Santa Barbara Rd 63.4 64.8 1.4
CNEL at 50 feet from Near-Travel-
Lane Centerline
1 OF 2
10/11: TEMP: 59-85 F. | HUMIDITY: 35-76 % | WIND SPEED: 1-3 MPH | SKY: CLEAR | GROUND: DRY
10/12: TEMP: 59-86 F. | HUMIDITY: 32-78 % | WIND SPEED: 2-5 MPH | SKY: CLEAR | GROUND: DRY
10/13: TEMP: 52-81 F. | HUMIDITY: 38-93 % | WIND SPEED: 3-4 MPH | SKY: CLEAR | GROUND: DRY
CLOUD COVER BY CLASS (OC=OVERCAST): 3 (1. HEAVY OC, 2. LIGHT OC, 3. SUNNY, 4. CLEAR NIGHT, 5. OC NIGHT)
MET. METER:
LARSON DAVIS SLM MODEL:
CALIBRATOR:
NO
YES A-WHT SLOW
LOCATION MAP:
MONITORING STAFF:
10/10: TEMP: 72-86 F. | HUMIDITY: 31-70 % | WIND SPEED: 2-5 MPH | SKY: CLEAR | GROUND: DRY
SoftdB Picollo Type II/LD LxT
Jon Pambakian/Kurt Legleiter
NOISE MEASUREMENT CONDITIONS & EQUIPMENT
KESTREL 5500
MET CONDITIONS & MONITORING EQUIPMENT:
NOISE MONITORING EQUIPMENT:
CAL200/250
NOISE MEASUREMENT SURVEY FORM
October 10-13, 2022
2045 Atascadero GPU
Atascadero, CA
SHEET
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
NOISE MONITORING SETUP:
CALIBRATED PRIOR TO AND UPON COMPLETION OF MEASUREMENTS:
WITHIN 10 FT OF REFLECTIVE SURFACE?:
METER SETTINGS:
5MICROPHONE HEIGHT AGL (FT):
Sol,-li,,i l' a•u-o cou~,•
••
Planning Area
8aHffWIP '-turn =-,~~~
c::::JUr--U-~ --------~ ~•W..,t,odiaa
CllyOub-°""S-
ll,'""' ... Cill-~c.m,,,,.i""1Y ---0 Shori·T•rm 4ST) MUR1rw:mc111
Q Lt11nt1•Tl!etmjLT)M£.t:iur10mel\t
2 OF 2
LEQ
ST1 7800 Del Rio Road 10:41 – 10:51 Birds, Electrical Equipment 44.3
ST2 Apple Valley Park 11:03 – 11:13 Birds, Traffic, People Walking on Path 45.3
ST3 5400 Santa Cruz Road 11:50 – 12:00 Distant Traffic, Birds 57.7
ST4 San Benito Elementary
School 12:10 – 12:20 Birds, Truck Passby 50.3
ST5 Monterey Road
Elementary School 12:32 – 12:42 Traffic, Birds 63.2
ST6 The Lakes Lake 12:57 – 13:07 Birds 41.5
ST7 High School Hill Road 15:08 – 15:18 Traffic, Dogs 52.6
ST8 Hope Lutheran Church 10:02 – 10:12 Traffic, Propeller Plane Overflight, Dogs,
Birds 50.7
ST9 9600 Atascadero
Avenue 10:26 – 10:36 Traffic, Birds 60.5
ST10 Paloma Creek Park 10:47 – 10:57 Distant Traffic, Children, Birds 44.4
ST11 Heilmann Regional Park 11:10 – 11:20 Traffic, Golf Cart, Birds, Squirrels 40.4
ST12 8500 El Corte Road 11:31 – 11:41 Traffic 52.5
ST13
Pueblo
Avenue/Sombrilla
Avenue
11:53 – 12:03 Traffic, Conversation, Propeller Plane
Overflight, Dogs 53.5
ST14 7700 Aragon Road 12:16 – 12:26 Dogs, Birds 49.6
ST15 7100 Sycamore Road 12:40 – 12:50 Traffic, Birds, Children, Sheep/Goat 64.7
ST16 5454 CA-41 Parking 13:03 – 13:13 Traffic 64.8
ST17 Traffic Way Park 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 57.8
ST18 12500 CA-41 10:51 – 11:01 Traffic 67.9
ST19 Atascadero Lake Park 11:25 – 11:35 Traffic 63.9
ST20 Nogales Avenue/Lobos
Avenue 11:56 – 12:06 Traffic, Birds, Dog, Distant Power Tool 53.4
ST21 3300 El Camino Real 12:19 – 12:29 Traffic 68.2
ST22 1000 San Ramon Road 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 71.2
ST23 6000 San Gabriel Road 14:06 – 14:16 Traffic, Propeller Plane Overflight 56.8
ST24 10700 El Camino Real 10:40 – 10:50 Traffic 66.9
ST25 8965 El Camino Real 11:00 – 11:10 Traffic 71.7
ST26 Sunken Gardens 11:22 – 11:32 Traffic, Water Fountain 58.3
ST27 4890 Alamo Avenue 11:45 – 11:55 Dogs, Vehicle Passby 56
ST28 6050 Marchant Avenue 12:56 – 13:06 Traffic 73.1
12-Oct-22
13-Oct-22
10-Oct-22
11-Oct-22
LOCATION
MEASUREMENT DURATION
(Minutes)PRIMARY NOISE SOURCES NOTED
MEASURED NOISE LEVELS
LOCATION:Atascadero, CA
MONITORING STAFF:Jon Pambakian/Kurt Legleiter
NOISE MEASUREMENT SURVEY FORM
SHEET
DATE:October 10-13, 2022
PROJECT:2045 Atascadero GPU
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX H
2045 General Plan Existing Conditions Report |
Chapter 8: Noise
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-1
2045 General Plan
Existing Conditions
Report
Chapter 8: Noise
tasca ero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-2 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Noise Findings
PRIMARY NOISE SOURCES
1. Roadways and freeways are the primary noise sources in the City of Atascadero.
Primary transportation noise sources include vehicular traffic along US-101 and SR-41.
2. Freight and Amtrak train traffic along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor result in
localized and intermittent noise events.
3. Non-transportation-related noise sources within the City of Atascadero are
predominantly associated with industrial and commercial operations and building
mechanical equipment. Other noise sources can result in intermittent increases in
ambient noise levels, such as short-term construction activities, as well as school and
public events.
OPPORTUNITIES
1. The City’s existing General Plan Noise Element includes noise policies and standards
to reduce public exposure to transportation and non-transportation (stationary) noise
sources. The continued application of these standards, could hinder development of
some future land uses, particularly where higher-density residential development is
located near major transportation or non-transportation noise sources, such as mixed-
use development projects.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-3
8.1 Introduction
This report examines existing noise conditions in the City of Atascadero. The purpose of this
report is to provide a context for the General Plan Noise Element by identifying current noise
conditions. The information presented in this report will be used by the City to develop noise
element policies and objectives and to define programs that will implement those polices.
The intent of this report is to identify and evaluate existing noise problems in the community,
and to provide guidance to avoid noise and land use incompatibility problems in the future.
The report will address existing noise sources in the community and identifies potential noise
impacts. This noise information will serve as the basis for developing guidelines for
identifying compatible land uses, identifying the proper distribution of land uses, and
establishing proper development standards. A discussion of acoustic fundamentals and
terminology is also included.
This chapter is organized into the following sections:
Section 8.1: Introduction
Section 8.2: Regulatory Setting
Section 8.3: Acoustical Fundamentals
Section 8.4: Existing Noise Environment
Section 8.5: Sensitive Land Uses
Section 8.6: Sources
Section 8.7: Acronyms and Key Terms
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-4 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
8.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal, state, and local governments have established noise standards and guidelines to
protect citizens from potential hearing damage and various other adverse physiological and
social effects associated with noise. Existing regulations most applicable to the City are
summarized, as follows:
FEDERAL
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
In 1974, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Noise Abatement and
Control published a report entitled Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite
to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Although this
document does not constitute EPA regulations or standards, it is useful in identifying noise
levels at which increased levels of annoyance would be anticipated. Based on an annual-
average day-night noise level (expressed as Ldn or DNL), the document states that “undue
interference with activity and annoyance” will not occur if outdoor noise levels in residential
areas are below 55 dBA Ldn and indoor levels are below 45 dBA Ldn (EPA 1974).
Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines for the
acceptability of residential land uses are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 24,
Part 51, “Environmental Criteria and Standards.” These guidelines identify an average-daily
noise exposure of 65 dBA Ldn, or less, as acceptable for residential development. Exterior noise
levels of 65 to 75 dBA Ldn are considered normally acceptable, provided appropriate sound
attenuation is provided to reduce interior noise levels to within acceptable levels. Exterior
noise levels above 75 dBA Ldn are considered unacceptable. The goal of the interior noise
levels for residential, hotel, and hospital/nursing home uses is 45 dBA Ldn. These guidelines
apply only to new construction supported by HUD grants and are not binding upon local
communities (HUD 2021).
Train Horn Rule
Under the federal train horn rule (49 CFR Part 222), locomotive engineers must begin to
sound train horns at least 15 seconds, and no more than 20 seconds, in advance of all public
grade crossings. In general, depending on train speed, train horns are often sounded within
one-quarter mile of a grade crossing. Local communities may reduce the effects of train
horns by establishing “quiet zones”, which typically incorporate measures to reduce public
risk caused by the absence of horn sounding (FRA 2021). No railroad quiet zones were
identified in the City.
STATE
California Building Code
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations contains standards for allowable interior noise
levels associated with exterior noise sources (California Building Code, 1998 edition, Volume 1,
Appendix Chapter 12, Section 1208A). The standards apply to new hotels, motels, dormitories,
apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family residences. The
standards state that the interior noise level attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-5
45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room. Proposed multi-family residential structures to be
located where the CNEL exceeds 60 dBA shall require an acoustical analysis showing that the
proposed building design would achieve the prescribed allowable interior noise standard.
State of California General Plan Guidelines
The State of California General Plan Guidelines, published by the Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR), provides guidance for the acceptability of new land uses
within specific noise environments. The goal of these recommended noise standards is, in
part, to allow for a “normally acceptable” interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. For instance,
assuming an average exterior-to-interior noise reduction of 15 dBA (with windows partially
open), an exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL for residential land uses, or less, would be
sufficient to achieve an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. Higher exterior noise levels may
be allowed provided that noise-reduction measures are incorporated to achieve acceptable
interior noise levels. Within “conditionally acceptable” exterior noise environments,
conventional construction with incorporation of fresh air circulation systems sufficient to
allow windows to remain closed would normally suffice. Compliance with current building
code requirements and with windows closed, exterior-to-interior noise reductions typically
average approximately 25 dBA, or more. The State’s guidelines can be modified to reflect
communities’ sensitivities to noise. The State recommended noise criteria for land use
compatibility are summarized in Table 8-1 (State of California 2017).
TABLE 8-1. STATE OF CALIFORNIA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY NOISE CRITERIA
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Interpretation
Residential – Low Density
Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes
Normally Acceptable
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the
assumption that any buildings
involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise
insulation requirements.
Residential – Multiple Family
Transient Lodging – Motels,
Hotels Conditionally Acceptable
New construction or
development should be
undertaken only after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements and needed noise insulation features included in
the design.
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Normally Unacceptable
-
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-6 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Interpretation
New construction or
development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed
analysis of the noise reduction
requirements must be made and needed noise insulation
features included in the design.
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries
Clearly Unacceptable
New construction or development should generally
not be undertaken
Office Buildings, Business
Commercial and Professional
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture
Source(s): California OPR 2017
LOCAL
City of Atascadero General Plan 2025
A general plan is a high-level policy document that is often described as the blueprint for
development. A general plan establishes the “ground rules” for conserving resources,
designing new projects, expanding public services, and improving community amenities. It
articulates the community’s vision and guides growth, change, and development over a 20-
25-year period. Adopted in June 2002, the City of Atascadero General Plan 2025 (General Plan
2025) sets the course of all planning efforts both City-initiated and developer-proposed, and
includes four chapters:
• Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element
• Circulation Element
• Safety and Noise Element
• Housing Element
The following section lists the Noise Element goals, as they relate to this chapter of the 2045
General Plan Existing Conditions Report.
Noise Element Goals
The Noise Element provides a policy framework for addressing potential noise impacts in the
planning process. It identifies exterior average-daily noise standards for the primary purpose
of ensuring the compatibility of proposed land uses within exterior noise environments and
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-7
ensure that noise levels at adjacent land uses do not exceed acceptable levels. These
standards are also designed to protect existing land uses, including transportation and
industry, from encroaching on urban uses. These noise standards are largely consistent with
those identified in the State of California’s General Plan Guidelines, as discussed above, and
summarized in Table 8-2 and Table 8-3 (City of Atascadero 2002). The goals of the 2002 Noise
Element included:
• SFN 6: Protect the citizens of Atascadero from the harmful and annoying effects of
exposure to excessive noise.
• SFN 7: Protect the economic base of Atascadero by preventing incompatible land
uses from encroaching upon existing or planned noise-producing uses.
• SFN 8: Preserve the tranquility of residential areas by preventing the encroachment of
noise-producing uses.
• SFN 9: Educate the residents of Atascadero concerning the effects of exposure to
excessive noise and the methods available for minimizing such exposure.
• SFN 10: Avoid or reduce noise impacts through site planning and project design,
giving second preference to the use of noise barriers and/or structural modifications
to buildings containing noise-sensitive land uses.
Noise Element Policies
The following policies have been adopted by the City to accomplish the goals presented in
the Noise Element:
• Policy 1. The noise standards in this chapter represent maximum acceptable noise
levels. New development should minimize noise exposure and noise generation. The
City shall maintain a Noise Ordinance that implements the requirements of the Noise
Element.
Transportation Noise Sources:
• Policy 2. New development of noise-sensitive land uses shall not be permitted in areas
exposed to existing or projected future levels of noise from transportation noise sources which exceed 60 dB or CNEL (70 Ld/CNEL for playgrounds and neighborhood parks)
unless the project design includes effective mitigation measures to reduce noise in
outdoor activity areas and interior spaces to or below the levels specified for the given
land use in Table 8-2.
• Policy 3. Noise created by new transportation noise sources, including roadway
improvement projects, shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the levels specified in
Table 8-2 within the outdoor activity areas and interior spaces of existing noise sensitive
land uses. Stationary Noise Sources:
• Policy 4. New development of noise-sensitive land uses shall not be permitted where the noise level due to existing stationary noise sources will exceed the noise level
standards of Table 8-3 unless effective noise mitigation measures have been
incorporated into the design of the development to reduce noise exposure to or below
the levels specified in Table 8-3.
• Policy 5. Noise created by new proposed stationary noise sources or existing stationary
noise sources which undergo modifications that may increase noise levels shall be
mitigated so as not to exceed the noise level standards of Table 8-3 on lands designated for noise-sensitive uses. This policy does not apply to noise levels associated with agricultural operations.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-8 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Existing and Cumulative Noise Impacts:
• Policy 6. The City shall consider implementing mitigation measures where existing
noise levels produce significant noise impacts to noise sensitive land uses or where new
development may result in cumulative increases of noise upon noise-sensitive land uses.
Table 8-2: Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure — Transportation Noise Sources
Land Use Outdoor Activity
Areas1
Interior Spaces
(Ldn/CNEL dB) (Ldn/CNEL dB) (Leq,
dB)2
Residential 603 45 --
Transient Lodging 603 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 603 45 --
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls, Office Buildings 603 -- 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums -- -- 45
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 -- --
1. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standards shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use.
2. As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
3. Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dB Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best-
available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.
Source(s): City of Atascadero 2002
Table 8-3: Allowable Noise Exposure — Stationary Noise Sources1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2 50 45
Maximum Level (dB)2 70 65
Maximum Impulse Level (dB)3 65 60
1. As determined at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards may be applied on the receptor side of the noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures. 2. Sound level measurements shall be made with slow meter response.
3. Sound level measurements shall be made with fast meter response.
Source(s): City of Atascadero 2002
City of Atascadero Municipal Code
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-9
The City’s Municipal Code (Title 9, Planning and Zoning, Chapter 14, Noise) includes various
provisions intended to protect community residents from prolonged unnecessary, excessive,
and annoying sound levels that are detrimental to the public health, welfare, and safety, or
are contrary to the public interest. Examples of noise sources subject to the City’s municipal
Code include, but are not limited to, industrial and commercial machinery and equipment,
pumps, fans, compressors, generators, air conditioners, and refrigeration equipment (City of
Atascadero 2022).
Noise sources associated with construction-related activities are typically exempt from the
City’s ordinance provided that the activities do not take place before the hours of seven a.m.
or after nine p.m. or by special permit from the Community Development Director. Various
other activities are also exempt, including, but not limited to, school entertainment and
athletic events, mobile sources associated with agricultural activities, and emergency
response activities (City of Atascadero 2022).
In addition, the City’s Noise Ordinance sets exterior and interior (Title 9, Sections 9-14.05 and
9-14.06, respectively) noise level standards. The City’s exterior and interior noise level
standards are summarized in Table 8-4 and Table 8-5, respectively. The exterior noise level
standards are applied at the property line of the receiving land use. Where practical, the
microphone shall be positioned three to five feet above the ground and away from reflective
surfaces. The interior standards applied within the affected dwelling unit, when both the
source and receiver are residential land uses. The reported interior noise level shall be
determined by taking the arithmetic average of the readings taken at the various
microphone locations (City of Atascadero 2022).
Table 8-4: City of Atascadero Municipal Code Exterior Noise Level Standards1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2, 3 50 45
Maximum Level (dB)2, 3 70 65
1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation
of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level
when measured at any affected single or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to exceed the noise level standards as set forth in the table. 2. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable
standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
3. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
Source(s): City of Atascadero 2022
Table 8-5: City of Atascadero Municipal Code Interior Noise Level Standards1
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent (Leq dB)2, 3 40 35
Maximum Level (dB)2, 3 60 55
1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-10 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Daytime Nighttime
(7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.) (9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
when measured at any affected single or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to
exceed the noise level standards as set forth in the table. 2. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable
standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
3. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
Source(s): City of Atascadero 2022
8.3 Acoustic Fundamentals
INTRODUCTION
Noise is generally defined as sound that is loud, disagreeable, or unexpected. Sound is
mechanical energy transmitted in the form of a wave because of a disturbance or vibration.
Sound levels are described in terms of both amplitude and frequency.
AMPLITUDE
Amplitude is defined as the difference between ambient air pressure and the peak pressure
of the sound wave. Amplitude is measured in decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale. For
example, a 65 dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source
results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB (i.e., doubling the source strength increases
the sound pressure by 3 dB). Amplitude is interpreted by the ear as corresponding to
different degrees of loudness. Laboratory measurements correlate a 10 dB increase in
amplitude with a perceived doubling of loudness and establish a 3 dB change in amplitude
as the minimum audible difference perceptible to the average person.
FREQUENCY
The frequency of a sound is defined as the number of fluctuations of the pressure wave per
second. The unit of frequency is the Hertz (Hz). One Hz equals one cycle per second. The
human ear is not equally sensitive to sound of different frequencies. For instance, the human
ear is more sensitive to sound in the higher portion of this range than in the lower and sound
waves below 16 Hz or above 20,000 Hz cannot be heard at all. To approximate the sensitivity
of the human ear to changes in frequency, environmental sound is usually measured in what
is referred to as “A-weighted decibels” (dBA). On this scale, the normal range of human
hearing extends from about 10 dBA to about 140 dBA. Common community noise sources
and associated noise levels, in dBA, are depicted in Figure 8-1.
ADDITION OF DECIBELS
Because decibels are logarithmic units, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through
ordinary arithmetic. Under the decibel scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3-
dB increase. In other words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the
same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one
source under the same conditions. For example, if one automobile produces a sound level of
70 dB when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-11
dB; rather, they would combine to produce 73 dB. Under the decibel scale, three sources of
equal loudness together would produce an increase of 5 dB.
SOUND PROPAGATION & ATTENUATION
Geometric Spreading
Noise sources are generally characterized as either a localized source (i.e., point source) or a
line source. Examples of point sources include construction equipment, vehicle horns,
alarms, and amplified sound systems. Examples of a line sources include trains and on-road
vehicular traffic. Sound from a point source propagates uniformly outward in a spherical
pattern.
For a point source, sound levels generally decrease (attenuate) at a rate of approximately 6
decibels for each doubling of distance from the source, depending on ground surface
characteristics. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the
source and the receiver), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. Parking lots and bodies
of water are examples of hard surfaces which generally attenuate at this rate. For acoustically
absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source
and the receiver, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground-
attenuation value of 1.5 decibels per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When soft
surfaces are present, the excess ground attenuation for soft surfaces generally results in an
overall attenuation rate of approximately 7.5 decibels per doubling of distance from the point
source.
On-road vehicle traffic consists of several localized noise sources on a defined path, and
hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources.
Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as
cylindrical spreading. Sound levels for line sources attenuate at a rate of approximately 3
decibels for each doubling of distance for hard sites and approximately 4.5 decibels per
doubling of distance for soft sites.
Atmospheric Effects
Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative
to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels
can be increased at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) from the highway due to
atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other
factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also have significant effects.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-12 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Figure 8-1: Common Noise Levels
Source(s): Caltrans 2021
Common Outdoor Noise Level Common Indoor
Activities (dBA) Activities
@ L Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300m ( 1000 ft))
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft)) @
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft), ® L Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft)
at 80 km (50 mph) ® L Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area , Daytime)
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft)) ® L Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m ( 1 O ft)
Commercial Area) L Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft)
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) ® Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime ® Dishwasher Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime ® Theater, Large Conference
Quiet Suburban Nighttime Room (Background)
® Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night,
® Concert Hall (Background)
Broadcast/Recording Studio -
®
Lowest Threshold of Human 0 Lowest Threshold of Human
Hearin~ Hearing
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-13
Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially
attenuate noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding
depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural
terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and
walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source
and a receiver specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a
source and a receiver will typically result in minimum 5 dB of noise reduction. Taller barriers
provide increased noise reduction.
Noise reductions afforded by building construction can vary depending on construction
materials and techniques. Standard construction practices typically provide approximately 15
dBA exterior-to-interior noise reductions for building facades, with windows open, and
approximately 20-25 dBA, with windows closed. With compliance with current building
construction and insulation requirements, exterior-to-interior noise reductions typically
average approximately 25 dBA. The absorptive characteristics of interior rooms, such as
carpeted floors, draperies, and furniture, can result in further reductions in interior noise.
HUMAN RESPONSE TO NOISE
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from
individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem,
not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of
inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health
effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including
sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss
can occur at the highest noise intensity levels. When community noise interferes with
human activities or contributes to stress, public annoyance with the noise source increases.
The acceptability of noise and the threat to public well-being are the basis for land use
planning policies preventing exposure to excessive community noise levels.
Unfortunately, there is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of
noise or of the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. This is primarily
because of the wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and habituation to noise
over differing individual experiences with noise. Thus, an important way of determining a
person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is the comparison of it to the existing
environment to which one has adapted: the so-called “ambient” environment. In general, the
more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the
new noise will be judged. Regarding increases in A-weighted noise levels, knowledge of the
following relationships will be helpful in understanding this analysis:
Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dB cannot be perceived
by humans;
Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dB change is considered a just-perceivable difference;
A change in level of at least 5 dB is required before any noticeable change in community
response would be expected. An increase of 5 dB is typically considered substantial;
A 10-dB change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would
almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-14 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
8.4 Existing Noise Environment
MONITORING
Short-term (10-minute) and long-term (24-hours) noise level measurements were conducted
from October 10, 2022 through October 13, 2022 for the purpose of documenting and
measuring the existing noise environment at various locations throughout the City.
Measurement locations were selected near major noise sources and other locations of
interest within the community.
Short-Term Ambient Noise Measurements
Twenty eight short-term measurement were conducted. Short-term ambient noise
measurement locations and corresponding measured average-hourly noise levels (in dBA
Leq) are summarized in Table 8-6. Noise measurement locations are depicted in Figure 8-2.
As noted in Table 8-6, measured daytime noise levels ranged from approximately 40 to 73
dBA Leq. Ambient noise levels are largely influenced by vehicle traffic on area roadways. To a
lesser extent, aircraft overflights and other noise sources within the community (e.g.,
landscaping, industrial activities, construction activities) also contribute to the ambient noise
environment.
Long-Term Ambient Noise Measurements
Two long-term measurements were conducted, which are identified as LT-1 and LT-2 in
Figure 8-2. Noise measurement location LT-1 was located approximately 110 feet from U.S.
Highway 101, near San Palo Road. Noise measurement location LT-2 was located
approximately 500 feet from U.S Highway 101 and 300 feet from El Camino Real. Measured
ambient noise levels for noise measurement locations LT-1 and LT-2 are summarized in
Tables 8-7 through 8-8, respectively.
As noted in Tables 8-7, measured ambient noise levels at location LT-1 ranged from
approximately 68 dBA Leq during the nighttime hours to a high of approximately 81 dBA Leq,
during the daytime hours. Average-daily noise levels at location LT-1 measured 81 dBA
CNEL/Ldn. Measured ambient noise levels at location LT-2 ranged from approximately 48 dBA
Leq during the nighttime hours to a high of approximately 58 dBA Leq during the daytime
hours. Average-daily noise levels at location LT-2measured 57 dBA CNEL/Ldn. In general,
nighttime noise levels are typically 5-10 dB lower than daytime noise levels.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-15
Figure 8-2: Ambient Noise Measurement Locations
0.5
I
'I
'I
I_
'I
' I ' ~ '~,,.o~~-
~-,.
,
~ I
I
I
I
Losl'mires-
Nationul. For..:;,'(/
2
0
.... ~. ~
<:',..(' .,~
,..(',t:".( (<,,r"L
~! o> -?0-
3
Miles
li,ws Rive,.
J
I I
l -.l
SAN LU I S
OB I SPO COUNTY
IEm
Atascadero
O U R C ITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 8-2
Ambient No ise Measurement Locations
Basemap Features
,--7 Atascadero City Limits 1.. __ ,
C:=J Atascadero Planning Area
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Sphere of Influence
Major Roads + Freeways
Noise Measurement Locations
• Long-Term (LT) Measurement
Q Short-Term (ST) Measurement
Notes ;md Sources:
Refer to Tvbl0s 8 6, 8 7, c1nd 8 8 for corresponding noise measuramcnt d<.,t<1, Ambi0nt
Air Qua lay & Noise Consulting, Esri, US Cons us, County of S<1rt Luis Obispo Open
V~ta, Cily of /1.losc:odew 2023.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-16 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 8-6: Summary of Short-Term Measured Ambient Noise Levels
Measurement Location Measurement
Period
Primary Noise
Sources
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
October 10, 2022
ST1 7800 Del Rio
Road
10:41 – 10:51 Birds, Electrical
Equipment
44.3
ST2 Apple Valley Park 11:03 – 11:13 Birds, Traffic,
People Walking
on Path
45.3
ST3 5400 Santa Cruz
Road
11:50 – 12:00 Distant Traffic,
Birds
57.7
ST4 San Benito
Elementary
School
12:10 – 12:20 Birds, Truck Passby 50.3
ST5 Monterey Road
Elementary
School
12:32 – 12:42 Traffic, Birds 63.2
ST6 The Lakes Lake 12:57 – 13:07 Birds 41.5
ST7 High School Hill Road 15:08 – 15:18 Traffic, Dogs 52.6
October 11, 2022
ST8 Hope Lutheran Church 10:02 – 10:12 Traffic, Propeller
Plane Overflight,
Dogs, Birds
50.7
ST9 9600 Atascadero Avenue 10:26 – 10:36 Traffic, Birds 60.5
ST10 Paloma Creek Park 10:47 – 10:57 Distant Traffic, Children, Birds 44.4
ST11 Heilmann
Regional Park
11:10 – 11:20 Traffic, Golf Cart,
Birds, Squirrels
40.4
ST12 8500 El Corte
Road
11:31 – 11:41 Traffic 52.5
ST13 Pueblo Avenue/
Sombrilla Avenue
11:53 – 12:03 Traffic,
Conversation, Propeller Plane Overflight, Dogs
53.5
ST14 7700 Aragon Road 12:16 – 12:26 Dogs, Birds 49.6
ST15 7100 Sycamore Road 12:40 – 12:50 Traffic, Birds, Children, Sheep/Goat
64.7
I I I I
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-17
Measurement Location Measurement
Period
Primary Noise
Sources
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
ST16 5454 CA-41
Parking
13:03 – 13:13 Traffic 64.8
ST17 Traffic Way Park 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 57.8
October 12, 2022
ST18 12500 CA-41 10:51 – 11:01 Traffic 67.9
ST19 Atascadero Lake Park 11:25 – 11:35 Traffic 63.9
ST20 Nogales Avenue/ Lobos Avenue 11:56 – 12:06 Traffic, Birds, Dog, Distant Power Tool
53.4
ST21 3300 El Camino Real 12:19 – 12:29 Traffic 68.2
ST22 1000 San Ramon Road 13:24 – 13:34 Traffic 71.2
ST23 6000 San Gabriel Road 14:06 – 14:16 Traffic, Propeller Plane Overflight 56.8
October 13, 2022
ST24 10700 El Camino Real 10:40 – 10:50 Traffic 66.9
ST25 8965 El Camino Real 11:00 – 11:10 Traffic 71.7
ST26 Sunken Gardens 11:22 – 11:32 Traffic, Water
Fountain
58.3
ST27 4890 Alamo
Avenue
11:45 – 11:55 Dogs, Vehicle
Passby
56.0
ST28 6050 Marchant
Avenue
12:56 – 13:06 Traffic 73.1
Notes: Noise measurements were conducted from October10, 2022 through October 13, 2022. Refer to Figure 8-2 for noise measurement
locations.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-18 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Table 8-7: Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-1
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
14:00 77.4
15:00 77.6
16:00 77.9
17:00 78.6
18:00 78.7
19:00 77.1
20:00 75
21:00 74.3
22:00 73.5
23:00 72.5
0:00 69.5
1:00 69.5
2:00 68.4
3:00 69.4
4:00 71.8
5:00 75.4
6:00 79
7:00 80.5
8:00 80.2
9:00 78.4
10:00 77.8
82
80
~ 78 C" OJ -' 76 <( ~ 74
a:; 72 > a, 70 _J
a, .!!! 68 0 z 66
64
62
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 ~ Lli <D ,:..: 00 cri 0 ,:..; r-i ;,; 0 M N rf) ~ U") <O r--00 O"l 0 ,:..; r-i ;,;
M M M M M M N N N N M M M M
Measurement Hour
{October 12, 2022 to October 13, 2022)
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-19
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
11:00 77.7
12:00 77.7
13:00 78
Notes: Average-daily noise level measured 81 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Refer to Figure 8-2 for noise measurement location.
Table 8-8: Measured Long-Term Noise Levels – Measurement Location LT-2
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
15:00 55.7
16:00 57.5
17:00 54.9
18:00 53.3
19:00 53.8
20:00 52
21:00 51.2
22:00 50.3
23:00 49.7
0:00 48.1
1:00 48.6
2:00 47.5
3:00 47.7
4:00 49.3
82
80
-78 er QJ --' 76 <( ~ 74
Q.J 72 > Q.J 70 --'
Q.J .!:'.! 68 0 z 66
64
62
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 "<t .:,; .:ci r=-.: 00 cri 0 ,:..; N ,;; 0 ,-1 N m "<t Lil I.O r--00 O'l 0 ,:..; N ,;;
,-1 ,-1 ,-1 ,-1 ,-1 ,-1 N N N N ,-1 ,-1 ,-1 ,-1
Measurement Hour
{October 12, 2022 to October 13, 2022)
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-20 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Measurement Hour Noise Level (dBA Leq)
5:00 49.3
6:00 53.9
7:00 53.5
8:00 52.7
9:00 52.4
10:00 54.5
11:00 55.8
12:00 53.4
13:00 52
14:00 52.3
Notes: Average-daily noise level measured 57 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Refer to Figure 8-2 for noise measurement location.
NOISE SOURCES
Surface Transportation Sources
Roadway Vehicular Traffic
As noted earlier in this report, noise from vehicular traffic on area roadways is a primary
source of ambient noise in the City. Major sources of roadway traffic noise within the City of
Atascadero include United States Highway 101 (US-101), State Route 41 (SR-41). To a lesser
extent, El Camino Real and Traffic Way contribute to roadway traffic noise.
Traffic noise levels were calculated using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Roadway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) based on average-daily traffic (ADT)
volumes obtained from the Caltrans Traffic Census Program (Caltrans 2022). Predicted
existing traffic noise levels and distances to traffic noise contours for major roadways are
summarized in Table 8-9. Based on the modeling conducted, existing traffic noise levels
along area roadways range from approximately 67 to 79 dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the near-
travel-lane centerline. The primary generator of traffic noise within the City of Atascadero is
US-101. Existing average-daily noise levels at 50 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline of
US-101 are approximately 79 dBA CNEL. Existing transportation noise contours within the City
of Atascadero are depicted in Figure 8-3.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-21
Table 8-9. Existing Roadway Traffic Noise Levels & Contour Distances
Roadway Segment
ADT
Volumes
CNEL at 50 ft.
from Near-
travel-lane
Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contour
(Feet from Road
Centerline)
70 65 60
US-101: Santa Barbara Rd to Santa Rosa Rd 55,000 78.7 313 669.8 1,440.6
US-101: Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave 55,000 78.7 313 669.8 1,440.6
US-101: Curbaril Ave to SR-41 55,000 78.7 313 669.8 1,440.6
US-101: SR-41 to Traffic Way 63,000 77.5 260.9 556.5 1,196.1
US-101: Traffic Way to San Anselmo Rd 63,000 77.5 260.9 556.5 1,196.1
US-101: San Anselmo Rd to del Rio Rd 63,000 77.5 260.9 556.5 1,196.1
US-101: Del Rio Rd to San Ramon Rd 65,000 77.6 266.2 568.1 1,221.3
US-101: San Ramon Rd to Vineyard
Rd
65,000 77.6 261.6 558.1 1,221.3
SR-41: Cerro Alto Rd to Santa Rosa
Rd
10,000 70.4 59.8 128.4 276.3
SR-41: Santa Rosa Rd to US-101 12,000 66.6 WR 75.1 160.9
SR-41: US-101 to El Camino Real 12,000 70.2 82.2 167.5 356.2
SR-41: El Camino Real to CA-229 12,000 75.7 134.3 289.0 622.4
Notes: Traffic volumes for US-101 and SR-41 were derived from Caltrans Traffic Census Program for year 2020. Does not include shielding from
intervening structures or terrain.
Source(s): Caltrans 2022
As noted in Table 8-9 and depicted in Figure 8-3, major roadway corridors located within the
City include US-101 and SR-41. Existing noise-sensitive land uses located along these traffic
corridors consist predominantly of residential land uses the nearest of which are generally
located approximately 50 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline of US-101 and
approximately 27 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline of SR-41. Other noise-sensitive
land uses generally located along these corridors include, but are not limited to, places of
worship, hotels, and recreational uses.
Railroad Traffic
The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) runs north-south through the City near the western City
limits with a portion of the tracks adjacent to Traffic Way. Depending on demand,
approximately five trains pass through the City on a daily basis. including three freight trains
and two passenger trains (Amtrak Coast Starlight).
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-22 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Existing train noise levels and distance to noise contours are summarized in Table 8-10.
Based on a conservative estimate of 5 trains per day, average-daily noise levels along the
railroad corridor would be approximately 66 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the rail corridor
centerline. Train noise events can also be a source of intermittent noise, including noise
generated by locomotive engines, wheel squeal, and warning horns. These instantaneous
noise events can contribute to increased levels of annoyance to occupants of nearby noise-
sensitive land uses. Existing transportation noise contours within the City of Atascadero are
depicted in Figure 8-3.
Table 8-10. Existing Railroad Traffic Noise Levels
Train Type
Number of
Trains/Day
CNEL at 100
feet from
Railroad Track
Centerline
Distance to CNEL Contours
(feet) from Railroad Track
Centerline
70 65 60
Freight & Passenger 5 66 51 108 233
Notes: UPRR freight trains distributed equally over a 24-hour period. Does not include shielding provided by intervening terrain or structures.
Does not include shielding from intervening structures or terrain. Projected railroad noise contours are depicted in Figure 8-3.
Existing noise-sensitive land uses located along the UPRR corridor consist predominantly of
residential land uses the nearest of which are generally located approximately 25 feet from
the UPRR track centerline. Other nearby noise-sensitive land uses include Chalk Mountain
Golf Course, which is located approximately 70 feet from the track centerline.
Non-Transportation Sources
Within the City, major non-transportation noise sources consist predominantly of industrial
and commercial land uses. Many industrial processes produce noise, even when the best
available noise control technology is applied. Noise exposures within industrial facilities are
controlled by federal and state employee health and safety regulations (i.e., regulations of the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor [OSHA] and
the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health [Cal-OSHA]). Exterior noise levels
that affect neighboring parcels are typically subject to local standards. Commercial,
recreational, and public facility activities can also produce noise that may affect adjacent
noise-sensitive land uses. These noise sources can be continuous or intermittent and may
contain tonal components that are annoying to individuals who live nearby. For instance,
emergency-use sirens and backup alarms are often considered nuisance noise sources but
may not occur frequently enough to be considered incompatible with noise-sensitive land
uses. In addition, noise generation from fixed noise sources may vary based upon climate
conditions, time of day, and existing ambient noise levels.
From a land-use planning perspective, stationary-source noise control issues focus on two
goals: (1) preventing the introduction of new noise-producing uses in noise-sensitive areas;
and (2) preventing encroachment of noise-sensitive uses upon existing noise-producing
facilities. The first goal can be achieved by applying noise performance standards to
proposed new noise producing uses. The second goal can be met by requiring that new
noise-sensitive uses near noise-producing facilities include noise-reduction measures to
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-23
Figure 8-3: Transportation Noise Contours
0.5
~
<>,_ J'
('><f> ,;)'"t
c,. "< \ ~ (<>(<>~ ':'::~
, f' l "'"
,f j ~-~
f e--/ I /\
I \ ~ I /
I _,,
I
Los Padres
National Forest
2 3
Miles
linas River
SAN LUIS
OBISPO COUNTY
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Figure 8-3
Transportation Noise Contours
Basemap Features
,--7
L--'
CJ
Atascadero City Limits
Atascadero Planning Area
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks + Open Space
Sphere of Influence
Major Roads + Freeways
Existing Noise Contours
CNEL in dB(A)
1111 > 70
65 -70
Notes and Sources:
Predicted noise contours do not include shielding from intervening structures or
terrain. Ambient Air Quality & Noise Consulting, Esri, US Census, County of San Luis
Obispo Open Data, City of Atascadero 2023.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-24 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
ensure compliance with noise performance standards. Each of these goals stresses the
importance of avoiding the location of new uses that may be incompatible with adjoining
uses.
The following discussions of existing non-transportation noise sources in the community are
intended to be representative of the sources and relative noise levels associated with such
uses. The average-hourly noise levels (in dBA Leq) discussed for these sources provide an
indication of the noise levels that can generally be expected to occur over an extended
period of time. The Leq noise levels do not necessarily reflect possible intermittent high noise
levels associated with the various uses but are useful for general planning purposes. Actual
noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive receptors will vary depending on the operational
characteristics of the facility, meteorological conditions, and the physical landscape.
Non-transportation noise sources within the City consist predominantly of commercial and
industrial uses. To a somewhat lesser extent, other non-transportation noise sources would
also include automotive/equipment repair and maintenance facilities, and construction
activities. Noise levels associated with some of the more common non-transportation noise
sources located throughout the community are discussed in more detail, as follows:
Commercial and Industrial Uses
Within the City planning area, commercial and industrial land uses are located primarily
along major roadway and the UPRR corridor. Noise sources commonly associated with these
land uses include truck traffic, loading dock activities, heavy-equipment operation, and
building mechanical systems. Major industrial and commercial operations within the
community include metal and glass recycling centers, trucking distribution centers, and food
and agricultural products processing. Various other activities, such as loading dock activities,
can result in temporary or intermittent increases in ambient noise levels. In general, noise
levels associated with these uses can range from approximately 55 to 85 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Noise levels associated with commercial and industrial land uses can vary depending on
various factors, including site conditions, equipment operated, and the specific activities
being conducted. As a result, actual noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive receptors will likely
vary depending on the above mentioned conditions and other influences, such as location,
distance from source, shielding provided by intervening terrain and structures, and ground
attenuation rates. For this reason, noise generated by commercial and industrial uses and
impacts to nearby noise-sensitive land uses should be evaluated on a project-by-project and
site-specific basis.
Other Non-Transportation Noise Sources
Various other non-transportation noise sources can contribute to noticeable increases in
ambient noise levels. Such sources would include, but are not limited to, recreational uses or
events, particularly those that utilize amplified sound systems (e.g., sporting events, concerts,
festivals, public actions, animal/vehicle exhibitions, etc.); automotive repair facilities; building
mechanical systems, and landscape maintenance activities. Noise generated by such sources
are often directional and can vary depending on site and operational characteristics.
Concerts and Live Music
Outdoor live music, festivals, and concert events are hosted at several locations within the
City; such as, the Atascadero Lake Park, the Sunken Gardens, and The Plaza. Noise levels
associated with live music and concerts can vary depending on musical style (e.g., rock, pop,
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-25
metal, hip-hop, classical, etc.) and amplification. Additionally, noise generated from
amplification (speakers) is directional, which can greatly affect operational noise levels at
offsite locations.
Landscape Maintenance
Landscape maintenance activities often result in sporadic and intermittent increases in
ambient noise levels. Equipment used for landscape maintenance often include the use of
power mowers and leaf blowers. Leaf blowers and gasoline-powered lawnmowers can result
in intermittent noise levels of up to approximately 100 dBA at 3 feet (EPA 1971). Resultant
exterior noise levels could reach intermittent levels of approximately 75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.
The use of leaf blowers, particularly when used during the more noise-sensitive evening and
nighttime hours, may result in increased levels of annoyance.
Automotive Maintenance & Repair
Typical automotive maintenance and repair activities often include the use of pneumatic
tools, air compressors, and power generators. Other equipment operations such as the use of
power hand tools (e.g., sanders, drills, grinders, pneumatic wrenches, etc.), typically generate
a lesser degree of noise. The use of air compressors, power generators, and pneumatic tools
can generate noise levels of up to approximately 85 dBA at 50 feet. Noise levels generated by
the use of hand-held tools, such as sanders, drills, and grinders, typically average between 63
and 87 dBA at 3 feet. The use of multiple hand tools, such as grinders being used on metal,
can generate levels of 87 to 97 dBA at 3 feet (EPA 1971, FHWA 2008). Noise levels associated
with these facilities would be dependent on the specific activities performed and
source/facility characteristics.
Building Mechanical Systems
The majority of electrical and mechanical equipment in buildings is used for air circulation
systems. Mechanical systems may also include pumping systems, elevators and escalators,
and various other material conveyance systems. Much of this equipment is located in
mechanical equipment rooms or in areas that provide shielding from direct public/personnel
exposure (i.e., above ceilings, in walls, or behind enclosures.) Equipment located within
exterior areas can result in increases in ambient noise levels, particularly when located in
unshielded areas and within line-of-sight of nearby receptors. Such equipment would
include air-conditioning units, cooling towers, compressors, fans/turbines, electrical
transformers, chillers, and pumps. Noise levels associated with these sources can vary
depending on the specific equipment being operated, facility/equipment design, and
operational characteristics. Typical noise levels associated with building mechanical
equipment can range from less than 50 to 110 dBA at 3 feet, with the highest noise levels
reaching approximately 85 dBA at 50 feet from the source.
Construction Activities
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending upon the nature or
phase (e.g., demolition/land clearing, grading, and excavation, erection) of construction.
Noise generated by construction equipment, including pile drivers, material handling
equipment, pavers, jackhammers, and portable generators, can result in intermittent and
prolonged increases in ambient noise levels. Although construction noise impacts are
generally short-term, they can result in increased levels of annoyance to occupants of nearby
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-26 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
residential dwellings. In general, noise levels generated by construction activities can range
from approximately 71 to 83 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the source.
Noise-generating construction activities are currently regulated through implementation of
the City’s Noise Control ordinance, which generally limits these activities to the less noise-
sensitive daytime hours (City of Atascadero 2022).
8.5 Sensitive Land Uses
NOISE-SENSITIVE LAND USES
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses that would result in
noise exposure that could cause health-related risks to individuals. Places where quiet is
essential are also considered noise-sensitive uses. Residential dwellings are of primary
concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both
interior and exterior noise levels. Other land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and
recreation areas are also considered potentially sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels.
School classrooms, places of assembly, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior
noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses.
The following noise-sensitive land uses have been identified within the City of Atascadero:
Residential land uses, including single-family units and multi-family units
Schools
Atascadero State Hospital
Assisted living/care facilities
Places of worship
Hotels and lodging
Community parks
Public Library
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | November 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 8: Noise | 8-27
8.6 Sources
REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2017. General Plan Guidelines.
Website url: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf.
City of Atascadero. Accessed: October 2022. Atascadero, California Municipal code. Website
url: https://library.qcode.us/lib/atascadero_ca/pub/municipal_code/item/title_9-
chapter_14.
City of Atascadero. June 25, 2002. Atascadero General Plan, Safety & Noise Element. Website
url:
https://www.atascadero.org/files/CD/General%20Plan/Atascadero%20GP%202025.pdf.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Accessed: December 17, 2021. The Train Horn Rule and
Quiet Zones. Website url: https://railroads.dot.gov/highway-rail-crossing-and-
trespasser-programs/train-horn-rulequiet-zones/train-horn-rule-and-quiet.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). December 31, 1971. Noise From
Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home
Appliances.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1974. Information on Levels of
Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an
Adequate Margin of Safety.
United States Housing & Urban Development (HUD). Accessed: December 17, 2021. Website
url: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-51.
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2008.
Roadway Construction Noise Model. Version 1.1.
DATA
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Accessed: October 25, 2022. Traffic Census
Program. Website url: https://dot.ca.gov/ programs/traffic-operations/census.
Public Draft | November 2023 Existing Conditions Report
8-28 | Chapter 8: Noise City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
8.7 Acronyms and Key Terms
ADT: Average-Daily Traffic
Caltrans: California Department of Transportation
CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB: Decibels
dBA: A weighted decibels
EPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FHWA: Federal Highway Administration
HUD: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development
Hz: Hertz
Ldn: Annual-Average Day-Night Noise Level
Leq: Equivalent Sound Level
OPR: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
UPRR: Union Pacific Railroad
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX I
2045 General Plan Existing Conditions Report |
Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-1
2045 General Plan
Existing Conditions
Report
Chapter 4: Transportation and
Mobility
tasca ero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
Public Draft | August 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-2 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Transportation and Mobility Findings
REGULATORY SETTING
1. Recent changes to State law eliminated vehicular delay, typically measured as level of
service (LOS), as an environmental impact since this metric discouraged infill and
high-density development and was counterproductive for meeting the State’s
emissions goals. Instead, the State has mandated that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) be
used to identify transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). This change will likely reduce barriers to development projects that
improve jobs-housing ratios, are well served by transit, and develop within mixed-use
corridors like El Camino Real and Morro Road (SR 41). Infrequent transit and low
density development is a challenge for reducing VMT due to transit service.
2. SLOCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) reflects a preferred land use alternative
where land use growth is focused on mixed-use corridors like El Camino Real and
Morro Road (SR 41) which are more transportation efficient. This preferred alternative
is the basis for future year transportation modeling used to identify regional
transportation projects. The RTP lists programmed funding for multiple projects in
the city, including improvements to the US 101/Del Rio Road interchange,
replacement of the Via Avenue bridge, installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon at
the El Camino Real/East Mall intersection, and implementation of Phase 2 of the
planned SR 41 complete streets improvements from El Camino Real to San Gabriel
Road.
EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM
1. Atascadero has 145 miles of roadways, more than any other city in the county.
Maintaining the extensive roadway network has been an ongoing challenge for the
City since funding typically comes from the General Fund. Voters approved a one-half
percent sales tax in 2014 (Measure F-14) that the City has used to fund roadway
maintenance, with a 12-year term that generated $3.1 million in 2022 and $2.8 million
in 2021. The existing pavement condition index (PCI) for the city’s roads is 50, well
below the target of 75. This translates into a current and ongoing need for roadway
maintenance and surface improvements.
2. The El Camino Real corridor is identified as a priority for land use growth in multiple
studies. The downtown portion of the corridor has planned improvements to enhance
safety for multi-modal travel (e.g., reduce the number of vehicle travel lanes to make
room for other parking, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and/or streetscape improvements),
improve pedestrian accessibility, and increase parking.
3. The US 101 freeway bisects Atascadero and limits east-west access. Of the eight
freeway interchanges, most were constructed in the 1960s and are undersized or
outdated, creating congestion and barriers for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
Future interchange upgrades will be costly and will need to be prioritized in
consultation with Caltrans.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-3
PARKING
1. Community members have identified parking as an important issue. Parking surveys
show that the overall peak parking demand in Atascadero is less than half the
available parking supply in the City core. However, many parking spaces are privately
controlled, inefficiently allocated, or located away from key destinations. Parking
within or near larger multi-family areas is also impacted, often due to limited on-
street parking due to narrow roads in hilly areas. Parking management techniques,
such as limited hour or permits, could be used to make parking areas more efficient.
TRANSIT
1. Atascadero is served by fixed-route bus transit service along the El Camino Real
corridor through the SLO Regional Transit Authority. The City also provides dial-a-ride
services, and Amtrak provides bus services. Existing bus transit stops are largely
concentrated along El Camino Real, with limited access to western residential
neighborhoods. Bus service is also infrequent, which hinders the ability for the
community to fully rely on transit.
BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND TRAIL FACILITIES
1. Atascadero’s climate, City core topography, and development patterns in mixed-use
areas are conducive to recreational and commute bicycle trips. However, the bicycle
commute mode share in the city is lower than the statewide average (1.6% versus 3.1%)
due to a limited and incomplete bicycle network which is a function of the City’s
topography, rural nature, and large size. With a growing interest to encourage
outdoor recreation and support local and regional emissions reduction goals, the City
sees opportunities to expand the bicycle network and create improved connections
to schools, commercial areas, and other destinations. The City’s Bicycle Transportation
Plan lists 18 planned bicycle infrastructure projects to improve the bicycle network.
2. Approximately 4.5% of commute trips in the city are made by walking, which is
substantially higher than the statewide average of 2.7%. The city’s steep topography
and low-density land uses on the west side tend to discourage destination walking,
but the higher densities and mix of uses on the east side generally support walking.
Walking is hindered in more residential and rural parts of the city due to topography,
physical constraints, sidewalk gaps or missing sidewalks, and limited crossings.
3. Safe Routes to School evaluations, led by SLOCOG, identified Santa Rosa Academic
Academy, Atascadero Middle School, and Atascadero High School as having the
greatest need for investment in the region and will be prioritized for capital
improvements.
4. Many of the US 101 interchanges in the city serve as barriers to pedestrian and bicycle
access.
FREIGHT AND GOODS MOVEMENT
1. Union Pacific (UPRR) operates mainline rail freight service between the San Francisco
Bay Area and Southern California along the Coast Line. Through Atascadero, the Coast
Line runs generally north-south, parallel to and west of the Salinas River. There are
Public Draft | August 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-4 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
three at-grade railway crossings and three grade-separated crossings. There are no
rail stops in the City limiting the potential for goods delivery via rail.
2. US 101, running north-south bisecting central Atascadero, serves as the main
thoroughfare for the movement of commercial goods to and from the city.
AVIATION
1. Atascadero does not contain any airports within its city limits but is served by airports
in neighboring cities. The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is a regional hub
for passenger air travel. The airport offers non-stop flights to Seattle, San Diego,
Portland, Phoenix, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. The
Paso Robles Municipal Airport serves private charter flights and seeks to become a
space port.
TRAVEL AND COMMUTE PATTERNS
1. Atascadero has a jobs-housing ratio of 0.80, indicating substantially more households
than jobs in the city. Over 10,700 Atascadero residents were employed outside of the
city in 2019, while 6,000 employees traveled to Atascadero for work. Nearly 3,000
residents live and work in the city. Nationally, the number of people primarily working
from home tripled between 2019 and 2021.
2. Over 81% of commuters in Atascadero drive alone to work. An additional 11% of
commuters carpool via car, truck, or van. Nearly 1.5% of commuters use public
transportation and roughly 4.5% of commuters travel to work by walking,
considerably higher than the statewide rate of 2.7%. The mean travel time to work for
City residents is 23 minutes.
NETWORK PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY
1. Congestion is typically localized near undersized Highway 101 interchanges and
schools during pick-up and drop-off times. Generally, congestion is short-lived and
most drivers experience low levels of delay outside of short peak periods. Traffic
volumes on local streets have not increased substantially over the past 20 years.
2. Between 2015 and 2019, more than one-third of the collisions in Atascadero resulted
from vehicles traveling at unsafe speeds. Over the past 10 years, 145 reported collisions
involving cyclists or pedestrians have occurred, the majority along El Camino Real and
Morro Road/State Route 41. Residents have highlighted roadway and traffic safety as a
major concern.
3. The City’s Local Road Safety Plan provides recommendations for 20 safety hot spots as
well as systemic improvements to address collisions associated with lane departure,
unsafe speed, traffic signals, lighting, DUI, pedestrian, and bicycle safety.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-5
4.1 Introduction
The City of Atascadero is in northern San Luis Obispo County and was laid out as a part of the
1913 Atascadero Colony plan that reflected low-intensity land uses and the nascent
automobile use of the time. The original roadway network used a radial pattern, expanding
out from the City Hall area, that was connected by arterial rings. There were some limited
areas in the city’s core that formed a grid pattern. The construction of US 101 in 1954
effectively bisected the city and lead to commercial uses developing along the El Camino
Real Corridor, along with numerous bottlenecks where local traffic crosses US 101 at eight
interchanges.
This chapter is organized into the following sections:
Section 4.1: Introduction
Section 4.2: Regulatory Setting
Section 4.3: Transportation Agencies and Service Providers
Section 4.4: Existing Roadway System
Section 4.5: Parking
Section 4.6: Transit
Section 4.7: Bicycle and Trail Facilities
Section 4.8: Pedestrian Network
Section 4.9: Freight and Goods Movement
Section 4.10: Aviation
Section 4.11: Travel Characteristics and Commute Patterns
Section 4.12: Network Performance and Safety
Section 4.13: Appendix A: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Section 4.14: Sources
Section 4.15: Acronyms and Key Terms
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-6 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
4.2 Regulatory Setting
FEDERAL
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is an agency within the U.S. Department of
Transportation that supports State and local governments in the design, construction, and
maintenance of the nation’s highway system.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) manages and participates in the environmental
reviews of FTA-funded projects and has authority for the final environmental approvals. The
Office of Planning and Environment supports the Regional Offices in the review of projects
by providing in-house and contractor expertise on technical issues. The Office of Planning
and Environment also provides technical assistance on general environmental protection
and specific impact assessment methods including noise, vibration, and air quality to the
Regional offices, as well as to project sponsors and the interested public.
STATE
Numerous State policies and plans affect Atascadero’s circulation network and the planning
and design of new facilities. State transportation policies are generally more detailed and
stringent than Federal policies.
California Complete Streets Act of 2008
The Complete Streets Act requires that City general plans support the development of
multimodal transportation facilities. Complete Streets policies seek to accommodate all users
safely and efficiently, including pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and transit riders.
California Senate Bill 288 (2020)
SB 288 provides exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for some
transit, bike, and pedestrian projects.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
CEQA is a State law enacted in 1970 to require analysis of the impact of public and private
land use actions intended to inform government decisionmakers and the public about the
potential environmental effects of proposed projects and to prevent significant, avoidable
environmental damage.
California Senate Bill 743 (2013)
SB 743 requires CEQA lead agencies (often the City of Atascadero) to use vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) as the primary tool for identifying transportation impacts. This is a major
change from past practices that were reliant on level of service (LOS), a measure of vehicular
delay that discouraged infill, high density development in favor of sprawling greenfield
development. The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) published a Technical
Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA in December 2018 that recommends
thresholds and analysis methods for various project types.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-7
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Caltrans is a responsible agency under CEQA and reviews environmental documents that
affect transportation facilities under their jurisdiction. Their jurisdiction includes all Highway
101 intersections in the city limits and Highway 41.
California Transportation Plan 2050 (CTP 2050)
The CTP 2050 is a statewide, long-range transportation policy plan designed to meet
California’s future mobility needs and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The plan
envisions a fully integrated, multimodal, sustainable transportation system that supports
economic vitality, protects natural resources, promotes the health and well-being of all
Californians, and meets people’s needs equitably.
REGIONAL
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) serves as both the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency and Metropolitan Planning Organization for San Luis Obispo
County and incorporated cities (including Atascadero). SLOCOG allocates Federal and State
transportation funds as an association of local governments within the region.
Draft 2023 Regional Transportation Plan
SLOCOG is required to prepare and adopt a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every four
years. The RTP outlines regional transportation policies and identifies projects and funding to
support transportation needs. The Administrative Draft 2023 RTP was released in December
2022. It lists four constrained (i.e., funded) projects in Atascadero. These include
improvements to the US 101/Del Rio Road interchange, replacement of the Via Avenue bridge
over Atascadero Creek, installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon at the El Camino Real/East
Mall intersection, and implementation of Phase 2 of the planned SR 41 complete streets
improvements from El Camino Real to San Gabriel Road. The RTP is scheduled to be released
for public review in January 2023, and additional traffic modeling work related to VMT is
currently underway.
LOCAL
The City of Atascadero has a variety of local planning documents informing improvements to
the transportation network.
Atascadero Bicycle Transportation Plan (2010)
The Bicycle Transportation Plan provides a blueprint for the development of bicycle facilities
within Atascadero, with goals of encouraging recreational cycling by residents and visitors.
The plan documents existing bicycle facilities and shows opportunities for additional
improvements in the short and long term.
Atascadero Parking Utilization and Management Study (2006)
The Parking Utilization and Management Study reports that the downtown area has a total
parking supply of 3,020 spaces, 85% of which are in off-street lots, many of them private. The
maximum observed demand was 1,138 spaces, with more than half of available spaces both
on- and off-street available. The study recommends the development of a parking in-lieu fee
to encourage infill development where on-site parking is infeasible or undesirable. It
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-8 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
recommends the development of employee parking areas and designated areas for business
loading and deliveries and recommends improved pedestrian lighting levels in parking areas
and connecting pedestrian paths. The plan notes that there is currently adequate parking
supply to accommodate both existing and planned development.
Atascadero Local Road Safety Plan (2022)
The Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) systematically evaluates collision data on city streets to
identify high-priority roadway safety issues. This analysis supports the development of
appropriate countermeasures to best address safety priorities. More than 1/3 of collisions in
the city had a primary collision factor of unsafe speed, which corresponds to a ranking of 13th
highest number of speeding-related collisions out of 94 similar-sized cities in California. In
addition to unsafe speeds, the LRSP focuses on collisions associated from lane departures,
traffic signals, lighting, driving under the influence, pedestrian safety, and bicycle safety.
SR 41 Corridor Study
A Complete Streets Feasibility Study was completed for State Route 41 between El Camino
Real and the City’s western city limits. The study evaluated potential improvements to the
roadway that would improve safety for all modes of transportation while continuing to
provide access to businesses. Improvement to bicycle and pedestrian access along
Atascadero Avenue was added to the plan. The final plan included Class IV protected
bikeways on each side of the corridor.
Downtown Infrastructure Enhancement Plan
The Downtown Atascadero Infrastructure Enhancement Plan proposes repurposing a large
portion of the street width of El Camino Real to accommodate all modes of transportation.
The current design would drop a lane in each direction to make room for pedestrian and
bicycle safety improvements, street spaces and angled parking.
The El Camino Plan (2019)
The El Camino Plan evaluated two disconnected segments of El Camino Real on either side
of downtown Atascadero. The northern segment is 1.2 miles long and extends from San
Anselmo Road to Madera Place. The southern segment is 1.9 miles long and extends from
San Gabriel Road to SR 41. The plan notes that with 100 feet of right-of-way available there are
opportunities to reallocate roadway space to better serve bicycles and pedestrians.
Interchange Operational Improvement Study (2008)
The Interchange Operation Improvement Study evaluated traffic operations at six key US 101
interchanges within the city. It includes near-term and long-term improvement
recommendations for the interchanges, with a focus on improving capacity and safety by
changing traffic control. Roundabouts are recommended at many of the ramp terminals,
which will require further study to determine bridge widening needs to meet current design
standards.
City of Atascadero General Plan 2025
A general plan is a high-level policy document that is often described as the blueprint for
development. A general plan establishes the “ground rules” for conserving resources,
designing new projects, expanding public services, and improving community amenities. It
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-9
articulates the community’s vision and guides growth, change, and development over a 20-
25-year period. Adopted in June 2002, the City of Atascadero General Plan 2025 (General Plan
2025) sets the course of all planning efforts both City-initiated and developer-proposed, and
includes four chapters:
• Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element
• Circulation Element
• Safety and Noise Element
• Housing Element
The following section lists the Circulation Element goals, as they relate to this chapter of the
2045 General Plan Existing Conditions Report.
Circulation
The Circulation Element provides a long-range plan for the City of Atascadero to
accommodate the transportation of people and goods within the city using a structured
network of highways, streets, pathways, and trails. This includes all modes of transportation
including transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and equestrians in addition to motorized vehicles.
Circulation policies and programs have been developed to achieve consistency with the
other elements of the General Plan, to reflect current community desires, and to provide a
safe and efficient circulation system. The Circulation Element has been developed to be
consistent with policies of the APCD, SLOCOG, San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA), Caltrans, and other regional agencies. The Circulation Element also reflects the
importance of neighborhood quality as well as vehicle, bicyclist, and pedestrian safety, and
emphasizes policies and programs to reduce vehicle use by promoting alternative modes of
travel. The goals of the 2002 Circulation Element include:
• CIR 1: Provide a balanced, safe, and efficient circulation system that serves all
segments of the community and is designed and constructed to preserve rural
character.
• CIR 2: Provide for walkways, horse trails, and bikeways without curbs and sidewalks in
rural areas. Provide a comprehensive system of routes to schools and parks which
include creekside trails.
• CIR 3: Provide and promote alternative modes of travel to reduce traffic congestion
and improve air quality by providing viable transit alternatives.
4.3 Transportation Agencies and Service Providers
INTRODUCTION
The City of Atascadero is served by both national and regional transportation agencies and
providers. This section provides an overview of the various agencies and service providers.
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY (RTA)
RTA serves Atascadero with the Route 9 hourly fixed route bus service connecting the city to
San Luis Obispo, Santa Margarita, Templeton, Paso Robles, and San Miguel. RTA Route 9
stops in Atascadero at Viejo Camino and Bocina and at the Atascadero Transit Center, in the
downtown area, near the junction of US 101 and SR 41.Amtrak
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-10 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Amtrak provides scheduled, national transit service via bus connections within Atascadero.
Service is offered through two daily buses, one northward towards San Jose, and one
southward towards Los Angeles. The only stop within Atascadero is the Transit Center in
Downtown Atascadero. Train service is available in the Cities of Paso Robles and San Luis
Obispo.
4.4 Existing Roadway System
INTRODUCTION
This section describes the existing transportation system in Atascadero. Figure 4-1 shows the
functional classifications of the city’s roadways.
STUDY LOCATIONS
The following intersections were analyzed in Fall 2022 during weekday morning and evening
peak hour periods:
1. El Camino Real/San Benito Road
2. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Road East
3. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Road West
4. El Camino Real/Curbaril Avenue
5. El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Road
6. El Camino Real/San Gabriel Road
7. El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Road
8. Traffic Way/Ardilla Avenue/US 101 SB Ramp
9. Traffic Way/Via Avenue
10. SR 41/Morro Road/Curbaril Avenue
11. SR 41/Morro Road/Atascadero Avenue
12. SR 41/Mercedes Avenue
13. Atascadero Avenue/Santa Rosa Road
The operational performance of the study intersections are discussed in Section 4.12 and on
Figure 4-5. Performance for additional intersections are also included using results from
other recent studies.
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS
Atascadero’s roadway system currently consists of the roadway types listed below. The City is
currently working to update roadway classifications.
• Freeways/Highways. Intercity or interregional connections designed for high-
volume, high-speed traffic. Freeways have controlled access, with limited cross-traffic
and connections to via interchanges.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-11
• Arterials. There are both major and minor arterials within the city limits. Major arterials connect key destinations, such as Highway 101 or El Camino Real, and
neighborhoods within the city. They are generally moderate-to-high speed roadways.
Minor arterials connect lower volume roads with major arterials, often serving areas
with less mobility or access to essential roads.
• Collectors. Connect local streets to arterials and act as key connections within
residential neighborhoods.
• Local Streets. Low-volume streets that mostly connect to residential properties. EXISTING ROADWAYS
Important roadways within Atascadero are listed below and shown in Figure 4-1. Note that
many of these roadways have different functional classifications along different segments.
• Ardilla Avenue*. A local road connecting Ardilla Road to Atascadero Avenue with no
posted speed limit.
• Ardilla Road. A minor arterial with no posted speed limit.
• Atascadero Avenue*. A minor arterial that connects Ardilla Avenue to the southerly
city limits with speed limits ranging 35-50 mph.
• Capistrano Avenue. A collector and minor arterial with a speed limit of 35 mph.
• Carmelita Road. A collector and local road with no posted speed limit.
• Curbaril Avenue*. A minor arterial and local road that connects San Marcos Road to
the railroad tracks on the East side of town. Speed limits range 35-40 mph.
• Del Rio Road. A collector, minor arterial and local road with a speed limit of 30 mph.
• East Front Street. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• El Camino Real*. El Camino is a major north-south route that spans California. Within
the vicinity of Atascadero, El Camino Real serves as a major arterial and a minor
arterial with speed limits ranging 25-45 mph.
• Graves Creek Road. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• Lewis Avenue. A minor arterial with no posted speed limit.
• Mercedes Avenue*. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• Monterey Road. A minor arterial road with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.
• Navarette Avenue. A local road with no posted speed limit.
• Potrero Road. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• Portola Road. A minor arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.
• San Anselmo Road*. A collector with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.
• San Benito Road*. A local road with speed limits of 30 mph.
• San Gabriel Road*. A collector and minor arterial with speed limits of 45 mph.
• San Jacinto. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• San Marcos. A collector and local road with no posted speed limit.
• San Ramon Road. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• Santa Barbara Road*. A minor arterial roadway with no posted speed limit.
• Santa Cruz Road. A minor arterial with no posted speed limit.
• Santa Lucia Road. Acollector and minor arterial road with a posted speed limit of 40
mph.
• Santa Rosa Road*. A minor arterial with a speed limit of 35 mph
• Santa Ysabel Avenue. A minor arterial with a posted speed limit of 25 mph.
• State Route 41 (Morro Road)*. A State highway connecting Morro Bay to Yosemite
National Park. SR 41 is a two-lane east-west highway connecting Morro Bay to
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-12 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Atascadero with a posted speed limit of 55 mph. SR 41 expands to 3-5 lanes within the
vicinity of US 101 and El Camino Real and the posted speed limit is reduced to 45 mph.
• Sycamore Road. A collector with a posted speed limit of 40 mph.
• Traffic Way. A minor arterial with a speed limit of 35-40 mph.
• US Highway 101*. A major north-south interstate facility connecting Los Angeles to
San Francisco. US 101 maintains 4 lanes throughout the City of Atascadero.
• Viejo Camino. A minor arterial, collector and local road with a posted speed limit of 40
mph.
• VenandoAvenue. A local road with no posted speed limit.
• Via Avenue*. A collector with no posted speed limit.
• West Front Road. A minor arterial and collector with no posted speed limit.
• West Mall. A collector with a no posted speed limit.
* Indicates that the roadway was included in the study locations.
4.5 Parking
INTRODUCTION
Atascadero provides both on-street and off-street parking options. The City estimates that
over 1,200 public parking spaces are available within Downtown Atascadero. Previous studies
report a total parking supply of 3,020 spaces with a maximum observed demand of 1,138
spaces; more than half of the on- and off-street parking is usually available. Parking is an
important issue for key City stakeholders. Parking surveys show that although overall peak
parking demand is low, many parking spaces are privately controlled and/or inefficiently
allocated, therefore deemed unusable. On-Street Parking
On-street parking is common in Atascadero, especially Downtown, along El Camino Real,
portions of Traffic Way, and State Route 41 within the city. On-street parking is allowed on
local streets on the shoulders unless noted otherwise.
PUBLIC OFF-STREET PARKING
The City provides off-street parking at the Atascadero Transit Center and the 5454 CA-41
parking lot between State Route 41 and Hospital Drive. There are also a few park and ride lots
within the city limits, the following list provides more information:
• Santa Barbara Park and Ride Lot – Located at the south end of the city limits, on the
corner of San Antonio Road and Atascadero Avenue.
• Santa Rosa Park and Ride Lot – Located on the corner of Santa Rosa Road and W
Front Road. It neighbors the on ramps for 101 North and South.
• Curbaril Park and Ride Lot – Located on the corner of San Luis Avenue and Curbaril
Avenue, allows for easy access to Hwy 101 and is walking distance to various stores are
restaurants nearby.
• St. Williams Park and Ride Lot – Located on the corner of Santa Lucia Road and Ardilla
Road. It is positioned immediately to the right of the Traffic Way exit off of Hwy 101 for
easy access.
• Highway 41 Park and Ride Lot – Located on the east side of SR-41, after intersecting
with Hwy 101. The lot is on Hospital Drive and has access to both East and West
directions on the highway.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-13
Each of the lots described above has transit access, either in the form of direct access or
located within half of a mile of the nearest stop, and multiple bike lockers. These amenities
help to encourage commuters and community members without personal transportation to
use these facilities. Park and ride lots in San Luis Obispo County are affiliated with the
Rideshare program and serve as a neutral location for vanpooling or other forms of
carpooling.
Existing Conditions Report Administrative Draft | Jan 2023
14 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Figure 4-1: Existing Roadway System
0.5
Los Padres
National Forest
2
TEMPLETON
CS D
3
Miles
SAN
O BI SPO
L U I S
COUN T Y
Atascadero
O U R CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 4-1
Road Classification
Basemap Features
.--7 Atascadero City Limits L __ ,
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
C:J Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks+ Open Space
Major Roads + Freeways
Road Classification
= Freeway
Major Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local
Source(s):
Local I Privately Maintained
Unincorporated
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Luis Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-15
4.6 Transit
INTRODUCTION
Atascadero is served by local Dial-A-Ride services, a variety of regional transit options, and
nationwide bus services.
DIAL-A-RIDE
Dial-A-Ride provides scheduled, door-to-door transit service via minibus within Atascadero.
Service is limited to weekdays from 7:30 AM to 3:30 PM and costs are based on service zones.
Fare Zone 1 consists of the city core and higher density neighborhoods. This service is
cheaper than in Fare Zone 2; the destinations served are primarily located in the eastern
section of the city, serving locations along Highway 101 and east Highway 41. Fare Zone 2
includes more rural residential areas, primarily in the western area of the city where less
citizens live. Two other locations in Templeton are included in this zone, Twin Cities Hospital
and Medical Offices on Las Tablas Road and Trader Joe’s on Vineyard Drive. Figure 4-2 shows
the Dial-A-Ride zones within city limits. Discounted rates are available for seniors, disabled
persons, and Medicare card holders. Additionally, all services follow Title IV regulations –
which require accommodations for any passenger regardless of identity. Responses to this
regulation are emphasized with the use of wheelchair lifts and bike racks on the vehicle.
REGIONAL TRANSIT
The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) Route 9 provides hourly and express fixed-route bus
service between San Miguel and San Luis Obispo. It includes stops in Paso Robles,
Atascadero, Templeton, and Santa Margarita. RTA Route 9 provides timed stops at Viejo
Camino at Bocina Lane and at the Atascadero Transit Center in downtown near the junction
of US 101 and SR 41. RTA Route 9 additionally provides numerous untimed stops on El Camino
Real as shown in Figure 4-2. All buses have ramps and are wheelchair accessible.
Runabout Paratransit is a county-wide ADA paratransit service. All vehicles are wheelchair
accessible and can accommodate additional personal items including mobility aids,
groceries, and packages. Riders must be ADA certified to qualify.
Ride-On provides specialized regional transportation services. Some of these services are
listed below.
• Veteran Express Shuttle. Door-to-door transportation for veterans in San Luis Obispo
County to local veteran’s clinics. Reservations must be made in advance and service is
limited to once per month.
• Medi-Cal & CenCal Shuttle. Free transportation to medical appointments for
individuals who cannot use public transit.
• Access Shuttle. A door-to-door transit service in San Luis Obispo County for low-
income individuals who do not have access to public transit. Service is limited to two
round-trip rides per month. Riders must be eligible to ride.
• Community Interaction Program. Door-to-door transportation for riders with
developmental disabilities. Rides must be requested in advance and services are
limited to after 5:00 PM Monday-Friday and throughout the weekends.
• Senior Go! Curb-to-curb transportation within local communities with no set
timetables or routes. Vehicles are equipped to support mobility-impaired passengers.
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-16 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Ride requests can be made within a week of the trip by calling the number provided.
Hours are limited to 9 AM – 5 PM weekdays, with a base fare of $2.50 and increases
with distance.
FAREBOX RATIOS
A metric to describe transit system financial performance is the farebox ratio. It measures the
ratio of passenger fares to total operating costs. As of 2017, the city of Atascadero had a
farebox rate of 15%. For context, the overall farebox ratio for the city of SLO Regional Transit
Authority, solely for the metro bus, is 24% - according to 2016 data from the Federal Transit
Authority (FTA). Reducing operating costs while optimizing the amount of fees passengers
pay can help increase the farebox ratio and allow for more funding. However, the City of
Atascadero has plans to move away from the farebox ratio and find new metrics that can
properly represent transit trends and highlight areas for improvement.
Transit ridership in Atascadero makes up 1.2% of total means of transportation to work.
Limited-service routes within the city discourage riders from using the bus system as a
consistent, reliable means of transportation. For long-range trips, the SLO RTA Route 9 buses
depart the two, timed stops in Atascadero every hour during the week, every three hours on
Saturday’s, and every four hours of Sunday’s. Times that do not coincide with common work
and school start times discourage commuters from relying on transit to arrive at their
destinations on time. Reliability of service should be considered when measuring the total
transit ridership for the system, since that is a strong disincentive for many riders.
AMTRAK
Amtrak provides scheduled, national transit service via bus connections within Atascadero.
Service is offered through two daily buses, one northward towards San Jose, and one
southward towards Los Angeles. Costs are based on the distance between destinations. The
only stop within Atascadero is the Transit Center in Downtown Atascadero.
Administrative Draft | Jan 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update CH4 Transportation and Mobility | 17
Figure 4-2: Existing Transit Network
0.5
I/
I/
Los Padres
National Forest
2
TEMPLETON
CS D
~
ii;o p,Jtu(-cc,
Q~ RO
Montessori Children's
House of Atascadero
e,:)16oa Rd
Monterey Road
Elementary School
San Gabriel Road
~-Elementary School , 1;,;,>..,._ ~hree Br1dges i' / , ~ ,1 o,.,..o~ Oak Preserve .)... .... -.... ... / -\
f ,-''--,--'_..,,'\-// r '--, /' -......_ 5 ' --'/ ( ... \
I "
::::,...
::::,...
3
Miles
I r I
(
creek Pufomo
~ A-town Skate Park
Fre Colony Park { sno Avenue Community
Colony Park Center O-0,,s Community Center ~ ~
,<:, -</1.-e <$>0;. lll;e AUSD Fine Arts
'<i> -1 Police Academy
1-0,\si Department .s:-,s-, @"" / \
1 EOC '!,,~I,..._..,,,,., Fire Station 1
41
/ ~[if • cef t-::. (0 . ®--Atascadero Junior
'1,,s:'..</t,, High School
e17lt0 I
SAN
O BIS PO
County
~L°ffices
Atascadero
Library
L U I S
C OU N T Y
O U R CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 4-2
Transit Network
Basemap Features
.--7 L __ , At ascadero City Limits
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
C:J Urban Services Li ne
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks+ Open Space
Major Roads + Freeways
SLO RTA Bus Stop
0 Transfer Hub
O Bus Stop I Single Dirrection
e Bus Stop I Multi-Direction
• Timed Stop
SLO RTA Route 9
Daily Route
Limited Service / Express Trips
Dial-A -Ride Service
Fare Zone 1
Fare Zone 2
Public Services
® Public Facility
® School
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data. County of San Luis Obispo. City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-18
4.7 Bicycle Facilities
INTRODUCTION
The Central Coast area has become a popular tourist destination known for its active lifestyle
and easy access to some of the most beautiful landscapes in California. Its temperate
weather and rolling terrain make it ideal for cycling. Mountain biking and recreational cycling
have become popular activities for locals and tourists alike.
Since the previous General Plan was published, the City of Atascadero published a Bicycle
Transportation Plan which assesses infrastructure needs and lists policies to improve safety
and accessibility to cycling. The Bicycle Transportation Plan outlines steps to promote
bicycling and provides recommendations for expanding bicycle facilities in the City.
Figure 4-3 shows the existing bicycle facilities in the city.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Safety is a key factor in bike ridership and infrastructure plays a critical role in providing safe
transportation routes for bicyclists. Bike routes are typically classified based on safety
features, such as separation from vehicular traffic. The following bike classification system is
commonly used to categorize the various types of bicycle routes:
• Class I – Separated Right-of-Way. A dedicated, paved pathway separated from
vehicle traffic with minimal vehicular crossings.
• Class II – Designated Right-of-Way. Shares the roadway with vehicle traffic but is a
designated space separated from traffic by pavement markings.
• Class III – Shared Right-of-Way. Shares the roadway with vehicle traffic and is not
provided dedicated space for bicycles. Class III bikeways are often delineated with
pavement markings or signage.
• Class IV – Separated Bikeway. Also known as protected bike lanes or cycletracks,
they include horizontal or vertical elements separating the bikeway from vehicular
and/or pedestrian paths,
In addition to bikeways, other infrastructure improvements may include crossings, safety
features at intersections, lighting, and bike parking at trailheads, transit stops, and
throughout the community.
Local
Currently, Atascadero provides primarily Class II bikeways which are typically located along
major arterials such as El Camino Real and portions of Traffic Way. Figure 4-3 shows planned
and existing bike routes in Atascadero by type of facility.
Caltrans is also assessing bicycle needs along the State Highways System (SHS). Bicycling is
permitted on nearly all main streets and rural intercommunity connectors in the county,
indicating that there are several opportunities to improve roadways for alternative
transportation options. As part of this assessment, infrastructure needs along the SHS were
identified including gaps in the bike network, difficult or infrequent crossings, and stressful
segments for bicyclists. Caltrans determined that there were five locations along Highway 101
in need of a bicycle crossing and that the segment along Highway 41 within the city
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-19
boundary needed improvement and was the highest priority. These locations are being
prioritized for future investments.
Regional
There are several bike trails for recreational cycling along the central coast and SLOCOG is
continuing to invest in connections between cities. The Juan Bautisa de Anza Trail (“de Anza
Trail”) is a 1,200-mile historical trail from Nogales, Arizona to San Francisco, California and runs
through the middle of Atascadero. The following trail developments are proposed within the
de Anza Trail corridor in Atascadero.
• Salinas River de Anza Trail. The Salinas River de Anza Trail is a partially constructed
35-mile trail between Santa Margarita and San Miguel. Six miles of the trail extends
through Atascadero along the Salinas River. The Salinas River Master Plan was
completed in 2014 and is intended to guide future planning decision-making for
municipalities to construct individual components over time.
• Templeton Atascadero Connector Project. The County of San Luis Obispo is
pursuing the development of a multi-use trail between Templeton and Atascadero.
The trail will extend 1 mile between South Main Street in Templeton to Atascadero.
ACCESSIBILITY
Transit services enable bicyclists to travel further distances. Bike racks are available on all
Regional Transit Authority and SLO Transit buses. Additionally, Park & Ride stations are
designated locations that provide connections between non-transit and transit modes. There
are five Park & Ride lots in Atascadero:
• St. Williams Church
• Highway 41
• Curbaril Avenue
• Santa Rosa Road
• Santa Barbara Road
All Park & Ride lots except for the St. Williams Church location currently provide bike lockers
for safe and secure bicycle storage.
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS
The Safe Routes to School Program is a nationwide initiative to increase walking and
bicycling to school through infrastructure improvements, education, enforcement, and
incentives. Increasing walking and cycling to school improves children’s physical health,
reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and relieves congestion. The regional Safe Routes to
School program is managed by SLOCOG Regional Rideshare.
The 2022 SLOCOG Safe Routes to School Family Survey found that roughly 57% of students
live less than 2 miles from their school but more than 55% of students arrive by family vehicle.
Key concerns with kids bicycling or walking to school include traffic speed, intersection
safety, and traffic volume. Routes between schools that have no safe sidewalks or have
difficult walking topography disincentivize students or people with mobility issues from
walking to and from school. Additionally, locations with no bus service leads to more cars on
the road; therefore, the concerns mentioned previously are heightened. Safety
improvements are critical to encouraging non-motorized travel for students.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-20
Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvement projects near schools may be funded
through SLOCOG. SLOCOG has evaluated the schools within the region for priority
investments based on each school’s preparedness for investment, internal need based on
social determinants, and external need based on demographics and the roadway network.
The following schools within the City of Atascadero were evaluated:
• Monterey Road Elementary
• San Benito Elementary
• San Gabriel Elementary
• Santa Rosa Academic Academy
• Atascadero Middle School
• Atascadero High School
The Santa Rosa Academic Academy, Atascadero Middle School, and Atascadero High School
were identified to have the greatest need for investment in the region and will be prioritized
for capital improvements.
SAFETY
Bike-involved collisions accounted for nearly 3.5% of total collisions in Atascadero between
2017 and 2021. There were 38 bike-related collisions reported between 2017 and 2021 in
Atascadero. 18% of the total collisions resulted in severe injury. Approximately 34% of
collisions were due to Automobile Right of Way and another 21% were due to being on the
wrong side of the road. Of the 38 collisions, 21 were along El Camino Real.
Children are particularly susceptible to the risk of fatality or severe injury as a bicyclist. The
City’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) notes that Atascadero ranks 34th out of 94 cities of
similar size for bicyclist-related collisions that resulted in a fatality or severe injury for
bicyclists under the age of 15. Bicyclist Safety has been identified as one of the key emphasis
areas in the Safety Plan. Ardilla Road and Atascadero Avenue between Traffic Way and
Atascadero High School have been prioritized in the LRSP for bicycle safety improvements to
improve connections for bicyclists between the school and the nearby downtown area.
Administrative Draft | Jan 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update CH4 Transportation and Mobility | 21
Figure 4-3: Existing Bike and Trail Facilities
0.5
Los Padres
National Forest
2
TEMPLETON
CS D
3
Miles
r'
I r ,
(
creek Pufomo
Public Facilit es
1 City Hall
2 Post Office
3 Atascadero Library
4 County Offices
5 Police Department I EOC
6 Fire Station 1
7 Fire Station 2
8 A-town Skate Park
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Public Works Corp Yard
Charles Paddock Zoo
Colony Park Community Center
Pavilion on the Lake
Senior Citizens Center
Cemetery
Waste Water Treatment Plant
Schools
16 Atascadero Junior High School
17 Monterey Road Elementary School
18 San Benito Road Elementary School
19 San Gabriel Road Elementary School
20 EOC Head Start School
21 AUSD Fine Arts Academy
22 AUSD Oak Hills Continuation High School
23 Montessori Children's House of Atascadero
24 Chalk Mountain Community School
25 North County Christian School
26 Santa Rosa Road Elementary School
27 Atascadero High School
SAN
O BISP O
L U I S
C OUN T Y
Atascadero
O U R CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 4-3
Bike and Trail Facilities
Basemap Features
.--7 Atascadero City Limits L __ ,
CJ Atascadero Planning Area
C:J Urban Servi ces Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks+ Open Space
Major Roads + Freeways
Bike and Trail Routes
M ulti-Use
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Public Services
®
®
Source(s):
Public Facility
School
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Luis Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-22
4.8 Pedestrian Facilities
INTRODUCTION
The following section summarizes pedestrian issues and provides initial direction and policy
that can ensure pedestrian movement in the city is safe, convenient, and pleasant, in
recognition that pedestrian travel is an important component of the transportation system.
Bikeway improvements often are accompanied by pedestrian network improvements.
Recent local improvements have produced safe facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists in the
community.
SAFETY
Pedestrian-involved collisions accounted for nearly 2.5% of the total collisions in Atascadero
between 2017 and 2021. There were 28 pedestrian-related collisions reported between 2017
and 2021 in Atascadero. Four collisions resulted in severe injury and one crash resulted in
fatality due to Driving Under the Influence. Approximately 32% of collisions were due to
pedestrian right-of-way and another 32 were due to pedestrian violations. Pedestrian
collisions are concentrated near downtown and the Highway 41 and El Camino Real corridors
where pedestrian activity is the greatest. Of the 28 pedestrian involved collisions, 11 were
along El Camino Real.
Children are at the greatest risk of fatality or injury as pedestrians. The City’s Local Roadway
Safety Plan notes that Atascadero ranks 10th out of 94 cities of similar size for pedestrian
collisions that result in a fatality or severe injury for pedestrians under 15 years of age.
Pedestrian Safety has been identified as one of the key emphasis areas in the Safety Plan.
Installing a pedestrian crossing signal on El Camino Real at East Mall has been listed as a
priority project to enhance pedestrian safety.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Pedestrian infrastructure may include pathways, crossings, sidewalks, walkable shoulders,
pedestrian overcrossings, and lighting.
4.9 Freight and Goods Movement
INTRODUCTION
This section summarizes the movement of goods (as distinct from people) by all modes to,
from, within, and through Atascadero. Much of the transportation infrastructure in
Atascadero serves the movement of both people and freight. Managing urban goods
movement serves to enhance economic development, reduce traffic congestion, and
contribute to other social goals. Adverse effects such as traffic accidents, noise, vibration,
emissions, and truck intrusion into residential areas are concerns that must be addressed.
RAILROADS
Union Pacific (UPRR) operates mainline rail freight service between the San Francisco Bay
Area and Southern California along the Coast Line. Through Atascadero, the Coast Line runs
generally north-south, parallel to and west of the Salinas River. There are three at-grade
railway crossings and two grade-separated undercrossing at Atascadero Creek and State
Route 41.
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-23 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
FREEWAYS
US 101, running north-south through central Atascadero serves as the main thoroughfare for
the movement of commercial goods by automobile to and from the city. The highway acts as
the most efficient connection between the city and the San Francisco Bay Area to the north,
and the Los Angeles Area to the south.
SR 46 is the primary east-west highway for freight movement via truck on the Central Coast.
To the north, I-80 is the closest similar route and to the south, I-10. This route is located in
Paso Robles, approximately 20 minutes to the north of Atascadero.
Interstate 5 is the predominant route in California for transporting freight north-south; it
connects from the Mexico-California border to the Washington-Canada border. It does not
route directly through the city of Atascadero. However, Highway 41 connects with SR-46 in
Shandon, which then connects with I-5 just outside of Kettleman City. When Interstate 5 is
closed US 101 becomes a substitute route for many trips.
4.10 Aviation
INTRODUCTION
Atascadero does not contain any airports within its city limits but is served by airports in
neighboring county communities.
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is approximately 20 miles south of the city, in
San Luis Obispo is a regional hub for passenger air travel. The airport is served by Alaska
Airlines, American Airlines, and United Airlines and offers non-stop flights to Seattle, San
Diego, Portland, Phoenix, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.
PASO ROBLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
The Paso Robles Municipal Airport is approximately 16 miles north of the city, in Paso Robles.
While no public passenger flights are offered from the airport, the airport serves private
charter flights and seeks to become a space port.
4.11 Travel Characteristics and Commute Patterns
INTRODUCTION
Atascadero is the largest city in the county by area and is home to over 29,000 residents,
ranking third largest in SLO county by population. It is centrally located between Paso
Robles, Morro Bay, and San Luis Obispo and provides housing options that are generally less
costly than some of its neighboring cities. The proximity to job centers and accessibility to
transportation corridors make Atascadero an ideal location along the Central Coast.
Employees that must travel to work outside of the city make up the largest segment of the
commuting population in Atascadero. Over 10,700 Atascadero residents were employed
outside of the city in 2019, while only 6,000 employees traveled to Atascadero for work.
Transportation is critical to the economic wellness of Atascadero’s residents and employees.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-24
Figure 4-4: Atascadero Commute Inflow and Outflow (2019 Census On the Map)
COMMUTES
Atascadero accounts for a significant portion of travel in the region at approximately 10% of
the daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the county in 2017. Data from SLOCOG shows that
daily VMT for other incorporated cities is about 13% for the city of SLO, 12% for Paso Robles,
and 2% for Pismo Beach. The COVID-19 crisis drastically changed travel patterns across the
nation. Commute trips plummeted as workers transitioned to remote working options. The
increased flexibility of remote working options enabled irregular travel patterns, such as
errands in the middle of the workday. Due to the unprecedented nature of the pandemic’s
impact on transportation, travel patterns were derived from information prior to 2020 to
reflect typical travel behavior more appropriately.
Mode Choice
Atascadero travel is predominated by personal vehicle. Data from the 2019 ACS show that
over 81% of commuters (excluding those who worked remotely) in Atascadero traveled to
♦cadero 10,733
2,827
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-25 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
work by driving alone. An additional 11% of commuters carpooled via car, truck, or van. Rates
of vehicle usage for commutes align closely with rates for the state.
Alternative transportation options were more variable when compared to statewide rates.
Nearly 1.5% of commuters used public transportation, which is slightly lower than the 2.6%
statewide public transportation rates. However, roughly 4.5% of commuters traveled to work
by walking, a considerably larger amount compared to the statewide rates of 2.7%. Other
means of transportation, including bicycling, taxis, and motorcycles accounted for only 1.6%
of total commuting trips, roughly half of the statewide average. The mode choice split
demonstrates a preference for walking and indicates that alternative modes may be less
popular due to accessibility constraints.
SLOCOG determined characteristics for disadvantaged communities in the region. These
traits include factors such as racial or ethnic minorities, disability status, household income,
households with no vehicle available, and renter affordability. Based on this definition,
SLOCOG did not designate any communities as “disadvantaged,” but rather applied a score
for each census tract based on the above characteristics. Many communities in Atascadero
have a score of about 130/350, with the areas roughly parallel and east of El Camino Real
showing the highest scores. Although they are not deemed disadvantaged, many local
communities do not have the resources to have as many options as other regional
communities. For example, preference for walking – as described in the above paragraph –
may be due to service workers not having alternative means of transportation or the transit
times do not align with their schedule. Preference then becomes necessity, and mode
choices must be reevaluated with assumptions in mind.
Travel Times
The 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) shows that most commutes (excluding those
who work remotely) in Atascadero are typically under 35 minutes. Approximately 87% of
commutes were under 35 minutes and 66% were under 25 minutes.
The lack of local public transit options means that transit is rarely used for short-distance
trips. Over 99% of transit trips have travel times greater than 20 minutes, and 56% of all transit
trips have travel times greater than 30 minutes.
Walking is exceptionally popular for short-distance trips. Nearly a third of all walking trips are
for commute times that are less than 10 minutes. Walking remains a popular option for travel
times up to 25 minutes. Although 15% of walking commutes were 30-35 minutes, walking to
work ceases when travel times are over 35 minutes. When considering future pedestrian
improvements, it will be important to consider how improving connectivity and accessibility
may reduce travel times and promote walking for work-related trips.
There are twice as many commuters that drive alone for short trips compared to statewide
rates. In Atascadero, 21% of commute trips where travelers drive alone are less than 10
minutes in length, whereas only 10% of commuters that drive alone are traveling for less than
10 minutes statewide. This data highlights the potential to reduce vehicle dependency by
investing in multimodal transportation, particularly for short-distance trips.
Vehicle Availability
Most households in Atascadero have at least one vehicle available for commuting.
Approximately 4.3% of all households do not have a vehicle available at all, and 1.6% of
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-26
commuters do not have a vehicle available for commuting. Commuters without a vehicle
must rely on alternative modes of transportation. About 16% of commuters that take public
transportation do not have a vehicle at home.
BIKE COUNTS
A regional effort to collect pedestrian and bicycle count data was conducted in 2018 and 2019
by SLOCOG. The study found that walking was generally favored over bicycling in the region,
particularly in urban areas and at schools. Counts show that there were over 430 trips per day
and over 131,000 trips per year through the tunnel connecting Atascadero High School
Tunnel under US 101 to East Mall.
The 2013 SLOCOG Bike Barriers Survey Analysis Report found that aggressive driving and
speeding were major barriers to bicycling. Infrastructure-related barriers, including gaps in
the bike network and dedicated bike lanes, were not perceived to be as large of barriers. And
distance was a divisive barrier, with the largest proportion of respondents stating it was not a
barrier, but the second largest response was that it was a major barrier. These results of the
survey show that distance is not a barrier for a significant portion of those who travel to and
throughout Atascadero, but that, for some, distance is a limiting factor, possibly for physical
ability, interest in physical exercise, or topography in certain areas.
Narrow overpasses also create a barrier for many bicyclists since they often carry higher
vehicle volumes in close proximity to cyclists. Focusing on infrastructure modifications and
improvements could increase safety and help balance vehicular needs with other modal
needs.
4.12 Network Performance and Safety
INTRODUCTION
Atascadero occupies a large area with extensive roadway miles for its population size.
Commercial areas are mostly spread along the El Camino Real and Morro Road (SR 41)
corridors. The City’s current Circulation Element specifies that level of service (LOS) C or
better operations shall be maintained as the standard at all intersections and on all arterial
and collector roads. Upon City Council approval, LOS D is acceptable where residences are
not directly impacted and improvements to meet the City’s standard would be prohibitively
costly or disruptive.
Figure 4-5 shows daily traffic volumes along roadway segments throughout the city as well
as intersection levels of service (LOS) during peak periods. Table 4-1 summarizes the
weekday AM and PM peak hour LOS at the study intersections for locations with data
collected in 2022; refer to Appendix A for a more comprehensive list using data from other
recent studies.
Table 4-1: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Control Peak
Hour Delay1 LOS
1. El Camino Real/San Benito Rd TWSC AM 2.5 (12.4) - (B)
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-27 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Control Peak Hour Delay1 LOS
PM 1.1 ( 11.8) - (B)
2. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd
(East) TWSC AM 5.5 (17.2) - (C)
PM 2.6 (14.6) - (B)
3. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd
(West) Signal AM 19.2 B
PM 17.9 B
4. El Camino Real/Curbaril Ave2 Signal AM 32.5 C
PM 36.2 D
5. El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Rd2 Signal AM 18.5 B
PM 21.4 C
6. El Camino Real/San Gabriel Rd TWSC AM 1.0 (14.8) - (B)
PM 2.0 (19.0) - (C)
7. El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Rd Signal AM 15.5 B
PM 12.3 B
8. Traffic Wy/Ardilla Ave/US 101 SB
Ramps3 TWSC AM 20.2 (79.5) F
PM 5.6 (15.1) C
9. Traffic Wy/Via Ave TWSC AM 3.4 (11.8) - (B)
PM 3.4 (11.0) - (B)
10. SR 41/Curbaril Ave Signal AM 10.4 B
PM 10.3 B
11. SR 41/Atascadero Ave2 Signal AM 41.6 D
PM 25.7 C
12. SR 41/Mercedes Ave TWSC AM 2.5 (13.0) - (B)
PM 2.5 (17.1) - (C)
13. Atascadero Ave/Santa Rosa Rd AWSC AM 11.7 B
PM 8.8 A
1 HCM 6th average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For two-way stop controlled (TWSC)
intersections the worst approach's delay is reported in parentheses next to the overall delay.
2 Intersections were based on HCM 2000 methodology.
3 Intersection was analyzed using Sim Traffic due to non-standard geometry. Unacceptable operations are shown in bold text.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-28
The study intersections operate at LOS C or better with the following exceptions:
• #4 El Camino Real/Curbaril Avenue operates at LOS D during the PM peak hour.
• #8 Traffic Way/Ardilla Avenue/US 101 SB Ramps operates at LOS F during the AM peak
hour. Multiple roadway curves and closely spaced intersections make this area
difficult for drivers to navigate, resulting in the highest segment collision rate in the
city. Potential improvements include signage improvements, additional stop signs,
and a roundabout.
• #11 SR 41/Atascadero Avenue operates at LOS D during the AM peak hour. The skewed
intersection requires split phasing on the Atascadero Road approaches which causes
delays, exacerbated by notable volume peaking when school starts.
Table 4-2 shows queueing on key movements at the study intersections.
Table 4-2: Existing Intersection Queues Existing Intersection Queues
Intersection Movement Storage Length (ft) Peak Hour 95th %ile Queue (ft)1
3. El Camino Real/San Anselmo
Rd (West)
NBL 125 AM 173
PM 204
SBL 60 AM 42
PM 34
4. El Camino Real/Curbaril Ave
NBL 125 AM #184
PM 238
SBL 125 AM 26
PM #58
5. El Camino Real/Santa Rosa
Rd
NBL 105 AM 306
PM #380
SBL 105 AM 6
PM 0
7. El Camino Real/Santa
Barbara Rd
NBL 120 AM 120
PM 72
SBL 160 AM 13
PM 18
10. SR 41/Curbaril Ave
NBL 200 AM 13
PM 16
SBL 200 AM 37
PM 49
11. SR 41/Atascadero Ave NBL 150 AM 91
PM 68
SBL 200 AM 159
I I I I
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-29 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Intersection Movement Storage Length (ft) Peak Hour 95th %ile Queue (ft)1
PM 79
1 Queue length in feet that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Bold indicates queue length longer than storage length.
The following queue issues are noted:
• #3 El Camino Real/San Anselmo Road West queueing exceeds storage for the
northbound left turn movement during both AM and PM peak hours.
• #4 EL Camino Real/Curbaril Avenue queueing exceeds storage for the northbound
left turn movement during both AM and PM peak hours.
• #5 EL Camino Real/Santa Rosa Road queueing exceeds storage for the northbound
left turn movement during both AM and PM peak hours.
SAFETY
Injury and fatal collisions from the most recent ten years are shown in Figure 4-6. Between
2015 and 2019, more than one-third of collisions in the city had a primary collision factor of
unsafe speed, ranking 13th highest in the state out of 94 similar-sized cities. Auto right-of-way
violations were the second highest cause of collisions, constituting 15% of all collisions.
Driving under the influence (DUI) and improper turning were ranked third and fourth,
respectively.
There were 145 collisions involving cyclists or pedestrians over the past ten years, the majority
of which occurred along El Camino Real and Morro Road (SR 41). The City’s Local Road Safety
Plan provides recommendations for 20 safety hot spots as well as systemic improvements to
address collisions associated with lane departure, unsafe speed, traffic signals, lighting, DUI,
pedestrian, and bicycle safety.
Public Draft | August 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-30 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Figure 4-5 Traffic Volumes and LOS
0.5
Los Padres
National Forest
2
TEMPLETON
CS D
3
Miles
creek Pufomo
SAN
OB IS PO
L U I S
CO UN T Y
Atascadero
O U R CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 4-5
Traffic Volumes and LOS
Basemap Features
.--7 Atascadero City Limits L __ ,
CJ Atascadero Planning A rea
C:J Urban Services Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Parks+ Open Space
Major Roads + Freeways
Intersection Level of Service
Service Grade
Q A, B, C 0 D O E e F
Daily Traffic Volumes
□ [2019] Traffic Volume
■ sma Traffic Volume
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Luis Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | August 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-31
Figure 4-6 Collision Density
'I
fj ...
TEMPLETON
CS D
~
<it l>Jtu<'bs
"'" Ro
0
0
~
1 ;;-.,,
"' ., "'1, ~ ~ 1'o
Ill
@ O•--•O.c:::5c:::c:::c:::c:::=-------=2c:::c:::c:::c:::c:::c:::c:::c:::c:::c::::::::i3 U.. Miles
oo
~60q
lle1 -0
'{;
?,,_
"'s •o % ,po'
r'
I r / ,
(
creek Pa!om0
SAN L UIS
O BISP O CO UN TY
O U R CITY, O U R PLAN
Figure 4-6
Collision Density
Basemap Features
,--7 At ascadero City Limits L--•
~ Atascadero Planning A rea
C:J Urban Servi ces Line
Rivers + Waterbodies
Pa rks+ Open Space
Major Roads + Freeways
Collision Type
1J Pedestria n Collision
• Bi ke Collision
o Vehicle Collision
Heat Map from All Collisions
Sparse
Dense
Source(s):
Esn, CA State Open Data, County of San Luis Obispo, City of Atascadero 2023.
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-32
4.13 Appendix A: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Control Peak Hour Dela/ LOS
El Camino Real/San Benito Rd TWSC AM 2.5 (12.4 ) -(B)
PM 1.1 ( 11.8) -(B)
El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (East) TWSC AM 5.5 (17.2 ) -(C)
PM 2.6 (14.6 ) -(B)
El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (West) Signal AM 29.8 C
PM 27.8 C
El Camino Real/Curbaril Ave2 Signal AM 38.5 D
PM 43.7 D
El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Rd2 Signal AM 17.6 (20.6) -(C)
PM 19.3 (24.8) -(C)
El Camino Real/San Gabriel Rd TWSC AM 1.0 (14.8 ) -(B)
PM 2.0 (19.0 ) -(C)
El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Rd Signal AM 16.2 B
PM 15.3 B
AM 69.3 (>120) F
Traffic Wy/US 101 SB Ramps3 TWSC
PM 19.1 (38.4) -(E)
Traffic Wy/Via Ave TWSC AM 3.4 (11.8 ) -(B)
PM 3.4 (11.0 ) -(B)
SR 41/Curbaril Ave Signal AM 10.4 B
PM 10.3 B
SR 41/Atascadero Ave2 Signal AM 18.4 B
PM 15.1 B
SR 41/Mercedes Ave TWSC AM 2.5(13.0) -(B)
PM 2.5 (17.1 ) -(C)
Atascadero Ave/Santa Rosa Rd AWSC AM 10.9 B
PM 8.8 A
Santa Barbara Rd/US 101 NB Ramps TWSC AM 6.4 (11.9 ) -(B)
PM 8.3 (14.9 ) -(B)
Santa Barbara Rd/US 101 SB Ramps AWSC AM 10.4 C
PM 10.1 B
Santa Barbara Rd/San Antonio Rd sss AM 9.8 C
PM 7.5 B
Santa Rosa Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal AM 13.3 C
PM 13.5 C
Santa Rosa Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal AM 14.9 C
PM 18.7 D
El Camino Real/US 101 NB Ramps at SR 41 Signal AM 15.5 B
PM 21.0 C
SR 41/EI Camino Real Signal AM 18.1 B
PM 20.0 B
SR 41/US 101 SB Ramps Signal AM 15.6 B
PM 14.6 B
SR 41/Portola Rd Signal AM 10.6 B
PM 10.4 B
SR 41/Santa Rosa Rd sss AM 9.1 C
PM 8.0 B
SR 41/San Gabriel Rd Signal AM 16.2 B
PM 9.7 A
SR 41/Old Morro Rd sss AM 5.8 B
PM 5.4 B
San Gabriel Rd/San Rafael Rd sss AM 7.3 B
PM 5.4 A
San Rafael Rd/San Carlos Rd Unsig AM 4.7 (8.5) -(A)
PM 4.7 (8.6) -(A)
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-33 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Control Peak Hour 1 Delay LOS
Atascadero Ave/San Gabriel Rd AM 9.1 A AWSC PM 7.6 A
Atascadero Ave/San Rafael Rd AM 5.0 A sss PM 4.5 A
Atascadero Ave/San Diego Rd sss AM 0.0 A
PM 0.4 A
Atascadero Ave/Santa Barbara Rd AM 5.2 A sss PM 5.0 A
AM 62.8 (>120) F
Curbaril Ave/US 101 SB Ramps AWSC
PM 58.7 (>120) F
AM 12.7 (25.9) -(D)
Curbaril Ave/US 101 NB Ramps sss
PM 25.1 (55.1) F
Traffic Wy/US 101 NB Ramps 3 sss AM 16.9 (28.8) -(D)
PM 14.7 (22.2) -(C)
Traffic Wy/Ardilla Ave sss AM 20.4 (39.6) -(E)
PM 8.9 (17.2 ) -(C)
Traffic Wy/EI Camino Real Signal AM 46.2 D
PM 37.9 D
El Camino Real/US 101 NB Ramps-Rosario Ave sss AM 15.6 (39.1) -(E)
PM 10.2 (21.4) -(C)
AM 46.3 (111.8) F
San Anselmo Ave/US 101 SB Ramps TWSC
PM 42.7 (96.1) F
AM 17.8 (35.0) -(E)
San Anselmo Ave/US 101 NB Ramps sss
PM 29.7 (58.5) F
AM 11.1 (24.2) -(C)
San Anselmo Ave/San Pablo Road Unsig PM 11.5 (26.1) -(D)
Del Rio Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal AM 21.2 C
PM 21.8 C
Del Rio Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal AM 16.3 B
PM 20.0 B
Del Rio Rd/Ramona Rd AM 6.3 B sss PM 5.8 A
El Camino Real/Principal Ave sss AM 1.0 (11.7) -(B)
PM 0.7 (13.6) -(B)
Existing Conditions Report Public Draft | September 2023
City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility | 4-34
4.14 Sources
REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS
City of Atascadero Bicycle Transportation Plan, 2010.
City of Atascadero Local Roadway Safety Plan, prepared by W-Trans and CCTC, 2022.
City of Atascadero General Plan, July 2016.
City of Atascadero Interchange Operational Improvement Study prepared by W-Trans, 2008.
City of Atascadero Parking Utilization and Management Study prepared by Carl Walker, Inc.,
2006.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. Administrative Draft 2023 Regional Transportation
Plan.
DATA
American Community Survey, 2021. US Census Bureau.
PERSONS CONTACTED
Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director
Kelly Gleason, Senior Planner
Loreli Cappel, Deputy Director of Economic and Community Development
Nick DeBar, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Ryan Hayes, Deputy Director of Public Works
James Worthley, SLOCOG Planning Director
Public Draft | September 2023 Existing Conditions Report
4-35 | Chapter 4: Transportation and Mobility City of Atascadero 2045 General Plan Update
4.15 Acronyms and Key Terms
LOS: Level of Service
VMT: Vehicle Miles Traveled
SLOCOG: San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
APPENDIX J
Transportation CEQA Memorandum
Authentic Atascadero | 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Appendices
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 11, 2025
To: Dan Amsden, MIG
Emily Creel, SWCA
From: Joe Fernandez and Michelle Matson, CCTC
Subject: Atascadero General Plan Update-Transportation CEQA
This memorandum evaluates potential mobility impacts of the Atascadero General Plan Update (AGPU)
including vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with state law as well as level of service (LOS)in
accordance with current City policies.
SUMMARY
The AGPU includes a variety of goals, policies, and programs that focus land use growth on existing mixed-
use corridors, an approach that has been shown to be VMT-efficient by increasing density, the diversity of land
uses, and support of non-auto travel options. As a result, the updated General Plan is expected to produce
lower levels of VMT per resident and employee than the current General Plan.
The City of Atascadero currently generates VMT at rates above the regional average. While the new plan
improves VMT performance, it remains above the regional average.
The current General Plan includes a local policy striving to maintain LOS C or better operations on City streets
during the peak 15-minute period of the peak hours of travel. Given infrastructure funding constraints, it is
financially infeasible to increase roadway capacity to meet this standard at all locations in the City during all
time periods. Occasional traffic congestion is expected to exceed this threshold, typically for a short duration
and usually associated with traffic peaks related to schools or special events.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Travel forecasts are typically prepared using Travel Demand Models (TDM) which use land use and roadway
network inputs to forecast future travel. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) develops
and maintains the SLOCOG TDM, which was used to estimate VMT and forecast traffic levels.
The SLOCOG TDM uses different land use categories than the land use model used in the AGPU. The AGPU
land use model growth was allocated into the SLOCOG TDM Traffic Analysis Zone structure, then the land
uses were apportioned into the TDM land use categories to evaluate the AGPU.
The AGPU land use buildout reflects the maximum development potential in the City. SLOCOG TDM land
use forecasts are typically discounted from this level to match overall regional growth forecasts, which reflect
typical growth rates that rarely reach maximum development potential on all parcels. The AGPU growth
forecasts as evaluated herein reflect more growth in the City (and therefore the region) than SLOCOG’s original
forecasts. This results in conservatively high traffic and regional VMT forecasts.
The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) publishes General Plan Guidelines that note that “When a
new general plan or revision is being considered, the EIR must evaluate the proposed plans or revision’s effects
Th
~-~ -Central Coast Transportation Consulting
Traffic Engineering & Transportation Planning _ . --~-~-,..---.. ----,. r--_ ___. _.---/ __....
T
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
2 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
on both the physical environment envisioned by an adopted plan.” Accordingly, this analysis compares the
current general plan to the proposed general plan.
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
State law identifies vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the appropriate metric to evaluate transportation impacts
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). VMT quantifies the total amount of vehicle miles
driven within a certain area. A car driving one mile generates one VMT.
OPR recommends thresholds for evaluating transportation VMT impacts associated with land use plans, which
are applied herein since the City has not adopted VMT thresholds. OPR’s recommends that land use plans be
evaluated based on the aggregate VMT effects of the plan.
Table 1 summarizes the AGPU’s effect on regional VMT:
Table 1: Regional VMT Summary
The regional VMT analysis shows that:
• Total regional VMT increases with the AGPU. However, as previously noted this reflects an increase
in overall regional population and employment, so total regional VMT does not provide an ‘apples to
apples’ comparison between the current and proposed plans. A more appropriate metric is an
efficiency metric of regional VMT per service population, discussed below.
• Service population is defined here as the sum of population and employment. On a regional basis the
AGPU produces lower regional VMT per service population than the current plan. This indicates that
the AGPU is more VMT-efficient than the current plan.
• Baseline residential VMT per capita in the region is 14.86. OPR recommends a threshold of 15 percent
below the regional average for this metric, which captures trips from homes. This threshold
corresponds to 12.63 residential VMT per capita.
• Baseline commute VMT per employee in the region is 11.88. OPR recommends a threshold of 15
percent below the regional average for this metric, which captures trips to work. This threshold
corresponds to 10.09 commute VMT per employee.
• Travel demand models produce planning-level forecasts of travel primarily based on land use and
network inputs. While the SLOCOG model offers some sensitivity to urban design it is a coarse tool
Scenario->Baseline (2015)
Current General Plan
Buildout (2045)
Proposed General
Plan Buildout (2045)
Total Regional VMT1 8,796,917 11,203,335 11,348,867
Population 271,859 302,069 307,885
Total Employment 115,190 135,908 138,978
Service Population (Population+Employees)387,049 437,977 446,863
Regional VMT/Service Population 22.73 25.58 25.40
Residential VMT1 4,040,055 4,398,052 4,474,989
Residential VMT/Population 14.86 14.56 14.53
Commute VMT1 1,367,961 1,474,183 1,515,782
Commute VMT/Employee 11.88 10.85 10.91
Source: SLOCOG TDM, CCTC, 2025.
Regional VMT Summary
1. Total regional VMT reflects daily automobile VMT within the San Luis Obispo County region. Residential VMT reflects all home-
based productions. Commute VMT reflects home-based work attractions.
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
3 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
that does not fully reflect the VMT-reducing effects of compact, mixed-use urban design supported
by the AGPU.
In summary, the AGPU will be more VMT-efficient on a regional basis than the current General Plan as it
focuses growth in areas with a mix of uses, more travel options, and at levels that are more supportive of transit
use. Table 2 summarizes the VMT analysis within the City of Atascadero:
Table 2: Atascadero VMT Summary
The Atascadero VMT analysis shows that:
• Residential VMT per capita is above OPR’s recommended threshold (12.63) for all of the evaluated
scenarios. The AGPU produces lower residential VMT per capita than the existing baseline and
current plan.
• Commute VMT per employee is above OPR’s recommended threshold (10.09) for all of the evaluated
scenarios. The AGPU produces lower commute VMT per employee than the existing baseline and
current plan.
In summary, the City of Atascadero generates residential and employment-based VMT at levels that are above
OPR’s recommended thresholds. The City’s large geographic area and low-density development patterns
require longer vehicle trips and reduce non-auto travel options. The AGPU focuses growth in more VMT-
efficient areas at higher densities and with more travel options, so it produces less VMT per capita and per
employee than the current General Plan.
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
This section evaluates traffic operations under existing and future (cumulative) conditions. Existing conditions
are described comprehensively in the Existing Conditions Report, which includes a section describing existing
automobile level of service (LOS). LOS is reported at selected intersections during typical weekday morning
(AM) and afternoon (PM) peak hours.
Cumulative conditions reflect buildout of the City and region, with a year 2045 horizon. The SLOCOG TDM
was used to develop the traffic forecasts. As previously noted, the land use inputs conservatively reflect full
buildout of City land uses and are not discounted to reflect lower historic growth rates or other factors.
Peak hour LOS analysis is conducted here for three primary reasons:
1. Identify intersection improvements to address traffic growth.
2. Estimate vehicular delay to inform the CEQA air quality analysis.
Scenario->Baseline (2015)
Current General Plan
Buildout (2045)
Proposed General
Plan Buildout (2045)
Population 29,906 31,352 37,176
Total Employment 8,985 10,315 13,386
Residential VMT 556,552 542,924 602,702
Residential VMT/Population 18.61 17.32 16.21
Commute VMT 125,563 132,501 166,441
Commute VMT/Employees 13.98 12.85 12.43
Source: SLOCOG TDM, CCTC, 2025.
Atascadero VMT Summary
1. Residential VMT reflects all home-based productions. Commute VMT reflects home-based work attractions.
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
4 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
3. Determine conformance to the City’s current General Plan Policy 1.3 which seeks to “maintain LOC
C or better as the standard at all intersections and on all arterial and collector roads. Upon City Council approval,
accept LOS D where residences are not directly impacted and improved to meet the City’s standard would be prohibitively
costly or disruptive.”
Table 3 shows the existing and cumulative peak hour auto level of service (LOS) at the study intersections.
The Synchro output sheets including queue reports are included in Attachment A. Figures 1 and 2 show these
results as well as daily traffic volumes under existing and cumulative conditions, respectively.
Table 3: Intersection Levels of Service
Table 4 shows the queue summary for key movements at signalized intersections and side street approaches at
two-way stop controlled intersections operating at LOS D or below.
Intersection Control Peak
Hour
Existing
Delay1
Existing
LOS
Cumulative
Delay1
Cumulative
LOS
AM 2.5 (12.4)- (B)6.9 (58.8)- (F)
PM 1.1 ( 11.8)- (B)5.1 (58.4)- (F)
AM 5.5 (17.2)- (C)16.1 (89.9)- (F)
PM 2.6 (14.6)- (B)4.2 (42.2)- (E)
AM 19.2 B 45.9 D
PM 17.9 B 105.7 F
AM 32.5 C 33.9 C
PM 36.2 D 43.2 D
AM 18.5 B 24.5 C
PM 21.4 C 28.0 C
AM 1.0 (14.8)- (B)1.1 (17.5)- (C)
PM 2.0 (19.0)- (C)2.2 (24.6)- (C)
AM 15.5 B 19.5 B
PM 12.3 B 13.1 B
AM 20.2 (79.5)- (F)49.0 (>200)- (F)
PM 5.6 (15.1)- (C)14.0 (46.3)- (E)
AM 3.4 (11.8)- (B)3.4 (11.7)- (B)
PM 3.4 (11.0)- (B)3.4 (11.8)- (B)
AM 10.4 B 11.6 B
PM 10.3 B 11.9 B
AM 41.6 D 42.2 D
PM 25.7 C 33.2 C
AM 2.5 (13.0)- (B)4.3 (22.5)- (C)
PM 2.5 (17.1)- (C)3.0 (25.7)- (D)
AM 11.7 B 13.9 B
PM 8.8 A 11.1 B
1. HCM 6th average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For two-way stop controlled (TWSC) intersections the worst approach's delay is
reported in parentheses next to the overall delay.
2. Intersections were based on HCM 2000 methodology
3. Intersection was analyzed using Sim Traffic due to non-standard geometry.
Unacceptable (City) operations shown in bold text.
11. SR 41/Atascadero Ave2 Signal
12. SR 41/Mercedes Ave TWSC
13. Atascadero Ave/Santa Rosa Rd AWSC
10. SR 41/Curbaril Ave Signal
5. El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Rd2 Signal
6. El Camino Real/San Gabriel Rd TWSC
7. El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Rd Signal
8. Traffic Wy/Ardilla Ave/US 101 SB Ramps3 TWSC
9. Traffic Wy/Via Ave TWSC
Existing and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
1. El Camino Real/San Benito Rd TWSC
2. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (East) TWSC
3. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (West)Signal
4. El Camino Real/Curbaril Ave2 Signal
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
5 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
Table 4: Intersection Queue Summary
The following intersections operate below the City’s LOS standard or are forecast to experience queue spillback
beyond available turn pocket storage space:
Existing Cumulative
AM 0 13
PM 3 83
AM 15 105
PM 5 28
AM 0 5
PM 3 15
AM 70 270
PM 25 98
AM 173 #683
PM 204 #1290
AM 42 65
PM 34 51
AM #184 #395
PM 238 #398
AM 26 30
PM #58 #62
AM 306 #609
PM #380 #678
AM 6 15
PM 0 0
AM 120 224
PM 72 80
AM 13 20
PM 18 23
AM 13 14
PM 16 24
AM 37 65
PM 49 108
AM 91 95
PM 68 89
AM 159 223
PM 79 138
AM 18 60
PM 15 33
AM 0 0
PM 0 5
12. SR 41/Mercedes Ave
EB
WB
2. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (East)
EB -
WB -
1. El Camino Real/San Benito Rd
EB -
WB -
Existing and Cumulative Intersection Queues
3. El Camino Real/San Anselmo Rd (West)
NBL 125 w/TWLTL
SBL 60
4. El Camino Real/Curbaril Ave
NBL 125 w/TWLTL
SBL 125 w/TWLTL
5. El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Rd
NBL 105 w/TWLTL
SBL 105 w/TWLTL
7. El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Rd
NBL 120
SBL 160
10. SR 41/Curbaril Ave
NBL 200 w/TWLTL
SBL 200 w/TWLTL
2. Queue length in feet that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Bold indicates queue length longer than storage length.
11. SR 41/Atascadero Ave
NBL 150 w/TWLTL
SBL 200 w/TWLTL
1. TWLTL=Two-way left-turn lane.
-
-
Storage Length
(ft)1MovementIntersection Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queue (ft)2
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
6 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
• El Camino Real/San Benito Road (#1) operates at LOS F on the side street approach under
cumulative conditions. Installation of a traffic signal would result in acceptable LOS C or better
operations.
• El Camino Real/San Anselmo Road (East, #2) operates at LOS E or F on the side street approach
under cumulative conditions. Installation of a traffic signal would result in acceptable LOS B or better
operations.
• El Camino Real/San Anselmo Road (West, #3) operates at LOS D and F under cumulative conditions
during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, respectively. A second northbound left turn lane would
be needed to provide LOS D operations. This would require widening San Anselmo Road to provide
two westbound receiving lanes and may require additional right-of-way.
• El Camino Real/Curbaril Avenue (#4) operates at LOS D during the weekday PM peak hour under
existing and cumulative conditions. An additional northbound left turn lane and designated eastbound
right turn lane would result in LOS C operations, but would likely require additional right-of-way.
• El Camino Real/Santa Rosa Road (#5) queues on the northbound left-turn movement exceed
available storage under existing and cumulative conditions. A second northbound left turn lane would
be needed to accommodate the forecast volumes, which would require widening to provide two
westbound receiving lanes on Santa Rosa Road. This may require additional right-of-way.
• El Camino Real/Santa Barbara Road (#7) queues on the northbound left-turn movement exceed
available storage during the cumulative PM peak hour. Extending the northbound left-turn pocket to
225 feet would accommodate the queue.
• Traffic Way/Ardilla Avenue/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#8) operates at LOS F during the AM peak
hour under existing and cumulative conditions, and operates at LOS E during the cumulative PM peak
hour. Installation of a single-lane roundabout would provide LOS C or better operations.
• SR 41/Atascadero Avenue (#11) operates at LOS D during the AM peak hour under existing and
cumulative conditions. The southbound left-turn queue exceeds available storage under cumulative
conditions, but the queue can be accommodated within the existing two-way left-turn lane and no
improvements are recommended.
• SR 41/Mercedes Avenue (#12) operates at LOS D during the cumulative PM peak hour on the side
street approach. The peak hour traffic signal warrant is expected to be met under cumulative AM
conditions. Adding east and westbound right turn lanes on the side street approaches would eliminate
the need for a traffic signal but the westbound approach would continue to operate at LOS D.
However, the volumes and queues on the westbound approach are minimal.
These results indicate that maintaining LOS C operations during all time periods would require major
intersection expansions and right-of-way acquisitions which are likely financially infeasible.
DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Daily traffic volumes are shown on Figures 1 and 2 and are shown in Table 5.
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
7 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
Table 5: Daily Traffic Volume Summary
Roadway Location 2019 2022 2045 Forecast
Ardilla Rd San Anselmo Rd to Portola Rd 3,100 -3,400
Atascadero Mall to Highway 41 2,000 4,400 4,600
Highway 41 to Curbaril Ave 1,100 2,500 3,100
Curbaril Ave to Santa Rosa Rd 2,200 -2,700
Santa Rosa Rd to San Rafael Rd 1,300 -1,500
San Rafael Rd to Santa Barbara Rd 1,200 -1,600
West Mall to Lewis Ave 700 -800
Lewis Ave to Highway 41 5,300 -5,500
Sycamore Rd to West Mall 700 -800
San Andres Ave to Curbaril Ave 400 -400
Curbaril Ave to Portola Rd 200 -200
Portola Rd to San Gabriel Rd 100 -100
San Marcos Rd to Carmelita Ave 100 -100
Carmelita Ave to Highway 41 -1,200 1,400
ECR to Highway 41 3,600 3,300 4,200
ECR to Sycamore Rd 2,500 -2,600
Monterey Rd to Ramona Rd 4,200 -4,300
ECR to Potrero Rd 2,000 -2,000
Potrero Rd to San Anselmo Rd 900 -1,000
East Front St 101 NB Ramps to Santa Rosa Rd 4,300 -5,000
San Ramon Rd to Del Rio Rd 3,600 -6,900
Del Rio Rd to Rosario Ave 6,700 -12,700
Rosario Ave to Highway 41 11,400 -16,000
Highway 41 to San Diego Rd 14,100 -17,200
San Diego Rd to Santa Barbara Rd 5,700 -7,500
Graves Creek Rd Monterey Rd to San Fernando Rd 1,000 -1,000
Atascadero Ave to Curbaril Ave -10,200 13,900
Santa Rosa Rd to Curbaril Ave -11,100 13,400
US 101 to Atascadero Ave -13,700 17,500
Santa Ysabel Ave to Mercedes Ave -6,300 8,300
Rocky Canyon Rd to Mercedes Ave -5,600 7,700
Lewis Ave Traffic Way to Capistrano Ave 1,900 -2,100
Mercedes Ave Capistrano Ave to Highway 41 2,300 2,100 2,400
Monterey Rd San Anselmo Rd to Del Rio Rd 1,800 -1,800
Navarette Ave San Marcos Rd to Santa Lucia Rd 100 -100
Ardilla Rd to Highway 41 2,300 -2,600
Higway 41 to Atascadero Ave 1,200 -1,600
Atascadero Ave to West Front Rd 1,200 -1,400
Potrero Rd Del Rio Rd to Traffic Way 900 -900
Ardilla Rd to ECR 4,200 -4,600
Del Rio Rd to Dolores Ave 1,000 -1,100
Dolores Ave to ECR 3,400 -3,500
San Benito Rd ECR to Del Rio Rd 900 -1,300
Del Rio Rd
Source: SLOCOG TDM, City of Atascadero Speed Surveys, CCTC, 2025.
Daily Traffic Volume Summary
Atascadero Ave
Capistrano Ave
Carmelita Rd
Curbaril Ave
Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
El Camino Real
Highway 41
Portola Rd
San Anselmo Rd
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 11, 2025
8 Atascadero General Plan Update - Transportation CEQA
Table 5 (Continued): Daily Traffic Volume Summary
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1: Existing Traffic Volumes
Figure 2: Cumulative Traffic Volumes
Attachment A: Synchro Output Sheets
REFERENCES
City of Atascadero. 2016. General Plan.
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). December 2018. Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.
______. General Plan Guidelines. Accessed from https://lci.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. 2023. Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy.
Transportation Research Board. 2017. Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 and 6th Edition.
Roadway Location 2019 2022 2045 Forecast
San Marcos Rd to Highway 41 1,000 -1,200
Highway 41 to Atascadero Ave 1,300 -1,400
Santa Lucia Rd to San Marcos Rd 500 -600
ECR to Nogales Ave 1,600 -1,700
Nogales Ave to Traffic Way 500 -500
San Adres Ave to Portola Rd 300 -300
Portola Rd to San Gabriel Rd 400 -500
San Ramon Rd ECR to 101 SB Ramps 3,700 -5,500
Atascadero Rd to SR 101 1,500 -1,900
SR 101 to Viejo Carrizo 8,600 -9,700
Santa Cruz Rd ECR to Carrizo Rd 900 -1,300
Ardilla Rd to Portola Rd 2,600 -2,900
Portola Rd to Laurel Rd 1,500 -2,200
Santa Rosa Rd ECR to Highway 41 2,700 -3,100
Santa Ysabel Ave Highway 41 to Curbaril Ave 1,700 -1,800
Sycamore Rd Capistrano Ave to Curbaril Ave 1,000 -1,100
ECR to Olmeda Ave 6,300 -7,400
Olmeda Ave to San Jacinto Ave 3,800 -4,100
San Jacinto Ave to Carrizo Rd 2,800 -3,100
Venado Ave Santa Lucia Rd to Ardilla Rd 100 -100
Via Ave Traffic Way to Capistrano Ave 2,100 -2,300
Viejo Carrizo ECR to Santa Barbara Rd 500 -900
101 SB Offramp to Santa Rosa Rd 6,800 -7,900
Santa Rosa Rd to SB 101 Onramp 1,100 -1,400
West Mall ECR to Atascadero Creek Bridge 1,600 -2,000
Daily Traffic Volume Summary
Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Source: SLOCOG TDM, City of Atascadero Speed Surveys, CCTC, 2025.
San Gabriel Rd
San Jacinto Ave
San Marcos Rd
Santa Barbara Rd
Santa Lucia Rd
Traffic Way
West Front Rd
41
41
101
101
Pine Mtn
HeilmannGrove
Stadium
Park
Heilmann
Regional
Park
Chalk MtnGolf Course
Viejo
C
a
m
i
n
o
Santa
Bar
b
ara
Rd
Sant
aC ru zRd
Sa
nGa
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
El
Ca
m
i
n
o
Rea
l
Capistra
n
o
A
v
e
Curbaril Ave
P
o
r
t
o
l
a
R
d
Wes
t
M
a
l
l
Del Rio
R
d
Sa
n
t
a
Ros
a
R
d
Gr
a
v
es
Cr
e
e
k
Rd
S
a
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
Santa
Lucia Rd
Monterey
Rd
Sa
n
Ra
m
on
R
d
San
B
enito
R
d
A
ta
s
c
a
d
e
r
o
A
v
e
SanMarcos
R
d
Sant
a
A
n
a
R
d
Potrer
o
R
d
SanAnselm
o
R d
El Bor
d
o
A
v
e
G
a
r
c
i
a
R
d
San
A
n
dres
A
v
e
Traffic
W
a
y
Syc
a
m
o
r
e
RdSanJacintoAv
e
Morro Rd
Traffic Way
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
M
o
n
t
e
rey R
d
Ardilla
R
d
Ve
n
a
d
o Ave
N
a
v
a
rette Av e
San Marcos Rd
Port
o
l
a
R
d
Halcon Rd
W
F
r
o
n
t
R
d
Carmelita
A
v
e 2,200
1,300
1,200
700
5,300
2,000
4,200
2,500
100
4,300
5,700
14,100
11,400
6,700
3,600
1,900
2,300
1,200
1,200
900
4,200
1,000
3,400
900
1,000
1,300
2,700
3,100 6,300
3,800
2,800
2,100
1,600
5001,800
1,000
500
300
1,7002,600
3,700
900
1,500
8,600
500
700
1,600
900
1,500
400
1,000
400
200
100
100
100
6,800
1,100
2,500
3,300
4,400
2,100
1,200
10,200
11,100
13,700
6,300
5,600
Atascadero
Lake
Waterway
Water Body
Recreation Area
Rail Line
Urban Reserve Line (SOI)
Atascadero City Limits
Basemap Features
0 1 20.5 Miles
E[istinJ Traffic Volumes
and LOS
Daily Traffic Volumes
Service Grade
A, B, C D E F
AM
PM
2019 Traffic Volume
2022 Traffic Volume2022
Intersection Level of Service
Source(s): Esri, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
City of Atascadero 2022.
... \ • \
✓ I .
I I
I I l
® -~========-----
\ ' \
I
\ •
• l
' \ I "' ... , .. , ....
\ I
\
I \
I
\ ' \ ' \
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
CD 0 0 0
□ c=J
■-
■ ■ I
-+-
1111
~,~ -Central Coast Transportation Consulting
Traffic Engineering & Transportation Planning .··~~-r---~
•· 1.~·· _. ~-~ ~ _,_.... -----~
41
41
101
101
Pine Mtn
HeilmannGrove
Stadium
Park
Heilmann
Regional
Park
Chalk MtnGolf Course
Viejo
C
a
m
i
n
o
Santa
Bar
b
ara
Rd
Sant
aC ru zRd
Sa
nGa
briel
R
d
El
Ca
m
i
n
o
Rea
l
Capistrano
A
ve
Curbaril Ave
P
o
r
t
o
l
a
R
d
Wes
t
M
a
l
l
Del Rio
R
d
Sa
nt
a
Ros
a
R
d
Gr
a
v
es
Cr
e
e
k
Rd
S
a
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
Santa
Lucia Rd
Monterey
Rd
Sa
n
Ra
m
on
Rd
San
B
enito
R
d
A
ta
s
c
a
d
e
ro
A
v
e
SanMarcos
R
d
Santa
A
n
a
R
d
Potrero
Rd
SanAnselm
o
R d
El Bor
d
o
A
v
e
G
a
r
c
i
a
R
d
San
A
n
dres
A
ve
Traffic
Wa
y
Syc
a
m
o
r
e
RdSanJacintoAve
Morro Rd
Traffic Way
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
M
o
n
t
e
rey R
d
Ardilla
R
d
Ve
n
a
d
o Ave
N
a
v
a
rette Av e
San Marcos Rd
Port
o
l
a
R
d
Halcon Rd
W
F
r
o
n
t
R
d
Carmelita
A
v
e
3,100
2,700
1,500
1,600
800
5,500
2,000
4,300
2,600
4,200
100
5,000
7,500
17,200
16,000
12,700
6,900
2,100
2,600
1,600 1,400
900
4,600
1,100
3,500
1,300
1,200
1,400
4,200
4,600
3,400 7,400
4,100
3,100
2,100
1,700
500
1,800
1,000
600
300
3,1002,900
5,500
1,300
1,900
9,700
900
2,400
800
2,000
1,000
2,200
100
1,100
400
200
100
100
100
7,900
1,400
1,400
13,900
13,400
17,500
8,300
7,700
Atascadero
Lake
Waterway
Water Body
Recreation Area
Rail Line
Urban Reserve Line (SOI)
Atascadero City Limits
Basemap Features
Source(s): Esri, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
City of Atascadero 2022.
0 1 20.5 Miles
Cumulative Traffic
Volumes and LOS
Daily Traffic Volumes
Service Grade
A, B, C D E F
AM
PM
2045 Traffic Volume
Intersection Level of Service
... \ • \
✓ I .
I I
I I l
® -~========-----
\ ' \
I
\ •
• l -;
\ I "' ... , .. , ....
\ I
\
I \
I
\ ' \ ' \
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
CD 0 0 0
-+-
1111
~,~ -Central Coast Transportation Consulting
Traffic Engineering & Transportation Planning .··~~-r---~
•· 1.~·· _. ~-~ ~ _,_.... -----~
41
41
101
101
Pine Mtn
HeilmannGrove
Stadium
Park
Heilmann
Regional
Park
Chalk MtnGolf Course
Viejo
C
a
m
i
n
o
Santa
Bar
b
ara
Rd
Sant
aC ru zRd
Sa
nGa
b
r
i
e
l
R
d
El
Ca
m
i
n
o
Rea
l
Capistra
n
o
A
v
e
Curbaril Ave
P
o
r
t
o
l
a
R
d
Wes
t
M
a
l
l
Del Rio
R
d
Sa
n
t
a
Ros
a
R
d
Gr
a
v
es
Cr
e
e
k
Rd
S
a
n
t
a
Y
s
a
b
e
l
A
v
e
Santa
Lucia Rd
Monterey
Rd
Sa
n
Ra
m
on
R
d
San
B
enito
R
d
A
ta
s
c
a
d
e
r
o
A
v
e
SanMarcos
R
d
Sant
a
A
n
a
R
d
Potrer
o
R
d
SanAnselm
o
R d
El Bor
d
o
A
v
e
G
a
r
c
i
a
R
d
San
A
n
dres
A
v
e
Traffic
W
a
y
Syc
a
m
o
r
e
RdSanJacintoAv
e
Morro Rd
Traffic Way
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
M
o
n
t
e
rey R
d
Ardilla
R
d
Ve
n
a
d
o Ave
N
a
v
a
rette Av e
San Marcos Rd
Port
o
l
a
R
d
Halcon Rd
W
F
r
o
n
t
R
d
Carmelita
A
v
e
3,100
2,700
1,500
1,600
800
5,500
2,000
4,300
2,600
4,200
100
5,000
7,500
17,200
16,000
12,700
6,900
2,100
2,600
1,600 1,400
900
4,600
1,100
3,500
1,300
1,200
1,400
4,200
4,600
3,400 7,400
4,100
3,100
2,100
1,700
500
1,800
1,000
600
300
3,1002,900
5,500
1,300
1,900
9,700
900
2,400
800
2,000
1,000
2,200
100
1,100
400
200
100
100
100
7,900
1,400
1,400
13,900
13,400
17,500
8,300
7,700
Atascadero
Lake
Waterway
Water Body
Recreation Area
Rail Line
Urban Reserve Line (SOI)
Atascadero City Limits
Basemap Features
Source(s): Esri, County of San Luis Obispo Open Data,
City of Atascadero 2022.
0 1 20.5 Miles
Cumulative Traffic
Volumes and LOS
Daily Traffic Volumes
Service Grade
A, B, C D E F
AM
PM
2045 Traffic Volume
Intersection Level of Service
... \ • \
✓ I .
I I
I I l
® -~========-----
\ ' \
I
\ •
• l
' \ I "' ... , .. , ....
\ I
\
I \
I
\ ' \ ' \
Atascadero
OUR CITY, OUR PLAN
CD 0 0 0
-+-
1111
~,~ -Central Coast Transportation Consulting
Traffic Engineering & Transportation Planning .··~~-r---~
•· 1.~·· _. ~-~ ~ _,_.... -----~
Atascadero General Plan Update
Traffic Operations Analysis Output Sheets
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 2025
Appendix A: Synchro Output Sheets
Atascadero General Plan Update
Traffic Operations Analysis Output Sheets
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 2025
Existing Conditions
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
1: El Camino Real & San Benito Rd HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 62 1 23 5 150 38 10 205 3
Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 62 1 23 5 150 38 10 205 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 01101200002
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 2 0 3 67 1 25 5 163 41 11 223 3
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 457 463 228 443 444 185 228 0 0 204 0 0
Stage 1 249 249 - 194 194 -------
Stage 2 208 214 - 249 250 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 514 496 811 525 508 857 1340 - - 1368 - -
Stage 1 755 701 - 808 740 -------
Stage 2 794 725 - 755 700 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 492 489 809 518 501 856 1337 - - 1368 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 492 489 - 518 501 -------
Stage 1 750 694 - 805 737 -------
Stage 2 766 722 - 745 693 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.6 12.4 0.2 0.4
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1337 - - 643 579 1368 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.008 0.161 0.008 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - - 10.6 12.4 7.7 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0.6 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
2: El Camino Real & San Anselmo East HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 2 0 234 4 14 4 212 68 8 257 3
Future Vol, veh/h 3 2 0 234 4 14 4 212 68 8 257 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 00002001100
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length --------10075--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 3 2 0 272 5 16 5 247 79 9 299 3
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 457 656 151 427 578 127 302 0 0 327 0 0
Stage 1 319 319 - 258 258 -------
Stage 2 138 337 - 169 320 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 487 384 868 512 425 900 1256 - - 1229 - -
Stage 1 667 652 - 724 693 -------
Stage 2 851 640 - 816 651 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 469 379 868 504 419 897 1256 - - 1228 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 469 379 - 574 494 -------
Stage 1 664 647 - 720 689 -------
Stage 2 824 636 - 807 646 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 17.2 0.1 0.2
HCM LOS B C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1256 - - 428 584 1228 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.014 0.502 0.008 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 - 13.5 17.2 8 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A - B C A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 2.8 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 164 77 246 192 33 212 379
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.36 0.39 0.59 0.12 0.22 0.24 0.56
Control Delay 30.0 7.6 30.2 30.0 13.2 35.9 22.7 6.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.0 7.6 30.2 30.0 13.2 35.9 22.7 6.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 58 0 20 83 24 12 34 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 131 41 64 173 51 42 73 54
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 1660 1485 731 978 2744 978 2797 1330
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.25 0.07 0.03 0.08 0.28
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Future Volume (vph) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1783 1583 1736 1770 3476 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1783 1583 1736 1770 3476 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 155 18 164 8 33 36 246 172 20 33 212 379
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 132 0 18 000000277
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 173 32 0 59 0 246 192 0 33 212 102
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)11
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 12.6 12.6 5.2 14.6 28.8 3.1 17.3 17.3
Effective Green, g (s) 12.6 12.6 5.2 14.6 28.8 3.1 17.3 17.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.23 0.45 0.05 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 1.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 349 310 140 402 1559 85 953 426
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.03 c0.14 0.06 0.02 0.06
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.06
v/c Ratio 0.50 0.10 0.42 0.61 0.12 0.39 0.22 0.24
Uniform Delay, d1 23.0 21.2 28.1 22.3 10.3 29.6 18.2 18.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.1 0.7 1.9 0.1 1.1 0.3 0.7
Delay (s) 23.4 21.2 28.8 24.2 10.4 30.7 18.5 19.0
Level of Service C C C C B C B B
Approach Delay (s) 22.3 28.8 18.2 19.5
Approach LOS C C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 64.2 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Future Volume (veh/h) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 155 18 164 8 33 36 246 172 20 33 212 379
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 240 28 237 10 42 46 298 1541 177 96 1303 580
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.17 0.48 0.48 0.05 0.37 0.37
Sat Flow, veh/h 1604 186 1585 178 736 803 1781 3212 369 1781 3554 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 0 164 77 0 0 246 94 98 33 212 379
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1790 0 1585 1717 0 0 1781 1777 1804 1781 1777 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 0.0 5.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 7.4 1.6 1.7 1.0 2.2 11.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 0.0 5.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 7.4 1.6 1.7 1.0 2.2 11.1
Prop In Lane 0.90 1.00 0.10 0.47 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 267 0 237 98 0 0 298 853 865 96 1303 580
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.00 0.69 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.16 0.65
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2053 0 1818 738 0 0 1021 1560 1584 1021 3120 1390
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.4 0.0 22.5 26.0 0.0 0.0 22.5 8.0 8.0 25.5 11.9 14.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.0 0.0 1.4 5.1 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.2 3.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.0 1.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.8 3.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.3 0.0 23.9 31.0 0.0 0.0 24.7 8.1 8.1 26.2 12.1 18.1
LnGrp LOS C A C C A A C A A C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 337 77 438 624
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.6 31.0 17.4 16.5
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 24.5 6.7 6.5 30.8 11.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.0 49.0 24.0 32.0 49.0 64.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.4 13.1 4.5 3.0 3.7 7.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.3 0.1 0.0 2.5 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 181 260 298 41 199 269 39 13 231 50
v/c Ratio 0.63 0.56 0.75 0.09 0.73 0.16 0.05 0.10 0.22 0.09
Control Delay 44.4 9.1 45.1 0.4 52.0 16.5 0.1 41.8 27.7 0.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.4 9.1 45.1 0.4 52.0 16.5 0.1 41.8 27.7 0.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 97 0 158 0 108 42 0 7 52 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 153 60 234 0 #184 94 0 26 97 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 160 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 406 549 434 484 311 1712 800 127 1094 576
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.47 0.69 0.08 0.64 0.16 0.05 0.10 0.21 0.09
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Future Volume (vph) 62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1562 1840 1583 1770 3539 1546 1766 3539 1543
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1562 1840 1583 1770 3539 1546 1766 3539 1543
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 65 116 260 75 223 41 199 269 39 12 231 50
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 219 0 0 32 0 0 22 0 0 35
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 181 41 0 298 9 199 269 17 13 231 15
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1 1
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4362
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.3 14.3 19.4 19.4 13.9 39.9 39.9 0.9 26.9 26.9
Effective Green, g (s) 14.3 14.3 19.4 19.4 13.9 39.9 39.9 0.9 26.9 26.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.22 0.22 0.15 0.44 0.44 0.01 0.30 0.30
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 290 248 396 341 273 1568 685 17 1057 461
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.16 c0.11 0.08 0.01 c0.07
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.62 0.17 0.75 0.03 0.73 0.17 0.03 0.76 0.22 0.03
Uniform Delay, d1 35.3 32.7 33.1 27.8 36.3 15.1 14.1 44.4 23.7 22.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 4.1 0.3 7.9 0.0 8.8 0.2 0.1 103.6 0.5 0.1
Delay (s) 39.5 33.0 40.9 27.9 45.1 15.3 14.2 148.1 24.1 22.5
Level of Service D C D C D B B F C C
Approach Delay (s) 35.7 39.3 26.9 29.3
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 9
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 127 422 8 392 324 1 302 131
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.36 0.06 0.53 0.14 0.01 0.46 0.34
Control Delay 40.8 1.9 27.0 21.7 6.8 38.0 29.2 8.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 40.8 1.9 27.0 21.7 6.8 38.0 29.2 8.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 48 0 1 110 19 0 58 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 124 35 15 306 78 6 116 42
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100 100
Base Capacity (vph) 669 1188 712 760 2531 506 2027 929
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.36 0.01 0.52 0.13 0.00 0.15 0.14
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 12 367 0 2 5 341 280 2 1 263 114
Future Volume (vph) 98 12 367 0 2 5 341 280 2 1 263 114
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1776 1583 1512 1770 3535 1770 3539 1536
Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1380 1583 1512 1770 3535 1770 3539 1536
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 113 14 422 0 2 6 392 322 2 1 302 131
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 203 06000000101
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 127 219 0 2 0 392 324 0 1 302 30
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 4 5 4
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)22
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.4 41.5 0.8 30.1 46.9 0.7 17.5 17.5
Effective Green, g (s) 11.4 41.5 0.8 30.1 46.9 0.7 17.5 17.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.52 0.01 0.38 0.59 0.01 0.22 0.22
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 197 922 15 667 2077 15 776 336
v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.00 c0.22 0.09 0.00 c0.09
v/s Ratio Perm c0.09 0.05 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.64 0.24 0.14 0.59 0.16 0.07 0.39 0.09
Uniform Delay, d1 32.3 10.5 39.2 19.9 7.5 39.2 26.6 24.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 5.3 0.0 1.5 0.9 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.1
Delay (s) 37.6 10.5 40.7 20.7 7.5 39.9 26.9 24.9
Level of Service D B D C A D C C
Approach Delay (s) 16.8 40.7 14.8 26.3
Approach LOS B D B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 18.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.8 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
6: El Camino Real & San Gabriel Rd/Commercial Driveway HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 0 37 0 1 1 55 536 0 2 483 8
Future Vol, veh/h 14 0 37 0 1 1 55 536 0 2 483 8
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 3 00003301103
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------0--0-0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 16 0 43 0 1 1 63 616 0 2 555 9
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1000 1305 281 1025 1314 312 567 0 0 617 0 0
Stage 1 562 562 - 743 743 -------
Stage 2 438 743 - 282 571 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 197 159 716 189 157 684 1001 - - 959 - -
Stage 1 479 508 - 373 420 -------
Stage 2 567 420 - 701 503 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 185 148 714 169 146 681 998 - - 958 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 304 267 - 270 255 -------
Stage 1 447 505 - 349 393 -------
Stage 2 527 393 - 658 500 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.8 14.8 0.8 0
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 998 - - 521 371 958 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.063 - - 0.113 0.006 0.002 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 12.8 14.8 8.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.4 0 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 48 98 99 8 204 203 106 7 78 215
v/c Ratio 0.17 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.43 0.49 0.12 0.03 0.20 0.44
Control Delay 17.8 17.3 5.7 16.0 19.9 22.3 9.3 24.5 20.4 6.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 17.8 17.3 5.7 16.0 19.9 22.3 9.3 24.5 20.4 6.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 22 0 2 49 52 13 2 19 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 37 62 29 11 116 120 55 13 58 47
Internal Link Dist (ft) 435 214 337 398
Turn Bay Length (ft) 265 265 155 120 160 160
Base Capacity (vph) 667 1114 985 773 1108 1024 1352 1024 1366 1213
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.18 0.20 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.18
Intersection Summary
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing AM 01/05/2023
Existing AM Atascadero General Plan Update SimTraffic Report
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Page 1
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp Performance by approach
Approach EB NB SB SE All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.6 0.5 16.6 3.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 82.2 3.6 8.2 79.5 20.2
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)43 87 88 7 174 7 181 88 6 6 69 191
Future Volume (vph)43 87 88 7 174 7 181 88 6 6 69 191
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1719 1810 1538 1719 1799 1719 1792 1719 1810 1538
Flt Permitted 0.60 1.00 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1084 1810 1538 1255 1799 1719 1792 1719 1810 1538
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Adj. Flow (vph) 48 98 99 8 196 8 203 99 7 7 78 215
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 74 02002000159
Lane Group Flow (vph) 48 98 25 8 202 0 203 104 0 7 78 56
Heavy Vehicles (%)5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 12.5 25.8 1.1 14.4 14.4
Effective Green, g (s) 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 12.5 25.8 1.1 14.4 14.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.47 0.02 0.26 0.26
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.8 3.5 5.8 5.8
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 269 449 381 311 446 392 843 34 475 404
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.11 c0.12 0.06 0.00 c0.04
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.18 0.22 0.06 0.03 0.45 0.52 0.12 0.21 0.16 0.14
Uniform Delay, d1 16.2 16.4 15.7 15.6 17.5 18.5 8.1 26.4 15.6 15.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.1 1.5 1.3 0.2 3.5 0.4 0.4
Delay (s)16.9 16.9 15.9 15.7 19.0 19.9 8.3 30.0 16.0 15.9
Level of Service BBBBB BA CBB
Approach Delay (s)16.5 18.9 15.9 16.2
Approach LOS BBBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.37
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.8 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 15
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 43 87 88 7 174 7 181 88 6 6 69 191
Future Volume (veh/h) 43 87 88 7 174 7 181 88 6 6 69 191
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 98 99 8 196 8 203 99 7 7 78 215
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Percent Heavy Veh, %555555555555
Cap, veh/h 336 426 361 399 406 17 278 676 48 16 458 389
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.16 0.40 0.40 0.01 0.25 0.25
Sat Flow, veh/h 1150 1826 1547 1157 1742 71 1739 1685 119 1739 1826 1547
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 98 99 8 0 204 203 0 106 7 78 215
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1150 1826 1547 1157 0 1813 1739 0 1804 1739 1826 1547
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 1.7 2.1 0.2 0.0 3.9 4.5 0.0 1.5 0.2 1.3 4.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 1.7 2.1 2.0 0.0 3.9 4.5 0.0 1.5 0.2 1.3 4.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 336 426 361 399 0 423 278 0 724 16 458 389
V/C Ratio(X) 0.14 0.23 0.27 0.02 0.00 0.48 0.73 0.00 0.15 0.43 0.17 0.55
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 955 1409 1194 1022 0 1399 1299 0 1707 1299 1727 1464
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.6 12.5 12.6 13.3 0.0 13.3 16.1 0.0 7.6 19.8 11.8 13.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.8 4.4 0.0 0.3 20.2 0.6 4.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.0 1.4 1.7 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.5 1.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.1 13.1 13.5 13.3 0.0 15.1 20.5 0.0 7.9 40.0 12.3 17.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBABCAADBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 245 212 309 300
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.8 15.1 16.2 16.4
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.4 21.8 14.0 10.4 15.8 14.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.7 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 38.0 31.0 30.0 38.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 3.5 7.4 6.5 6.9 5.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 2.0 0.7 3.2 2.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.5
HCM 6th LOS B
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
9: Traffic Way & Via Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 26 77 136 22 66 180
Future Vol, veh/h 26 77 136 22 66 180
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 10110
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 74 74 74 74 74 74
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 35 104 184 30 89 243
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 621 201 0 0 215 0
Stage 1 200 -----
Stage 2 421 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 451 840 - - 1355 -
Stage 1 834 -----
Stage 2 662 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 416 838 - - 1354 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 416 -----
Stage 1 833 -----
Stage 2 612 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.8 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 667 1354 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.209 0.066 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.8 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.8 0.2 -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 17
Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 115 149 6 391 112 33 463
v/c Ratio 0.27 0.39 0.03 0.53 0.17 0.13 0.56
Control Delay 14.9 16.5 25.2 15.4 6.4 23.9 13.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 14.9 16.5 25.2 15.4 6.4 23.9 13.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 14 18 1 42 3 5 52
Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 80 13 214 38 37 250
Internal Link Dist (ft) 369 467 389 478
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 105 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1337 1170 949 1812 1505 949 1796
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.13 0.01 0.22 0.07 0.03 0.26
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 18
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 28 56 15 69 27 33 5 336 96 28 378 20
Future Volume (vph) 28 56 15 69 27 33 5 336 96 28 378 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.98 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 1742 1770 1863 1550 1770 1849
Flt Permitted 0.88 0.79 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1607 1405 1770 1863 1550 1770 1849
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Adj. Flow (vph) 33 65 17 80 31 38 6 391 112 33 440 23
RTOR Reduction (vph)05001000048020
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 110 0 0 139 0 6 391 64 33 461 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.1 11.1 0.6 17.9 17.9 1.9 18.7
Effective Green, g (s) 11.1 11.1 0.6 17.9 17.9 1.9 18.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.42
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 397 347 23 742 617 74 770
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.21 c0.02 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.10 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.28 0.40 0.26 0.53 0.10 0.45 0.60
Uniform Delay, d1 13.7 14.1 21.9 10.3 8.5 21.0 10.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 2.2 0.3 0.0 1.6 0.8
Delay (s) 13.8 14.4 24.1 10.6 8.5 22.5 11.0
Level of Service B B C B A C B
Approach Delay (s) 13.8 14.4 10.3 11.8
Approach LOS BBBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 11.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 44.9 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 19
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 56 15 69 27 33 5 336 96 28 378 20
Future Volume (veh/h) 28 56 15 69 27 33 5 336 96 28 378 20
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 65 17 80 31 38 6 391 112 33 440 23
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 209 239 52 310 106 82 14 573 485 71 568 30
Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.04 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 297 1155 252 645 511 396 1781 1870 1582 1781 1762 92
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 0 0 149 0 0 6 391 112 33 0 463
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1704 0 0 1552 0 0 1781 1870 1582 1781 0 1854
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 5.7 1.7 0.6 0.0 7.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 5.7 1.7 0.6 0.0 7.1
Prop In Lane 0.29 0.15 0.54 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 501 0 0 498 0 0 14 573 485 71 0 597
V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.68 0.23 0.47 0.00 0.78
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1883 0 0 1692 0 0 1136 3698 3129 1136 0 3665
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.5 0.0 0.0 10.8 0.0 0.0 15.5 9.5 8.1 14.7 0.0 9.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.5 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 1.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.6 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 0.0 22.4 10.1 8.2 16.5 0.0 10.4
LnGrp LOS BAABAACBABAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 115 149 509 496
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.6 10.9 9.8 10.8
Approach LOS BBAB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.3 14.9 11.1 4.9 15.4 11.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.1 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 62.0 33.0 20.0 62.0 32.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 7.7 3.7 2.1 9.1 4.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.4
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 20
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 300 51 193 97 50 447 4 105 624 225
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.13 0.69 0.33 0.42 0.69 0.01 0.58 0.81 0.33
Control Delay 61.3 8.8 70.2 28.4 79.2 42.5 0.0 76.1 45.3 17.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 61.3 8.8 70.2 28.4 79.2 42.5 0.0 76.1 45.3 17.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 230 0 153 26 41 308 0 84 460 71
Queue Length 95th (ft) 366 16 255 70 91 432 0 159 606 123
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 50 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 627 573 647 592 385 1227 1030 385 1227 1041
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.09 0.30 0.16 0.13 0.36 0.00 0.27 0.51 0.22
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 21
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Future Volume (vph) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 1531 1856 1583 1770 1863 1540 1770 1863 1539
Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1799 1531 1856 1583 1770 1863 1540 1770 1863 1539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Adj. Flow (vph) 212 88 51 14 179 97 50 447 4 105 624 225
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 39 0 0 53 0030055
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 300 12 0 193 44 50 447 1 105 624 170
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 6 4 3
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 7 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 7826
Actuated Green, G (s) 29.1 29.1 19.2 19.2 6.8 46.2 46.2 13.1 52.5 52.5
Effective Green, g (s) 29.1 29.1 19.2 19.2 6.8 46.2 46.2 13.1 52.5 52.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.41 0.41
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 413 351 281 239 94 679 561 183 771 637
v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.10 0.03 0.24 c0.06 c0.33
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.11
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.03 0.69 0.19 0.53 0.66 0.00 0.57 0.81 0.27
Uniform Delay, d1 45.1 37.9 50.9 46.9 58.4 33.7 25.6 54.1 32.7 24.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 5.3 0.0 5.5 0.1 2.9 1.8 0.0 2.7 5.9 0.1
Delay (s) 50.4 37.9 56.4 47.1 61.3 35.4 25.6 56.8 38.6 24.5
Level of Service D D E D E D C E D C
Approach Delay (s) 48.6 53.3 37.9 37.3
Approach LOS DDDD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 41.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 126.7 Sum of lost time (s) 19.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
12: SR 41 & Mercedes Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 23
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 0 67 0 0 0 43 143 3 2 322 47
Future Vol, veh/h 30 0 67 0 0 0 43 143 3 2 322 47
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------285--165--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 32 0 71 0 0 0 45 151 3 2 339 49
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 611 612 364 646 635 153 388 0 0 154 0 0
Stage 1 368 368 - 243 243 -------
Stage 2 243 244 - 403 392 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 404 407 679 383 395 890 1165 - - 1420 - -
Stage 1 650 620 - 758 703 -------
Stage 2 758 702 - 622 605 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 391 391 679 333 379 890 1165 - - 1420 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 391 391 - 333 379 -------
Stage 1 625 619 - 728 676 -------
Stage 2 729 675 - 557 604 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13 0 1.9 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1165 - - 553 - 1420 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.039 - - 0.185 - 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - - 13 0 7.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B A A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.7 - 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM
13: Atascadero Ave & Santa Rosa Rd HCM 6th AWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 24
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.7
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 111 6 48 50 46 8 72 75 206 53 7
Future Vol, veh/h 7 111 6 48 50 46 8 72 75 206 53 7
Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 9 141 8 61 63 58 10 91 95 261 67 9
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 10.6 10.7 10.2 13.6
HCM LOS BBBB
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 5% 6% 33% 77%
Vol Thru, % 46% 90% 35% 20%
Vol Right, % 48% 5% 32% 3%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 155 124 144 266
LT Vol 8 7 48 206
Through Vol 72 111 50 53
RT Vol 75 6 46 7
Lane Flow Rate 196 157 182 337
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.281 0.247 0.279 0.499
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.155 5.668 5.517 5.339
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 697 633 651 673
Service Time 3.197 3.713 3.562 3.376
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.281 0.248 0.28 0.501
HCM Control Delay 10.2 10.6 10.7 13.6
HCM Lane LOS BBBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.2 1 1.1 2.8
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 164 77 246 192 33 212 379
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.37 0.32 0.48 0.14 0.07 0.25 0.57
Control Delay 28.5 7.3 21.1 14.5 15.3 10.5 20.2 6.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 28.5 7.3 21.1 14.5 15.3 10.5 20.2 6.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 58 0 14 52 19 6 33 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 115 38 51 101 53 20 60 47
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 874 860 244 526 1443 492 1296 819
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.19 0.32 0.47 0.13 0.07 0.16 0.46
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Future Volume (vph) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.1 4.6 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1783 1583 1736 1770 3476 1767 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.47 1.00 0.63 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1783 1583 1736 880 3476 1174 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 155 18 164 8 33 36 246 172 20 33 212 379
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 134 0 33 000000274
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 173 30 0 44 0 246 192 0 33 212 105
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)11
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.6 11.6 5.3 31.0 23.2 19.8 17.4 17.4
Effective Green, g (s) 11.6 11.6 5.3 31.0 23.2 19.8 17.4 17.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.08 0.49 0.37 0.31 0.28 0.28
Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.1 4.6 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 1.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 328 291 146 548 1280 391 977 437
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.03 c0.06 0.06 0.00 0.06
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.16 0.02 0.07
v/c Ratio 0.53 0.10 0.30 0.45 0.15 0.08 0.22 0.24
Uniform Delay, d1 23.2 21.4 27.1 9.7 13.3 15.1 17.6 17.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.7
Delay (s) 23.9 21.4 27.5 9.9 13.4 15.1 17.8 18.4
Level of Service C C C A B B B B
Approach Delay (s) 22.7 27.5 11.5 18.0
Approach LOS C C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Future Volume (veh/h) 132 15 139 7 28 31 209 146 17 28 180 322
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 155 18 164 8 33 36 246 172 20 33 212 379
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 261 30 258 15 61 67 545 977 112 636 1047 466
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.29 0.29
Sat Flow, veh/h 1604 186 1585 178 736 803 1781 3211 369 1781 3554 1582
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 0 164 77 0 0 246 94 98 33 212 379
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1790 0 1585 1717 0 0 1781 1777 1803 1781 1777 1582
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.5 0.0 5.9 2.6 0.0 0.0 5.7 2.4 2.4 0.7 2.7 13.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.5 0.0 5.9 2.6 0.0 0.0 5.7 2.4 2.4 0.7 2.7 13.6
Prop In Lane 0.90 1.00 0.10 0.47 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 292 0 258 143 0 0 545 541 549 636 1047 466
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.64 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.17 0.18 0.05 0.20 0.81
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 819 0 725 196 0 0 574 653 663 636 1214 540
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.7 0.0 23.9 26.9 0.0 0.0 12.1 15.6 15.7 10.9 16.2 20.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.0 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.3 11.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 2.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.9 0.9 0.2 1.0 5.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.5 0.0 24.9 28.1 0.0 0.0 12.3 16.1 16.1 10.9 16.5 31.3
LnGrp LOS C A C C AABBBBBC
Approach Vol, veh/h 337 77 438 624
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.7 28.1 14.0 25.2
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 23.4 9.7 12.4 24.0 15.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.4 5.4 4.6 5.4 5.4 5.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.6 20.9 7.0 7.0 22.5 28.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.7 15.6 4.6 2.7 4.4 7.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 376 75 264 199 269 39 13 231 50
v/c Ratio 0.42 0.81 0.91 0.65 0.68 0.12 0.04 0.09 0.15 0.07
Control Delay 36.5 34.1 112.3 37.0 46.5 8.6 0.4 40.3 18.2 0.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 36.5 34.1 112.3 37.0 46.5 8.6 0.4 40.3 18.2 0.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 32 133 42 132 108 25 0 7 40 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 210 #107 185 166 73 3 25 83 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 227 628 122 599 483 2266 1021 169 1564 766
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.60 0.61 0.44 0.41 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.15 0.07
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Future Volume (vph)62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1654 1769 1819 1770 3539 1546 1770 3539 1544
Flt Permitted 0.37 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)698 1654 376 1819 1770 3539 1546 1770 3539 1544
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 65 116 260 75 223 41 199 269 39 12 231 50
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 104 009000160028
Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 272 0 75 255 0 199 269 23 13 231 22
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)1 1 1 1 1
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 14.9 53.3 53.3 1.4 39.8 39.8
Effective Green, g (s) 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 14.9 53.3 53.3 1.4 39.8 39.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.17 0.59 0.59 0.02 0.44 0.44
Clearance Time (s)4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 153 363 82 400 293 2095 915 27 1565 682
v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 0.14 c0.11 0.08 0.01 c0.07
v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.20 0.01 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.42 0.75 0.91 0.64 0.68 0.13 0.03 0.48 0.15 0.03
Uniform Delay, d1 30.2 32.8 34.3 31.9 35.3 8.1 7.6 43.9 15.0 14.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 8.4 70.8 3.3 5.6 0.1 0.1 9.5 0.2 0.1
Delay (s)32.1 41.2 105.1 35.2 40.9 8.2 7.6 53.5 15.2 14.3
Level of Service C D F D D A A D B B
Approach Delay (s)39.9 50.7 21.0 16.7
Approach LOS D D C B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
--~ tt ~ ~ tt
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Future Volume (veh/h) 62 111 250 72 214 39 191 258 37 12 222 48
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 116 260 75 223 41 199 269 39 12 231 50
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 286 156 349 180 466 86 238 1792 782 36 1389 605
Arrive On Green 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.02 0.39 0.39
Sat Flow, veh/h 1115 513 1149 1006 1537 283 1781 3554 1551 1781 3554 1548
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 65 0 376 75 0 264 199 269 39 12 231 50
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1115 0 1662 1006 0 1819 1781 1777 1551 1781 1777 1548
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 0.0 18.3 6.5 0.0 10.6 9.8 3.7 1.2 0.6 3.8 1.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 15.2 0.0 18.3 24.9 0.0 10.6 9.8 3.7 1.2 0.6 3.8 1.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 286 0 504 180 0 552 238 1792 782 36 1389 605
V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.75 0.42 0.00 0.48 0.84 0.15 0.05 0.33 0.17 0.08
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 311 0 541 203 0 592 487 1792 782 170 1389 605
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.7 0.0 28.2 39.4 0.0 25.5 38.0 12.0 11.3 43.5 17.9 17.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 5.2 1.5 0.0 0.6 5.7 0.2 0.1 4.0 0.3 0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 0.0 7.8 1.7 0.0 4.6 4.5 1.4 0.4 0.3 1.5 0.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.1 0.0 33.4 40.9 0.0 26.2 43.8 12.1 11.5 47.5 18.1 17.5
LnGrp LOS C A C D A C D B B D B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 441 339 507 293
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.2 29.5 24.5 19.2
Approach LOS C C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.4 40.6 32.0 7.2 50.8 32.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.4 5.4 * 4.7 5.4 5.4 * 4.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.6 20.6 * 29 8.6 36.6 * 29
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.8 5.8 20.3 2.6 5.7 26.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 1.7 1.8 0.0 2.6 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.0
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
--~ tt ~ ~ tt
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 127 422 8 392 324 1 302 131
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.44 0.03 0.56 0.15 0.00 0.33 0.24
Control Delay 25.2 2.9 20.6 11.3 8.9 28.0 19.3 1.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 25.2 2.9 20.6 11.3 8.9 28.0 19.3 1.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 30 0 1 51 18 0 37 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 107 42 14 177 86 5 95 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100 100
Base Capacity (vph) 734 1083 259 798 2372 275 1829 900
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.17 0.39 0.03 0.49 0.14 0.00 0.17 0.15
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 12 367 0 2 5 341 280 2 1 263 114
Future Volume (vph) 98 12 367 0 2 5 341 280 2 1 263 114
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.5 5.1 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1777 1583 1547 1767 3535 1770 3539 1540
Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1381 1583 1547 820 3535 1770 3539 1540
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 113 14 422 0 2 6 392 322 2 1 302 131
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 283 0600100091
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 127 139 0 2 0 392 323 0 1 302 40
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 4 5 4
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)22
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA pm+pt NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 8.7 20.0 0.9 35.9 29.5 0.9 18.6 18.6
Effective Green, g (s) 8.7 20.0 0.9 35.9 29.5 0.9 18.6 18.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.33 0.01 0.59 0.49 0.01 0.31 0.31
Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.5 5.1 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 197 521 22 661 1717 26 1084 471
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.00 c0.11 0.09 0.00 0.09
v/s Ratio Perm c0.09 0.04 c0.24 0.03
v/c Ratio 0.64 0.27 0.09 0.59 0.19 0.04 0.28 0.09
Uniform Delay, d1 24.5 15.0 29.5 6.9 8.8 29.5 16.0 15.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 5.3 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1
Delay (s) 29.9 15.1 30.2 7.9 8.9 29.7 16.1 15.1
Level of Service C B C A A C B B
Approach Delay (s) 18.5 30.2 8.3 15.8
Approach LOS B C A B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.7 Sum of lost time (s) 21.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp HCM 6th Roundabout
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh14.5
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB SE
Entry Lanes 10111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 11111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 48 0 676 723 363
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 49 0 689 737 370
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 1076 603 421 22 759
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 53 507 703 581 0
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 00000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.5 0.0 20.0 8.7 16.4
Approach LOS A - C A C
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 49 689 737 370
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 461 898 1349 636
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.975 0.981 0.981 0.981
Flow Entry, veh/h 48 676 723 363
Cap Entry, veh/h 449 881 1324 624
V/C Ratio 0.106 0.767 0.546 0.581
Control Delay, s/veh 9.5 20.0 8.7 16.4
LOS A C A C
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 8 3 4
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 11
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 212 139 14 276 50 447 4 105 624 225
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.20 0.06 0.78 0.39 0.70 0.01 0.61 0.85 0.30
Control Delay 26.0 14.8 29.7 45.0 49.3 28.7 0.0 55.0 33.9 3.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 26.0 14.8 29.7 45.0 49.3 28.7 0.0 55.0 33.9 3.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 75 34 6 121 25 190 0 53 288 1
Queue Length 95th (ft) 116 63 19 177 55 237 0 #105 340 23
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 379 852 322 480 128 947 849 189 1012 940
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.16 0.04 0.57 0.39 0.47 0.00 0.56 0.62 0.24
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Future Volume (vph) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1743 1760 1765 1770 1863 1545 1770 1863 1544
Flt Permitted 0.24 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)450 1743 1238 1765 1770 1863 1545 1770 1863 1544
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Adj. Flow (vph) 212 88 51 14 179 97 50 447 4 105 624 225
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 22 000300137
Lane Group Flow (vph) 212 116 0 14 254 0 50 447 1 105 624 88
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)6 6 4 3
Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 29.3 29.3 14.2 14.2 2.6 26.4 26.4 5.5 29.3 29.3
Effective Green, g (s) 29.3 29.3 14.2 14.2 2.6 26.4 26.4 5.5 29.3 29.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.19 0.19 0.03 0.35 0.35 0.07 0.39 0.39
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 359 674 232 331 60 649 538 128 721 597
v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.07 c0.14 0.03 0.24 c0.06 c0.33
v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.01 0.00 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.59 0.17 0.06 0.77 0.83 0.69 0.00 0.82 0.87 0.15
Uniform Delay, d1 17.2 15.2 25.3 29.2 36.3 21.1 16.1 34.6 21.4 15.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 0.0 0.0 9.2 58.5 2.4 0.0 31.3 10.3 0.0
Delay (s)19.7 15.3 25.3 38.4 94.8 23.6 16.1 65.9 31.7 15.1
Level of Service B B C D F C B E C B
Approach Delay (s)18.0 37.8 30.6 31.5
Approach LOS B D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.7 Sum of lost time (s)19.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
--~ t ~ ~ t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing AM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Future Volume (veh/h) 161 67 39 11 136 74 38 340 3 80 474 171
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 212 88 51 14 179 97 50 447 4 105 624 225
Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 357 413 239 337 211 115 80 629 530 134 686 579
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.08 0.37 0.37
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1107 642 1233 1134 614 1781 1870 1576 1781 1870 1579
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 212 0 139 14 0 276 50 447 4 105 624 225
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1749 1233 0 1748 1781 1870 1576 1781 1870 1579
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 0.0 3.6 0.6 0.0 10.3 1.9 14.0 0.1 3.9 21.3 7.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.0 0.0 3.6 0.6 0.0 10.3 1.9 14.0 0.1 3.9 21.3 7.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 357 0 652 337 0 326 80 629 530 134 686 579
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.21 0.04 0.00 0.85 0.62 0.71 0.01 0.78 0.91 0.39
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 422 0 858 437 0 468 132 976 822 196 1043 880
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.2 0.0 14.4 22.5 0.0 26.4 31.6 19.5 14.9 30.6 20.3 15.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.8 2.9 0.6 0.0 6.5 6.0 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.5 0.0 1.4 0.2 0.0 4.5 0.8 5.6 0.0 1.8 9.3 2.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.8 0.0 14.4 22.5 0.0 33.3 34.5 20.0 14.9 37.1 26.3 15.9
LnGrp LOS B A B C A C C C B D C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 351 290 501 954
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.7 32.7 21.4 25.0
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 45678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.7 27.9 29.7 7.6 30.0 12.5 17.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.5 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.4 35.1 33.0 5.0 37.5 10.5 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.9 16.0 5.6 3.9 23.3 8.0 12.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.0
HCM 6th LOS C
--~ t ~ ~ t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
1: El Camino Real & San Benito Rd HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 079017826018202323
Future Vol, veh/h 4 079017826018202323
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 00001900009
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 4 0 8 10 0 19 9 289 20 22 258 3
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 641 640 269 625 631 300 270 0 0 309 0 0
Stage 1 313 313 - 317 317 -------
Stage 2 328 327 - 308 314 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 388 393 770 397 398 740 1293 - - 1252 - -
Stage 1 698 657 - 694 654 -------
Stage 2 685 648 - 702 656 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 367 380 763 385 384 739 1282 - - 1252 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 367 380 - 385 384 -------
Stage 1 687 639 - 689 649 -------
Stage 2 662 643 - 683 638 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.7 11.8 0.2 0.6
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1282 - - 548 561 1252 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - - 0.022 0.051 0.018 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - 11.7 11.8 7.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.2 0.1 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
2: El Camino Real & San Anselmo East HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 3 7 103 9 14 11 308 155 33 254 8
Future Vol, veh/h 6 3 7 103 9 14 11 308 155 33 254 8
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 00001402204
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length --------10075--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 6 3 7 108 9 15 12 324 163 35 267 8
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 537 858 142 555 699 165 279 0 0 489 0 0
Stage 1 345 345 - 350 350 -------
Stage 2 192 513 - 205 349 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 427 293 880 414 362 850 1281 - - 1070 - -
Stage 1 644 635 - 639 631 -------
Stage 2 791 534 - 778 632 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 397 278 877 392 344 848 1276 - - 1068 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 397 278 - 485 435 -------
Stage 1 633 612 - 629 622 -------
Stage 2 755 526 - 742 609 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.9 14.6 0.2 0.9
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1276 - - 472 505 1068 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - - 0.036 0.263 0.033 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - 12.9 14.6 8.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A - B B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 1 0.1 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 263 163 75 247 238 20 205 240
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.31 0.40 0.59 0.15 0.16 0.27 0.47
Control Delay 30.1 6.4 33.9 32.2 14.2 39.8 27.0 7.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.1 6.4 33.9 32.2 14.2 39.8 27.0 7.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 95 0 23 92 26 8 37 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 211 47 76 204 73 34 86 61
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 1611 1445 680 912 2581 912 2645 1204
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.27 0.09 0.02 0.08 0.20
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Future Volume (vph) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1784 1583 1732 1770 3463 1770 3539 1539
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1784 1583 1732 1770 3463 1770 3539 1539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 232 31 162 20 23 32 247 210 28 20 205 240
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 123 0 16 000000182
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 263 40 0 59 0 247 238 0 20 205 58
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)42
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)13
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 17.2 17.2 5.4 15.8 30.9 1.8 16.9 16.9
Effective Green, g (s) 17.2 17.2 5.4 15.8 30.9 1.8 16.9 16.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.08 0.23 0.44 0.03 0.24 0.24
Clearance Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 1.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 439 390 133 400 1533 45 856 372
v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.03 c0.14 0.07 0.01 c0.06
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.60 0.10 0.45 0.62 0.16 0.44 0.24 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 23.3 20.3 30.8 24.3 11.6 33.5 21.3 20.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0.0 0.9 2.0 0.1 2.5 0.4 0.5
Delay (s) 24.7 20.4 31.6 26.3 11.8 36.0 21.6 21.3
Level of Service C C C C B D C C
Approach Delay (s) 23.1 31.6 19.2 22.1
Approach LOS C C B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.8 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Future Volume (veh/h) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 232 31 162 20 23 32 247 210 28 20 205 240
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 319 43 320 25 29 40 302 1274 167 90 1016 441
Arrive On Green 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.17 0.40 0.40 0.05 0.29 0.29
Sat Flow, veh/h 1580 211 1585 458 526 732 1781 3147 413 1781 3554 1542
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 263 0 162 75 0 0 247 117 121 20 205 240
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1791 0 1585 1716 0 0 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1542
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.9 0.0 4.6 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.7 2.1 2.2 0.5 2.2 6.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.9 0.0 4.6 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.7 2.1 2.2 0.5 2.2 6.6
Prop In Lane 0.88 1.00 0.27 0.43 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 361 0 320 95 0 0 302 719 722 90 1016 441
V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.00 0.51 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.16 0.17 0.22 0.20 0.54
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2275 0 2013 817 0 0 1131 1727 1734 1131 3455 1499
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.8 0.0 17.9 23.5 0.0 0.0 20.2 9.6 9.6 23.0 13.6 15.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 0.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.3 2.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.6 0.0 1.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.8 2.2
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.9 0.0 18.4 29.0 0.0 0.0 22.3 9.8 9.9 23.4 13.9 18.1
LnGrp LOS B A B C A A C A A C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 425 75 485 465
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.3 29.0 16.2 16.5
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.0 18.4 6.3 6.0 24.4 13.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.0 49.0 24.0 32.0 49.0 64.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.7 8.6 4.2 2.5 4.2 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.6 0.1 0.0 3.2 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 314 291 242 43 271 467 90 34 401 99
v/c Ratio 0.85 0.53 0.77 0.11 0.78 0.29 0.12 0.35 0.42 0.19
Control Delay 60.6 8.1 55.4 0.6 52.9 19.2 4.4 56.2 33.8 3.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.6 8.1 55.4 0.6 52.9 19.2 4.4 56.2 33.8 3.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 185 0 147 0 164 111 0 21 118 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #342 69 227 0 238 146 29 #58 174 25
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 160 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 382 555 366 422 451 1634 763 98 964 512
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.82 0.52 0.66 0.10 0.60 0.29 0.12 0.35 0.42 0.19
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Future Volume (vph) 96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1834 1558 1822 1583 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1532
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1834 1558 1822 1583 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1532
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 100 214 291 109 133 43 271 467 90 34 401 99
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 232 0 0 36 0 0 50 0 0 72
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 314 59 0 242 7 271 467 40 34 401 27
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 1 3
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4362
Actuated Green, G (s) 20.2 20.2 17.3 17.3 19.7 44.2 44.2 2.8 27.3 27.3
Effective Green, g (s) 20.2 20.2 17.3 17.3 19.7 44.2 44.2 2.8 27.3 27.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 370 314 315 273 348 1564 682 49 966 418
v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.13 c0.15 0.13 0.02 c0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.85 0.19 0.77 0.03 0.78 0.30 0.06 0.69 0.42 0.06
Uniform Delay, d1 38.4 33.1 39.4 34.4 38.1 17.9 16.0 48.2 29.8 26.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 16.4 0.3 10.7 0.0 10.1 0.5 0.2 32.5 1.3 0.3
Delay (s) 54.8 33.4 50.2 34.4 48.2 18.4 16.1 80.7 31.1 27.2
Level of Service D C D C D B B F C C
Approach Delay (s) 44.5 47.8 27.9 33.5
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.1% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 9
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 161 273 4 387 502 496 245
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.25 0.03 0.57 0.21 0.63 0.55
Control Delay 44.7 1.9 39.8 27.2 6.4 32.9 17.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.7 1.9 39.8 27.2 6.4 32.9 17.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 72 0 1 140 38 112 38
Queue Length 95th (ft) 166 36 13 #380 110 208 131
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100
Base Capacity (vph) 591 1098 687 678 2405 1808 835
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.25 0.01 0.57 0.21 0.27 0.29
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 139 7 248 0 3 1 352 457 0 0 451 223
Future Volume (vph) 139 7 248 0 3 1 352 457 0 0 451 223
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1775 1583 1772 1770 3539 3539 1515
Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1365 1583 1772 1770 3539 3539 1515
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 153 8 273 0 3 1 387 502 0 0 496 245
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 126 01000000116
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 161 147 0 3 0 387 502 0 0 496 129
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 3 10
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 45.5 0.8 30.8 53.8 18.0 18.0
Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 45.5 0.8 30.8 53.8 18.0 18.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.54 0.01 0.37 0.64 0.21 0.21
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 238 948 16 646 2258 755 323
v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.00 c0.22 0.14 c0.14
v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.04 0.08
v/c Ratio 0.68 0.16 0.19 0.60 0.22 0.66 0.40
Uniform Delay, d1 32.6 9.7 41.4 21.7 6.4 30.3 28.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 5.9 0.0 2.1 1.0 0.1 2.1 0.8
Delay (s) 38.4 9.8 43.5 22.7 6.5 32.4 29.3
Level of Service D A D C A C C
Approach Delay (s) 20.4 43.5 13.6 31.4
Approach LOS C D B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 84.3 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
6: El Camino Real & San Gabriel Rd/Commercial Driveway HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 2 64 1 2 10 58 643 0 4 553 28
Future Vol, veh/h 40 2 64 1 2 10 58 643 0 4 553 28
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 5 0000510131301
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------0--0-0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 49 2 78 1 2 12 71 784 0 5 674 34
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1225 1624 338 1287 1658 410 709 0 0 797 0 0
Stage 1 685 685 - 939 939 -------
Stage 2 540 939 - 348 719 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 135 102 658 121 97 591 886 - - 821 - -
Stage 1 404 447 - 284 341 -------
Stage 2 494 341 - 641 431 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 122 92 657 98 88 581 885 - - 811 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 238 205 - 193 191 -------
Stage 1 371 444 - 258 310 -------
Stage 2 439 310 - 558 428 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19 14.5 0.8 0.1
HCM LOS C B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 885 - - 385 396 811 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.08 - - 0.336 0.04 0.006 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 19 14.5 9.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - C B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 1.5 0.1 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 101 148 142 7 97 92 138 11 122 146
v/c Ratio 0.28 0.28 0.26 0.02 0.19 0.27 0.17 0.04 0.25 0.28
Control Delay 16.4 15.8 4.5 13.3 14.1 21.8 11.0 23.3 18.7 6.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 16.4 15.8 4.5 13.3 14.1 21.8 11.0 23.3 18.7 6.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 31 0 1 19 21 15 3 25 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 58 76 31 9 52 72 82 18 84 40
Internal Link Dist (ft) 435 214 337 398
Turn Bay Length (ft) 265 265 155 120 160 160
Base Capacity (vph) 911 1313 1158 871 1286 1219 1504 1219 1526 1323
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.01 0.08 0.11
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)92 135 129 6 77 11 84 113 13 10 111 133
Future Volume (vph)92 135 129 6 77 11 84 113 13 10 111 133
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 1583 1770 1823 1770 1834 1770 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1293 1863 1583 1235 1823 1770 1834 1770 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 101 148 142 7 85 12 92 124 14 11 122 146
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 104 04003000103
Lane Group Flow (vph) 101 148 38 7 93 0 92 135 0 11 122 43
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 6.8 20.2 1.0 14.4 14.4
Effective Green, g (s) 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 6.8 20.2 1.0 14.4 14.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.14 0.42 0.02 0.30 0.30
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.8 3.5 5.8 5.8
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 348 502 426 332 491 247 762 36 552 469
v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.05 c0.05 0.07 0.01 c0.07
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.03
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.09 0.02 0.19 0.37 0.18 0.31 0.22 0.09
Uniform Delay, d1 14.1 14.1 13.3 13.0 13.7 19.0 9.0 23.5 12.9 12.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.4 1.1 0.3 5.6 0.5 0.2
Delay (s)15.0 14.8 13.5 13.1 14.1 20.1 9.3 29.1 13.4 12.6
Level of Service BBBBB CA CBB
Approach Delay (s)14.4 14.0 13.6 13.6
Approach LOS BBBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 48.6 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 15
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 92 135 129 6 77 11 84 113 13 10 111 133
Future Volume (veh/h) 92 135 129 6 77 11 84 113 13 10 111 133
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 101 148 142 7 85 12 92 124 14 11 122 146
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 501 500 423 432 428 60 151 500 56 26 435 368
Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.01 0.23 0.23
Sat Flow, veh/h 1293 1870 1585 1089 1602 226 1781 1650 186 1781 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 101 148 142 7 0 97 92 0 138 11 122 146
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1293 1870 1585 1089 0 1828 1781 0 1837 1781 1870 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 2.2 2.5 0.2 0.0 1.4 1.7 0.0 1.9 0.2 1.8 2.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 2.2 2.5 2.3 0.0 1.4 1.7 0.0 1.9 0.2 1.8 2.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 501 500 423 432 0 488 151 0 556 26 435 368
V/C Ratio(X) 0.20 0.30 0.34 0.02 0.00 0.20 0.61 0.00 0.25 0.43 0.28 0.40
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1320 1685 1428 1122 0 1647 1553 0 2028 1553 2065 1750
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.2 10.0 10.2 11.0 0.0 9.8 15.2 0.0 9.0 16.8 10.8 11.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.7 0.0 0.7 12.8 1.1 2.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.2 0.6 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.6 10.7 11.1 11.0 0.0 10.2 19.9 0.0 9.8 29.7 12.0 13.4
LnGrp LOS BBBBABBAACBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 391 104 230 279
Approach Delay, s/veh 11.1 10.2 13.8 13.4
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.5 16.1 13.8 6.9 13.7 13.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.7 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 38.0 31.0 30.0 38.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 3.9 5.7 3.7 4.7 4.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.7 3.4 0.3 3.1 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.3
HCM 6th LOS B
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing PM 01/05/2023
Existing PM Atascadero General Plan Update SimTraffic Report
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Page 1
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp Performance by approach
Approach EB NB SB SE All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.8 1.8 4.8 15.1 5.6
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
9: Traffic Way & Via Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 41 70 150 39 47 118
Future Vol, veh/h 41 70 150 39 47 118
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 10110
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 45 76 163 42 51 128
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 415 186 0 0 206 0
Stage 1 185 -----
Stage 2 230 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 594 856 - - 1365 -
Stage 1 847 -----
Stage 2 808 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 570 854 - - 1364 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 570 -----
Stage 1 846 -----
Stage 2 776 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11 0 2.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 721 1364 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.167 0.037 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.1 -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 17
Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 81 130 7 444 93 41 439
v/c Ratio 0.19 0.35 0.03 0.46 0.11 0.16 0.41
Control Delay 14.7 16.7 27.0 14.2 6.9 25.1 11.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 14.7 16.7 27.0 14.2 6.9 25.1 11.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 10 16 1 47 3 6 46
Queue Length 95th (ft) 53 79 16 283 41 49 265
Internal Link Dist (ft) 369 467 389 478
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 105 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1361 1184 958 1782 1464 958 1769
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.06 0.11 0.01 0.25 0.06 0.04 0.25
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 18
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 16 47 14 60 31 34 7 426 89 39 408 13
Future Volume (vph) 16 47 14 60 31 34 7 426 89 39 408 13
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.97 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.99 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1790 1742 1770 1863 1543 1770 1852
Flt Permitted 0.91 0.81 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1653 1436 1770 1863 1543 1770 1852
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 17 49 15 62 32 35 7 444 93 41 425 14
RTOR Reduction (vph)06001100031010
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 75 0 0 119 0 7 444 62 41 438 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 4 4
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 9.0 9.0 0.6 22.1 22.1 2.0 23.0
Effective Green, g (s) 9.0 9.0 0.6 22.1 22.1 2.0 23.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.01 0.47 0.47 0.04 0.49
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 315 274 22 874 723 75 904
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.24 c0.02 0.24
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.08 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.24 0.43 0.32 0.51 0.09 0.55 0.48
Uniform Delay, d1 16.1 16.8 23.0 8.7 6.9 22.1 8.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.4 3.0 0.2 0.0 4.3 0.1
Delay (s) 16.3 17.2 26.1 8.9 6.9 26.4 8.2
Level of Service B B C A A C A
Approach Delay (s) 16.3 17.2 8.8 9.8
Approach LOS BBAA
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 10.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 47.1 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 19
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 47 14 60 31 34 7 426 89 39 408 13
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 47 14 60 31 34 7 426 89 39 408 13
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 17 49 15 62 32 35 7 444 93 41 425 14
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 176 235 62 277 112 82 17 588 495 85 606 20
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 195 1216 321 555 581 423 1781 1870 1575 1781 1800 59
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 81 0 0 129 0 0 7 444 93 41 0 439
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1733 0 0 1559 0 0 1781 1870 1575 1781 0 1859
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.7 1.4 0.7 0.0 6.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.7 1.4 0.7 0.0 6.5
Prop In Lane 0.21 0.19 0.48 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 473 0 0 471 0 0 17 588 495 85 0 626
V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.76 0.19 0.48 0.00 0.70
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1902 0 0 1702 0 0 1131 3682 3101 1131 0 3661
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.7 0.0 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 15.5 9.7 7.9 14.6 0.0 9.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.8 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.0 1.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.8 0.0 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 21.5 10.5 7.9 16.2 0.0 9.6
LnGrp LOS BAABAACBABAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 81 129 544 480
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 11.2 10.2 10.2
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.6 15.2 10.7 4.9 15.9 10.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.1 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 62.0 33.0 20.0 62.0 32.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 8.7 3.2 2.1 8.5 4.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 20
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 203 55 82 53 43 499 8 53 492 146
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.15 0.40 0.23 0.27 0.73 0.01 0.31 0.71 0.24
Control Delay 38.7 9.0 45.8 12.1 46.2 31.1 0.0 45.9 29.5 11.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 38.7 9.0 45.8 12.1 46.2 31.1 0.0 45.9 29.5 11.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 0 38 0 20 210 0 25 203 22
Queue Length 95th (ft) 211 30 109 32 68 428 0 79 413 76
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 50 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1005 868 1032 908 615 1681 1374 615 1681 1365
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.30 0.01 0.09 0.29 0.11
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 21
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Future Volume (vph) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1807 1514 1855 1583 1770 1863 1538 1770 1863 1533
Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1807 1514 1855 1583 1770 1863 1538 1770 1863 1533
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 126 77 55 7 75 53 43 499 8 53 492 146
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 44 0 0 47 0050048
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 203 11 0 82 6 43 499 3 53 492 98
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 8 7
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 7 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 7826
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.3 16.3 8.8 8.8 5.5 29.1 29.1 6.0 29.6 29.6
Effective Green, g (s) 16.3 16.3 8.8 8.8 5.5 29.1 29.1 6.0 29.6 29.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.37 0.37
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 371 311 205 175 122 683 564 133 695 572
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.04 0.02 c0.27 c0.03 0.26
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.04 0.40 0.03 0.35 0.73 0.01 0.40 0.71 0.17
Uniform Delay, d1 28.2 25.2 32.8 31.5 35.2 21.7 15.9 34.9 21.2 16.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 3.5 0.0 0.7 2.7 0.1
Delay (s) 29.1 25.2 33.3 31.5 35.8 25.2 15.9 35.6 23.9 16.7
Level of Service C C CCDCBDCB
Approach Delay (s) 28.3 32.6 25.9 23.3
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.3 Sum of lost time (s) 19.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.1% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
12: SR 41 & Mercedes Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 23
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 0 38 1 2 0 80 321 1 0 170 32
Future Vol, veh/h 33 0 38 1 2 0 80 321 1 0 170 32
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------285--165--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 37 0 43 1 2 0 90 361 1 0 191 36
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 752 751 209 773 769 362 227 0 0 362 0 0
Stage 1 209 209 - 542 542 -------
Stage 2 543 542 - 231 227 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 327 340 831 316 332 683 1341 - - 1197 - -
Stage 1 793 729 - 525 520 -------
Stage 2 524 520 - 772 716 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 309 317 831 284 310 683 1341 - - 1197 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 309 317 - 284 310 -------
Stage 1 740 729 - 490 485 -------
Stage 2 487 485 - 732 716 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 14.3 17.1 1.6 0
HCM LOS B C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1341 - - 466 301 1197 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.067 - - 0.171 0.011 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 14.3 17.1 0 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B C A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.6 0 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM
13: Atascadero Ave & Santa Rosa Rd HCM 6th AWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 24
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 100 10 36 110 50 5 31 40 78 36 8
Future Vol, veh/h 6 100 10 36 110 50 5 31 40 78 36 8
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 7 109 11 39 120 54 5 34 43 85 39 9
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 8.6 9.1 8.2 9
HCM LOS AAAA
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 7% 5% 18% 64%
Vol Thru, % 41% 86% 56% 30%
Vol Right, % 53% 9% 26% 7%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 76 116 196 122
LT Vol 5 6 36 78
Through Vol 31 100 110 36
RT Vol 40 10 50 8
Lane Flow Rate 83 126 213 133
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.105 0.163 0.265 0.181
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.584 4.658 4.486 4.902
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 779 768 799 731
Service Time 2.63 2.699 2.524 2.944
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.107 0.164 0.267 0.182
HCM Control Delay 8.2 8.6 9.1 9
HCM Lane LOS AAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.7
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 263 163 75 247 238 20 205 240
v/c Ratio 0.61 0.32 0.30 0.47 0.16 0.04 0.25 0.45
Control Delay 27.7 6.1 22.4 16.0 13.8 11.8 21.1 6.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 27.7 6.1 22.4 16.0 13.8 11.8 21.1 6.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 89 0 15 58 27 4 33 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 174 41 58 125 72 17 66 51
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 909 885 248 522 1574 467 1409 756
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.18 0.30 0.47 0.15 0.04 0.15 0.32
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Future Volume (vph) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.1 4.6 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1784 1583 1732 1770 3464 1770 3539 1540
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.47 1.00 0.60 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1784 1583 1732 882 3464 1125 3539 1540
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 232 31 162 20 23 32 247 210 28 20 205 240
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 127 0 30 000000175
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 263 36 0 45 0 247 238 0 20 205 65
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)42
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)13
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.0 14.0 3.6 30.3 24.9 18.0 17.1 17.1
Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 14.0 3.6 30.3 24.9 18.0 17.1 17.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.48 0.40 0.29 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.1 4.6 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 5.5 3.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 396 351 98 534 1369 330 960 418
v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.03 c0.06 0.07 0.00 0.06
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.17 0.02 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.66 0.10 0.46 0.46 0.17 0.06 0.21 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 22.4 19.5 28.8 10.2 12.4 16.3 17.7 17.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 3.2 0.0 1.2 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4
Delay (s) 25.6 19.6 30.0 10.8 12.5 16.3 18.0 17.9
Level of Service C B C B B B B B
Approach Delay (s) 23.3 30.0 11.6 17.9
Approach LOS C C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 18.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Future Volume (veh/h) 223 30 156 19 22 31 237 202 27 19 197 230
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.97
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 232 31 162 20 23 32 247 210 28 20 205 240
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 305 41 306 39 45 62 534 1113 146 446 846 366
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.35 0.35 0.03 0.24 0.24
Sat Flow, veh/h 1580 211 1585 458 526 732 1781 3146 413 1781 3554 1539
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 263 0 162 75 0 0 247 117 121 20 205 240
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1791 0 1585 1716 0 0 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1539
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.0 0.0 5.3 2.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 2.6 2.7 0.5 2.7 8.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.0 0.0 5.3 2.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 2.6 2.7 0.5 2.7 8.1
Prop In Lane 0.88 1.00 0.27 0.43 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 346 0 306 146 0 0 534 628 630 446 846 366
V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.00 0.53 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.24 0.66
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 869 0 769 208 0 0 540 751 754 580 1349 584
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.0 0.0 20.9 25.3 0.0 0.0 12.3 12.9 12.9 15.7 17.8 19.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.4 5.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.1 0.0 1.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.9 1.0 0.2 1.0 3.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.3 0.0 21.4 26.3 0.0 0.0 12.9 13.3 13.3 15.7 18.2 25.2
LnGrp LOS C A C C AABBBBBC
Approach Vol, veh/h 425 75 485 465
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.6 26.3 13.1 21.7
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 19.1 9.5 6.1 25.8 16.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.4 5.4 4.6 4.5 5.4 5.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.6 21.9 7.0 6.0 24.4 28.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 10.1 4.4 2.5 4.7 10.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 2.4 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 505 109 176 271 467 90 34 401 99
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.86 1.28 0.30 0.79 0.31 0.13 0.13 0.34 0.17
Control Delay 26.0 41.0 221.1 22.8 55.2 24.2 6.9 35.2 28.7 7.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 26.0 41.0 221.1 22.8 55.2 24.2 6.9 35.2 28.7 7.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 47 254 ~87 74 164 122 0 18 102 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 80 343 #182 112 244 186 38 45 170 42
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 443 728 109 734 417 1713 794 262 1190 580
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.23 0.69 1.00 0.24 0.65 0.27 0.11 0.13 0.34 0.17
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Future Volume (vph)96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1686 1768 1794 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1533
Flt Permitted 0.59 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1100 1686 271 1794 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1533
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 100 214 291 109 133 43 271 467 90 34 401 99
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 56 0 0 13 0 0 0 53 0 0 66
Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 449 0 109 163 0 271 467 37 34 401 33
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 1 3
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 19.3 40.9 40.9 12.0 33.6 33.6
Effective Green, g (s) 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 19.3 40.9 40.9 12.0 33.6 33.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.19 0.41 0.41 0.12 0.34 0.34
Clearance Time (s)4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 347 532 85 566 341 1447 631 212 1189 515
v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 0.09 c0.15 0.13 0.02 c0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.40 0.02 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.84 1.28 0.29 0.79 0.32 0.06 0.16 0.34 0.06
Uniform Delay, d1 25.7 31.9 34.2 25.7 38.5 20.1 17.9 39.5 24.9 22.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 11.7 191.0 0.3 11.7 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.2
Delay (s)26.2 43.6 225.2 26.0 50.1 20.7 18.1 39.7 25.6 22.8
Level of Service C D F C D C B D C C
Approach Delay (s)40.7 102.2 30.1 26.0
Approach LOS D F C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 41.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
--~ tt ~ ~ tt
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Future Volume (veh/h) 96 205 279 105 128 41 260 448 86 33 385 95
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 100 214 291 109 133 43 271 467 90 34 401 99
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 472 285 387 198 537 174 306 670 291 462 982 426
Arrive On Green 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.26 0.28 0.28
Sat Flow, veh/h 1207 717 975 894 1353 437 1781 3554 1546 1781 3554 1541
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 100 0 505 109 0 176 271 467 90 34 401 99
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1207 0 1692 894 0 1790 1781 1777 1546 1781 1777 1541
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 0.0 25.6 11.9 0.0 6.6 14.9 12.3 5.0 1.4 9.2 5.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.6 0.0 25.6 37.6 0.0 6.6 14.9 12.3 5.0 1.4 9.2 5.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 472 0 672 198 0 711 306 670 291 462 982 426
V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.00 0.75 0.55 0.00 0.25 0.89 0.70 0.31 0.07 0.41 0.23
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 479 0 682 203 0 722 420 1318 574 462 982 426
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.4 0.0 25.9 42.1 0.0 20.2 40.5 37.9 35.0 27.9 29.5 28.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 4.6 3.0 0.0 0.2 14.4 5.9 2.7 0.0 1.3 1.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.0 10.8 2.8 0.0 2.7 7.5 5.7 2.1 0.6 4.0 1.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.6 0.0 30.5 45.1 0.0 20.3 54.8 43.8 37.7 28.0 30.8 29.3
LnGrp LOS C A C D A CDDDCCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 605 285 828 534
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.6 29.8 46.8 30.3
Approach LOS CCDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.6 33.0 44.4 31.4 24.2 44.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.4 5.4 * 4.7 5.4 5.4 * 4.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.6 20.6 * 40 7.1 37.1 * 40
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.9 11.2 27.6 3.4 14.3 39.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 2.6 3.1 0.0 4.6 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.1
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
--~ tt ~ ~ tt
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 161 273 4 387 502 496 245
v/c Ratio 0.52 0.28 0.02 0.69 0.25 0.55 0.44
Control Delay 30.4 2.4 30.5 15.9 8.0 23.6 7.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.4 2.4 30.5 15.9 8.0 23.6 7.0
Queue Length 50th (ft) 46 0 1 56 34 70 2
Queue Length 95th (ft) 146 38 12 202 113 185 62
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100
Base Capacity (vph) 585 1149 224 734 2380 1474 767
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.24 0.02 0.53 0.21 0.34 0.32
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 139 7 248 0 3 1 352 457 0 0 451 223
Future Volume (vph) 139 7 248 0 3 1 352 457 0 0 451 223
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1776 1583 1778 1770 3539 3539 1523
Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1366 1583 1778 536 3539 3539 1523
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 153 8 273 0 3 1 387 502 0 0 496 245
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 161 01000000178
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 161 112 0 3 0 387 502 0 0 496 67
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 3 10
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA pm+pt NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.6 26.2 0.9 33.6 33.6 15.6 15.6
Effective Green, g (s) 13.6 26.2 0.9 33.6 33.6 15.6 15.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.41 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.24 0.24
Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 291 651 25 526 1866 866 372
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.00 c0.15 0.14 0.14
v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.04 c0.24 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.17 0.12 0.74 0.27 0.57 0.18
Uniform Delay, d1 22.3 11.9 31.0 10.0 8.3 21.1 19.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.0 0.8 4.6 0.1 0.9 0.2
Delay (s) 23.6 11.9 31.8 14.6 8.4 22.0 19.2
Level of Service C B C B A C B
Approach Delay (s) 16.3 31.8 11.1 21.1
Approach LOS B C B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 15.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.7 Sum of lost time (s) 21.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp HCM 6th Roundabout
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.5
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB SE
Entry Lanes 10111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 11111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 17 0 517 464 341
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 17 0 527 473 347
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 805 524 310 13 486
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 28 313 512 511 0
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 00000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.3 0.0 10.2 5.9 9.5
Approach LOS A - B A A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 17 527 473 347
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 607 1006 1362 841
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.993 0.981 0.982 0.982
Flow Entry, veh/h 17 517 464 341
Cap Entry, veh/h 603 987 1337 825
V/C Ratio 0.028 0.524 0.347 0.413
Control Delay, s/veh 6.3 10.2 5.9 9.5
LOS A B A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 3 2 2
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 11
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 126 132 7 128 43 499 8 53 492 146
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.25 0.04 0.44 0.21 0.53 0.01 0.27 0.52 0.17
Control Delay 20.5 13.3 25.3 23.4 31.0 16.3 0.0 31.8 16.2 3.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 20.5 13.3 25.3 23.4 31.0 16.3 0.0 31.8 16.2 3.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 29 19 2 26 13 140 0 16 138 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 88 72 14 87 50 253 0 #62 249 28
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 333 1384 887 1173 200 1348 1145 200 1348 1147
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.21 0.37 0.01 0.27 0.36 0.13
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Future Volume (vph) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1718 1757 1747 1770 1863 1542 1770 1863 1539
Flt Permitted 0.40 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)745 1718 1345 1747 1770 1863 1542 1770 1863 1539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 126 77 55 7 75 53 43 499 8 53 492 146
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 35 0 0 36 00050083
Lane Group Flow (vph) 126 97 0 7 92 0 43 499 3 53 492 63
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)10 10 8 7
Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 13.8 5.5 5.5 2.5 23.4 23.4 2.5 23.4 23.4
Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 13.8 5.5 5.5 2.5 23.4 23.4 2.5 23.4 23.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.43 0.43 0.05 0.43 0.43
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 261 437 136 177 81 804 665 81 804 664
v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.06 0.05 0.02 c0.27 c0.03 0.26
v/s Ratio Perm c0.09 0.01 0.00 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.22 0.05 0.52 0.53 0.62 0.01 0.65 0.61 0.09
Uniform Delay, d1 16.4 16.0 22.0 23.1 25.3 12.0 8.8 25.4 11.9 9.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.1 0.1 1.3 3.3 1.1 0.0 13.5 1.0 0.0
Delay (s)17.8 16.1 22.1 24.4 28.6 13.0 8.8 39.0 12.9 9.1
Level of Service B B C C C B A D B A
Approach Delay (s)16.9 24.2 14.2 14.1
Approach LOS B C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 15.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.2 Sum of lost time (s)19.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
--~ t ~ ~ t
Atascadero General Plan Update Existing PM Mitigated
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Future Volume (veh/h) 115 70 50 6 68 48 39 454 7 48 448 133
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 126 77 55 7 75 53 43 499 8 53 492 146
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 411 341 243 349 174 123 79 630 527 91 642 539
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.05 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1008 720 1228 1006 711 1781 1870 1566 1781 1870 1569
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 0 132 7 0 128 43 499 8 53 492 146
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1728 1228 0 1717 1781 1870 1566 1781 1870 1569
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.0 3.5 1.2 12.8 0.2 1.5 12.4 3.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.0 3.5 1.2 12.8 0.2 1.5 12.4 3.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 411 0 584 349 0 297 79 630 527 91 642 539
V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 0.43 0.55 0.79 0.02 0.58 0.77 0.27
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 437 0 1324 856 0 1007 168 1238 1037 168 1238 1039
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.6 0.0 12.5 18.2 0.0 19.5 24.7 15.9 11.7 24.5 15.5 12.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.2 0.9 0.0 2.2 0.7 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.5 4.7 0.1 0.6 4.5 1.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.0 0.0 12.6 18.2 0.0 19.9 26.9 16.7 11.7 26.7 16.2 12.7
LnGrp LOS BABBABCBBCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 258 135 550 691
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.8 19.8 17.5 16.3
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 45678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.3 23.1 22.5 6.9 23.5 8.7 13.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.5 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 35.0 40.5 5.0 35.0 5.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 14.8 4.9 3.2 14.4 4.9 5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.6
HCM 6th LOS B
--~ t ~ ~ t
Atascadero General Plan Update
Traffic Operations Analysis Output Sheets
Central Coast Transportation Consulting July 2025
Cumulative Conditions
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
1: El Camino Real & San Benito Rd HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 0 19 78 6 35 63 482 62 13 418 29
Future Vol, veh/h 15 0 19 78 6 35 63 482 62 13 418 29
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 01101200002
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 16 0 21 85 7 38 68 524 67 14 454 32
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1217 1227 473 1204 1210 559 488 0 0 591 0 0
Stage 1 500 500 - 694 694 -------
Stage 2 717 727 - 510 516 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 158 178 591 161 183 529 1075 - - 985 - -
Stage 1 553 543 - 433 444 -------
Stage 2 421 429 - 546 534 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 134 164 589 146 169 528 1073 - - 985 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 134 164 - 146 169 -------
Stage 1 517 534 - 406 416 -------
Stage 2 360 402 - 519 525 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 23.1 58.8 0.9 0.2
HCM LOS C F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1073 - - 236 187 985 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - 0.157 0.692 0.014 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - 23.1 58.8 8.7 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - C F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.5 4.2 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
2: El Camino Real & San Anselmo East HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 16.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 5 0 263 5 15 5 613 78 10 608 5
Future Vol, veh/h 5 5 0 263 5 15 5 613 78 10 608 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 00002001100
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length --------10075--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 5 5 0 286 5 16 5 666 85 11 661 5
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1034 1448 333 1032 1365 336 666 0 0 752 0 0
Stage 1 686 686 - 677 677 -------
Stage 2 348 762 - 355 688 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 186 130 663 ~ 187 146 660 919 - - 853 - -
Stage 1 404 446 - 409 450 -------
Stage 2 641 412 - 635 445 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 175 127 663 ~ 178 143 658 919 - - 852 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 175 127 - 299 266 -------
Stage 1 400 440 - 405 446 -------
Stage 2 611 408 - 619 439 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 31.4 89.9 0.1 0.1
HCM LOS D F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 919 - - 147 307 852 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.074 1.002 0.013 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 0 - 31.4 89.9 9.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A - D F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 10.8 0 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 291 241 82 463 481 33 341 515
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.46 0.55 0.81 0.25 0.33 0.41 0.77
Control Delay 51.4 8.7 54.4 47.3 15.6 61.8 35.2 18.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.4 8.7 54.4 47.3 15.6 61.8 35.2 18.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 168 5 38 255 86 20 95 69
Queue Length 95th (ft) 328 75 109 #683 176 65 167 235
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 1155 1109 436 574 1899 574 1760 980
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.22 0.19 0.81 0.25 0.06 0.19 0.53
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 253 15 222 10 30 35 426 422 20 30 314 474
Future Volume (vph) 253 15 222 10 30 35 426 422 20 30 314 474
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1779 1583 1735 1770 3511 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1779 1583 1735 1770 3511 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 275 16 241 11 33 38 463 459 22 33 341 515
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 181 0 18 000000289
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 291 60 0 64 0 463 481 0 33 341 226
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)11
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.2 22.2 7.7 33.1 55.0 3.8 25.7 25.7
Effective Green, g (s) 22.2 22.2 7.7 33.1 55.0 3.8 25.7 25.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.07 0.32 0.53 0.04 0.25 0.25
Clearance Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 1.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 382 340 129 567 1871 65 881 394
v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.04 c0.26 0.14 0.02 0.10
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.14
v/c Ratio 0.76 0.18 0.50 0.82 0.26 0.51 0.39 0.57
Uniform Delay, d1 38.0 33.1 45.9 32.3 13.0 48.8 32.2 33.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 7.9 0.1 1.1 8.4 0.2 2.3 0.7 3.6
Delay (s) 45.9 33.1 47.0 40.7 13.2 51.0 32.9 37.5
Level of Service D C D D B D C D
Approach Delay (s) 40.1 47.0 26.7 36.3
Approach LOS DDCD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 103.2 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 253 15 222 10 30 35 426 422 20 30 314 474
Future Volume (veh/h) 253 15 222 10 30 35 426 422 20 30 314 474
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 275 16 241 11 33 38 463 459 22 33 341 515
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 316 18 297 14 42 48 471 2063 99 62 1308 583
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.26 0.60 0.60 0.03 0.37 0.37
Sat Flow, veh/h 1688 98 1585 230 690 795 1781 3452 165 1781 3554 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 291 0 241 82 0 0 463 236 245 33 341 515
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1786 0 1585 1716 0 0 1781 1777 1840 1781 1777 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 19.1 0.0 17.6 5.7 0.0 0.0 31.3 7.5 7.5 2.2 8.1 36.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 19.1 0.0 17.6 5.7 0.0 0.0 31.3 7.5 7.5 2.2 8.1 36.9
Prop In Lane 0.95 1.00 0.13 0.46 1.00 0.09 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 335 0 297 104 0 0 471 1062 1100 62 1308 583
V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.00 0.81 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.22 0.22 0.53 0.26 0.88
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 944 0 838 340 0 0 471 1062 1100 471 1439 641
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.8 0.0 47.1 56.1 0.0 0.0 44.3 11.3 11.3 57.4 26.7 35.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.8 0.0 2.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 36.9 0.3 0.3 2.6 0.3 15.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 8.7 0.0 7.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 18.2 2.9 3.0 1.0 3.4 16.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.5 0.0 49.2 61.1 0.0 0.0 81.1 11.6 11.6 60.1 27.0 51.1
LnGrp LOS D A D E A A F B B E C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 532 82 944 889
Approach Delay, s/veh 49.9 61.1 45.7 42.2
Approach LOS D E D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.5 48.6 10.8 7.7 76.3 26.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.0 49.0 24.0 32.0 49.0 64.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 33.3 38.9 7.7 4.2 9.5 21.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.7 0.1 0.0 6.9 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 45.9
HCM 6th LOS D
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 188 336 309 42 344 392 57 16 335 59
v/c Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.79 0.09 0.76 0.23 0.07 0.13 0.49 0.14
Control Delay 44.1 9.3 48.5 0.4 46.5 16.7 1.3 42.3 35.3 0.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.1 9.3 48.5 0.4 46.5 16.7 1.3 42.3 35.3 0.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 101 0 164 0 176 66 0 9 93 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 158 68 #276 0 #395 126 7 30 131 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 160 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 406 608 425 478 453 1677 786 127 766 446
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.55 0.73 0.09 0.76 0.23 0.07 0.13 0.44 0.13
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 65 115 323 82 215 40 330 376 55 15 322 57
Future Volume (vph) 65 115 323 82 215 40 330 376 55 15 322 57
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1830 1562 1837 1583 1770 3539 1546 1767 3539 1541
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1830 1562 1837 1583 1770 3539 1546 1767 3539 1541
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 68 120 336 85 224 42 344 392 57 16 335 59
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 281 0 0 33 0 0 32 0 0 48
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 188 55 0 309 9 344 392 25 16 335 11
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1 1
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4362
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 14.7 19.2 19.2 23.1 39.7 39.7 0.9 17.5 17.5
Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 14.7 19.2 19.2 23.1 39.7 39.7 0.9 17.5 17.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.26 0.44 0.44 0.01 0.19 0.19
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 298 255 391 337 454 1561 681 17 688 299
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.17 c0.19 0.11 0.01 c0.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.63 0.22 0.79 0.03 0.76 0.25 0.04 0.94 0.49 0.04
Uniform Delay, d1 35.1 32.6 33.5 28.0 30.9 15.8 14.3 44.5 32.3 29.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 4.3 0.4 10.4 0.0 6.8 0.4 0.1 188.5 2.5 0.2
Delay (s) 39.4 33.1 43.9 28.0 37.6 16.2 14.4 233.1 34.7 29.7
Level of Service D C D C D B B F C C
Approach Delay (s) 35.4 42.0 25.4 41.7
Approach LOS DDCD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.9% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 9
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 175 463 10 551 376 5 347 236
v/c Ratio 0.67 0.39 0.08 0.78 0.17 0.04 0.53 0.53
Control Delay 43.5 1.9 32.6 32.4 8.3 41.0 32.3 11.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 43.5 1.9 32.6 32.4 8.3 41.0 32.3 11.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 0 2 201 27 2 74 12
Queue Length 95th (ft) 174 41 21 #609 107 15 147 84
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100 100
Base Capacity (vph) 620 1201 693 710 2363 473 1895 912
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.39 0.01 0.78 0.16 0.01 0.18 0.26
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 146 15 426 0 5 5 507 341 5 5 319 217
Future Volume (vph) 146 15 426 0 5 5 507 341 5 5 319 217
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1773 1583 1618 1770 3531 1770 3539 1535
Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1369 1583 1618 1770 3531 1770 3539 1535
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 159 16 463 0 5 5 551 371 5 5 347 236
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 215 05000000159
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 175 248 0 5 0 551 376 0 5 347 77
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 4 5 4
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)22
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 45.5 0.9 30.8 48.6 0.8 18.6 18.6
Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 45.5 0.9 30.8 48.6 0.8 18.6 18.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.54 0.01 0.36 0.57 0.01 0.22 0.22
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 236 940 17 641 2018 16 774 335
v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.00 c0.31 0.11 0.00 c0.10
v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.06 0.05
v/c Ratio 0.74 0.26 0.30 0.86 0.19 0.31 0.45 0.23
Uniform Delay, d1 33.3 10.7 41.7 25.1 8.7 41.8 28.8 27.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 10.4 0.1 3.5 10.7 0.0 4.0 0.4 0.4
Delay (s) 43.8 10.7 45.3 35.8 8.8 45.9 29.2 27.7
Level of Service D B D D A D C C
Approach Delay (s) 19.8 45.3 24.9 28.7
Approach LOS B D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
6: El Camino Real & San Gabriel Rd/Commercial Driveway HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 0 56 0 5 5 55 771 0 5 588 10
Future Vol, veh/h 15 0 56 0 5 5 55 771 0 5 588 10
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 3 00003301103
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------0--0-0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 16 0 61 0 5 5 60 838 0 5 639 11
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1197 1611 323 1289 1622 423 653 0 0 839 0 0
Stage 1 652 652 - 959 959 -------
Stage 2 545 959 - 330 663 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 141 103 673 121 102 579 930 - - 791 - -
Stage 1 423 462 - 276 334 -------
Stage 2 490 334 - 657 457 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 129 95 671 104 94 577 927 - - 790 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 249 209 - 198 201 -------
Stage 1 395 458 - 258 312 -------
Stage 2 445 312 - 594 453 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.6 17.5 0.6 0.1
HCM LOS B C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 927 - - 494 298 790 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - 0.156 0.036 0.007 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 13.6 17.5 9.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B C A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.6 0.1 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 49 97 111 9 224 355 136 11 87 237
v/c Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.24 0.03 0.49 0.65 0.14 0.06 0.25 0.49
Control Delay 23.1 21.6 6.5 20.6 25.4 25.1 8.8 31.1 26.6 8.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.1 21.6 6.5 20.6 25.4 25.1 8.8 31.1 26.6 8.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 14 28 0 2 69 110 20 4 27 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 47 76 36 14 159 224 70 20 78 58
Internal Link Dist (ft) 435 214 337 398
Turn Bay Length (ft) 265 265 155 120 160 160
Base Capacity (vph) 493 942 853 654 936 866 1153 866 1155 1067
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.01 0.24 0.41 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.22
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)45 89 102 8 196 10 327 115 10 10 80 218
Future Volume (vph)45 89 102 8 196 10 327 115 10 10 80 218
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1719 1810 1538 1719 1796 1719 1788 1719 1810 1538
Flt Permitted 0.52 1.00 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)948 1810 1538 1256 1796 1719 1788 1719 1810 1538
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 49 97 111 9 213 11 355 125 11 11 87 237
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 84 02002000181
Lane Group Flow (vph) 49 97 27 9 222 0 355 134 0 11 87 56
Heavy Vehicles (%)5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 15.6 15.6 15.6 15.6 15.6 19.7 33.7 1.2 15.2 15.2
Effective Green, g (s) 15.6 15.6 15.6 15.6 15.6 19.7 33.7 1.2 15.2 15.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.30 0.52 0.02 0.23 0.23
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.8 3.5 5.8 5.8
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 228 435 370 302 432 522 929 31 424 360
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 c0.21 0.08 0.01 c0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.21 0.22 0.07 0.03 0.52 0.68 0.14 0.35 0.21 0.15
Uniform Delay, d1 19.7 19.7 19.0 18.8 21.3 19.8 8.1 31.4 19.9 19.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 2.1 3.8 0.2 8.1 0.6 0.5
Delay (s)20.7 20.3 19.2 18.9 23.4 23.6 8.3 39.5 20.6 20.2
Level of Service C C B B C C A D C C
Approach Delay (s)19.9 23.2 19.3 21.0
Approach LOS B C B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 64.8 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 15
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 45 89 102 8 196 10 327 115 10 10 80 218
Future Volume (veh/h) 45 89 102 8 196 10 327 115 10 10 80 218
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826 1826
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 49 97 111 9 213 11 355 125 11 11 87 237
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %555555555555
Cap, veh/h 272 414 351 349 391 20 440 799 70 25 445 377
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.48 0.48 0.01 0.24 0.24
Sat Flow, veh/h 1129 1826 1547 1146 1721 89 1739 1654 146 1739 1826 1547
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 49 97 111 9 0 224 355 0 136 11 87 237
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1129 1826 1547 1146 0 1810 1739 0 1800 1739 1826 1547
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 2.2 3.1 0.3 0.0 5.7 9.9 0.0 2.2 0.3 2.0 7.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.7 2.2 3.1 2.6 0.0 5.7 9.9 0.0 2.2 0.3 2.0 7.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 272 414 351 349 0 411 440 0 869 25 445 377
V/C Ratio(X) 0.18 0.23 0.32 0.03 0.00 0.55 0.81 0.00 0.16 0.45 0.20 0.63
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 691 1093 926 775 0 1083 1007 0 1320 1007 1339 1135
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.1 16.3 16.7 17.4 0.0 17.7 18.2 0.0 7.5 25.3 15.5 17.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.0 2.4 4.2 0.0 0.3 14.6 0.7 5.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.0 2.3 3.7 0.0 0.6 0.2 0.8 2.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.7 17.0 17.8 17.5 0.0 20.1 22.4 0.0 7.8 40.0 16.2 23.0
LnGrp LOS C BBBACCAADBC
Approach Vol, veh/h 257 233 491 335
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.2 20.0 18.3 21.8
Approach LOS B B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 30.7 16.4 17.1 18.3 16.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.7 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 38.0 31.0 30.0 38.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 4.2 9.7 11.9 9.1 7.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.7 2.0 1.3 3.6 2.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.5
HCM 6th LOS B
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
SimTraffic Performance Report
CM AM 07/02/2025
CM AM Atascadero General Plan Update SimTraffic Report
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Page 1
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp Performance by approach
Approach EB NB SB SE All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 46.3 0.6 25.3 216.2 55.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 247.7 2.9 30.9 250.4 49.0
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
9: Traffic Way & Via Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 80 142 32 74 214
Future Vol, veh/h 40 80 142 32 74 214
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 10110
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 43 87 154 35 80 233
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 566 174 0 0 190 0
Stage 1 173 -----
Stage 2 393 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 486 869 - - 1384 -
Stage 1 857 -----
Stage 2 682 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 453 867 - - 1383 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 453 -----
Stage 1 856 -----
Stage 2 637 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.7 0 2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 665 1383 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.196 0.058 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.7 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.2 -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 17
Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 240 5 487 128 58 560
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.58 0.03 0.66 0.19 0.25 0.63
Control Delay 19.9 24.1 33.6 20.5 8.1 31.4 15.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 19.9 24.1 33.6 20.5 8.1 31.4 15.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 33 62 2 131 11 18 101
Queue Length 95th (ft) 94 166 14 314 53 65 342
Internal Link Dist (ft) 369 467 389 478
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 105 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1089 971 768 1741 1449 768 1726
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.25 0.01 0.28 0.09 0.08 0.32
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 18
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 37 69 15 108 32 81 5 448 118 53 495 20
Future Volume (vph) 37 69 15 108 32 81 5 448 118 53 495 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1804 1715 1770 1863 1549 1770 1852
Flt Permitted 0.88 0.81 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1608 1427 1770 1863 1549 1770 1852
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 40 75 16 117 35 88 5 487 128 58 538 22
RTOR Reduction (vph)04001600043010
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 127 0 0 224 0 5 487 85 58 559 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 15.3 15.3 0.6 23.5 23.5 3.7 26.1
Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 15.3 0.6 23.5 23.5 3.7 26.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.01 0.42 0.42 0.07 0.46
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 435 386 18 774 644 115 855
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.26 c0.03 c0.30
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.16 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.58 0.28 0.63 0.13 0.50 0.65
Uniform Delay, d1 16.3 17.8 27.7 13.1 10.2 25.5 11.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 1.4 3.0 1.2 0.0 1.3 1.4
Delay (s) 16.5 19.3 30.8 14.2 10.2 26.8 13.1
Level of Service B B C B B C B
Approach Delay (s) 16.5 19.3 13.5 14.4
Approach LOS BBBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 14.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 56.5 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 19
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 37 69 15 108 32 81 5 448 118 53 495 20
Future Volume (veh/h) 37 69 15 108 32 81 5 448 118 53 495 20
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 40 75 16 117 35 88 5 487 128 58 538 22
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 206 253 45 292 70 121 12 610 516 110 654 27
Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.33 0.33 0.06 0.37 0.37
Sat Flow, veh/h 340 1201 214 654 332 571 1781 1870 1583 1781 1784 73
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 131 0 0 240 0 0 5 487 128 58 0 560
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1755 0 0 1558 0 0 1781 1870 1583 1781 0 1857
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 8.3 2.1 1.1 0.0 9.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 8.3 2.1 1.1 0.0 9.5
Prop In Lane 0.31 0.12 0.49 0.37 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 505 0 0 482 0 0 12 610 516 110 0 681
V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.80 0.25 0.53 0.00 0.82
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1681 0 0 1514 0 0 1021 3323 2811 1021 0 3299
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.7 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 17.3 10.7 8.6 15.9 0.0 10.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.9 0.1 1.5 0.0 1.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.8 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 25.4 11.6 8.7 17.3 0.0 11.0
LnGrp LOS BAABAACBABAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 131 240 620 618
Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 13.0 11.1 11.6
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 16.7 12.0 4.8 18.1 12.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.1 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 62.0 33.0 20.0 62.0 32.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 10.3 4.1 2.1 11.5 6.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 1.2 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.6
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 20
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 264 43 183 126 42 532 5 129 709 187
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.12 0.71 0.46 0.41 0.71 0.01 0.65 0.80 0.24
Control Delay 69.4 5.7 76.2 38.1 83.3 42.4 0.0 79.0 40.5 16.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 69.4 5.7 76.2 38.1 83.3 42.4 0.0 79.0 40.5 16.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 228 0 160 53 37 379 0 113 524 58
Queue Length 95th (ft) 395 19 295 140 95 702 0 223 947 146
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 50 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 568 525 585 542 349 1147 967 349 1149 970
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.08 0.31 0.23 0.12 0.46 0.01 0.37 0.62 0.19
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 21
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 169 74 40 17 152 116 39 489 5 119 652 172
Future Volume (vph) 169 74 40 17 152 116 39 489 5 119 652 172
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1528 1854 1583 1770 1863 1540 1770 1863 1538
Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1800 1528 1854 1583 1770 1863 1540 1770 1863 1538
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 184 80 43 18 165 126 42 532 5 129 709 187
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 35 0 0 53 0030036
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 264 8 0 183 73 42 532 2 129 709 151
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 6 4 3
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 7 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 7826
Actuated Green, G (s) 26.5 26.5 18.9 18.9 6.3 56.0 56.0 15.3 65.0 65.0
Effective Green, g (s) 26.5 26.5 18.9 18.9 6.3 56.0 56.0 15.3 65.0 65.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.48 0.48
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 351 298 258 220 82 768 635 199 891 736
v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.10 0.02 0.29 c0.07 c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.10
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.03 0.71 0.33 0.51 0.69 0.00 0.65 0.80 0.21
Uniform Delay, d1 51.6 44.2 55.8 52.7 63.2 32.8 23.5 57.7 29.8 20.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 7.9 0.0 7.1 0.3 2.2 2.2 0.0 5.4 4.6 0.1
Delay (s) 59.4 44.2 62.9 53.1 65.5 35.0 23.5 63.0 34.5 20.5
Level of Service E D E D E D C E C C
Approach Delay (s) 57.3 58.9 37.1 35.5
Approach LOS E E D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 42.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 135.8 Sum of lost time (s) 19.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.6% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
12: SR 41 & Mercedes Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 23
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 72 0 95 0 0 0 45 273 5 5 428 58
Future Vol, veh/h 72 0 95 0 0 0 45 273 5 5 428 58
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------285--165--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 76 0 100 0 0 0 47 287 5 5 451 61
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 876 878 482 926 906 290 512 0 0 292 0 0
Stage 1 492 492 - 384 384 -------
Stage 2 384 386 - 542 522 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 268 286 582 248 275 747 1048 - - 1264 - -
Stage 1 557 546 - 637 610 -------
Stage 2 637 608 - 523 529 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 258 272 582 198 262 747 1048 - - 1264 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 258 272 - 198 262 -------
Stage 1 532 544 - 608 583 -------
Stage 2 608 581 - 431 527 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 22.5 0 1.2 0.1
HCM LOS C A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1048 - - 378 - 1264 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.045 - - 0.465 - 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - 22.5 0 7.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - C A A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.4 - 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM AM
13: Atascadero Ave & Santa Rosa Rd HCM 6th AWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 24
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 13.9
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 153 7 56 129 75 18 101 86 243 55 16
Future Vol, veh/h 12 153 7 56 129 75 18 101 86 243 55 16
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 13 166 8 61 140 82 20 110 93 264 60 17
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 12.2 13.8 12.1 16.2
HCM LOS B B B C
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 9% 7% 22% 77%
Vol Thru, % 49% 89% 50% 18%
Vol Right, % 42% 4% 29% 5%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 205 172 260 314
LT Vol 18 12 56 243
Through Vol 101 153 129 55
RT Vol 86 7 75 16
Lane Flow Rate 223 187 283 341
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.362 0.323 0.456 0.556
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.851 6.223 5.923 5.962
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 619 580 613 608
Service Time 3.851 4.235 3.923 3.962
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.36 0.322 0.462 0.561
HCM Control Delay 12.1 12.2 13.8 16.2
HCM Lane LOS B B B C
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.6 1.4 2.4 3.4
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
1: El Camino Real & San Benito Rd HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 38 0 51 14 0 35 40 635 27 38 555 19
Future Vol, veh/h 38 0 51 14 0 35 40 635 27 38 555 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 00001900009
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 41 0 55 15 0 38 43 690 29 41 603 21
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1516 1510 623 1514 1506 706 633 0 0 719 0 0
Stage 1 705 705 - 791 791 -------
Stage 2 811 805 - 723 715 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 98 120 486 98 121 436 950 - - 882 - -
Stage 1 427 439 - 383 401 -------
Stage 2 373 395 - 417 434 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 83 108 482 81 109 436 942 - - 882 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 83 108 - 81 109 -------
Stage 1 404 415 - 365 383 -------
Stage 2 325 377 - 352 410 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 58.4 30.4 0.5 0.6
HCM LOS F D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 942 - - 158 194 882 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.046 - - 0.612 0.275 0.047 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 58.4 30.4 9.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F D A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 3.3 1.1 0.1 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
2: El Camino Real & San Anselmo East HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 5 10 123 10 15 15 737 199 35 658 10
Future Vol, veh/h 10 5 10 123 10 15 15 737 199 35 658 10
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 00001402204
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length --------10075--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 5 11 129 11 16 16 776 209 37 693 11
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1204 1796 356 1233 1592 391 708 0 0 987 0 0
Stage 1 777 777 - 810 810 -------
Stage 2 427 1019 - 423 782 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 140 79 640 133 106 608 887 - - 696 - -
Stage 1 356 405 - 340 391 -------
Stage 2 576 313 - 579 403 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 121 71 638 ~ 115 96 606 884 - - 695 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 121 71 - 231 212 -------
Stage 1 340 382 - 325 374 -------
Stage 2 522 299 - 532 380 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 34.5 42.2 0.3 0.5
HCM LOS D E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 884 - - 148 245 695 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - 0.178 0.636 0.053 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 0.2 - 34.5 42.2 10.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A - D E B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.6 3.9 0.2 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 341 238 83 705 551 21 391 482
v/c Ratio 0.79 0.45 0.58 1.32 0.29 0.26 0.45 0.79
Control Delay 54.9 12.0 61.1 191.0 16.3 67.5 37.5 23.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 54.9 12.0 61.1 191.0 16.3 67.5 37.5 23.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 215 24 43 ~613 93 14 119 109
Queue Length 95th (ft) 412 108 121 #1290 217 51 204 286
Internal Link Dist (ft) 345 64 217 210
Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 125 60 100
Base Capacity (vph) 1074 1030 404 533 1926 533 1633 874
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.23 0.21 1.32 0.29 0.04 0.24 0.55
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 298 30 228 20 25 35 677 499 30 20 375 463
Future Volume (vph) 298 30 228 20 25 35 677 499 30 20 375 463
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1782 1583 1732 1770 3501 1770 3539 1536
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1782 1583 1732 1770 3501 1770 3539 1536
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 310 31 238 21 26 36 705 520 31 21 391 482
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 147 0 16 000000230
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 341 91 0 67 0 705 551 0 21 391 252
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)42
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)13
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 26.7 26.7 8.2 33.4 61.0 2.2 29.8 29.8
Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 26.7 8.2 33.4 61.0 2.2 29.8 29.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.07 0.30 0.54 0.02 0.26 0.26
Clearance Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 1.0 5.5 5.5
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 422 375 126 525 1896 34 936 406
v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 c0.04 c0.40 0.16 0.01 0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 c0.16
v/c Ratio 0.81 0.24 0.53 1.34 0.29 0.62 0.42 0.62
Uniform Delay, d1 40.5 34.8 50.4 39.6 14.0 54.8 34.2 36.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 10.3 0.1 2.2 166.7 0.2 21.2 0.7 4.5
Delay (s) 50.8 34.9 52.5 206.3 14.2 76.0 35.0 41.0
Level of Service D C D F B E C D
Approach Delay (s) 44.3 52.5 122.1 39.2
Approach LOS D D F D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 77.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service E
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 112.6 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.0% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
3: El Camino Real & San Anselmo West HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 298 30 228 20 25 35 677 499 30 20 375 463
Future Volume (veh/h) 298 30 228 20 25 35 677 499 30 20 375 463
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 310 31 238 21 26 36 705 520 31 21 391 482
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 349 35 340 26 33 45 453 1979 118 49 1261 548
Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.25 0.58 0.58 0.03 0.35 0.35
Sat Flow, veh/h 1626 163 1585 434 537 744 1781 3403 202 1781 3554 1544
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 341 0 238 83 0 0 705 271 280 21 391 482
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1789 0 1585 1715 0 0 1781 1777 1828 1781 1777 1544
Q Serve(g_s), s 23.3 0.0 17.5 6.0 0.0 0.0 32.0 9.5 9.5 1.5 10.0 36.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.3 0.0 17.5 6.0 0.0 0.0 32.0 9.5 9.5 1.5 10.0 36.8
Prop In Lane 0.91 1.00 0.25 0.43 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 384 0 340 105 0 0 453 1034 1063 49 1261 548
V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.00 0.70 0.79 0.00 0.00 1.56 0.26 0.26 0.43 0.31 0.88
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 910 0 806 327 0 0 453 1034 1063 453 1383 601
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.0 0.0 45.7 58.3 0.0 0.0 46.9 13.0 13.0 60.2 29.4 38.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.8 0.0 1.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 261.2 0.4 0.4 2.2 0.4 15.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 10.6 0.0 6.9 2.7 0.0 0.0 46.7 3.7 3.8 0.7 4.3 15.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.8 0.0 46.7 63.3 0.0 0.0 308.1 13.4 13.4 62.4 29.8 53.7
LnGrp LOS D A D E A A F B B E C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 579 83 1256 894
Approach Delay, s/veh 49.1 63.3 178.8 43.5
Approach LOS D E F D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.5 48.7 11.2 7.0 77.2 30.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.0 49.0 24.0 32.0 49.0 64.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 34.0 38.8 8.0 3.5 11.5 25.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.8 0.1 0.0 8.0 1.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 105.7
HCM 6th LOS F
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 318 445 283 47 388 543 107 36 668 105
v/c Ratio 0.89 0.68 0.84 0.12 0.91 0.34 0.14 0.40 0.85 0.24
Control Delay 66.3 9.4 61.4 0.6 63.1 19.8 4.4 60.1 50.8 5.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 66.3 9.4 61.4 0.6 63.1 19.8 4.4 60.1 50.8 5.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 198 2 172 0 236 126 0 23 225 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #349 92 #297 0 #398 171 32 #62 #347 29
Internal Link Dist (ft) 306 234 460 694
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 160 125 125 125 125
Base Capacity (vph) 370 666 363 421 451 1594 755 90 784 441
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.86 0.67 0.78 0.11 0.86 0.34 0.14 0.40 0.85 0.24
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
4: El Camino Real & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 100 205 427 142 130 45 372 521 103 35 641 101
Future Volume (vph) 100 205 427 142 130 45 372 521 103 35 641 101
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1833 1558 1815 1583 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1531
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1833 1558 1815 1583 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1531
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 104 214 445 148 135 47 388 543 107 36 668 105
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 355 0 0 38 0 0 60 0 0 82
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 318 90 0 283 9 388 543 47 36 668 23
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 1 3
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)12
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4362
Actuated Green, G (s) 19.6 19.6 18.6 18.6 24.2 43.6 43.6 2.7 22.1 22.1
Effective Green, g (s) 19.6 19.6 18.6 18.6 24.2 43.6 43.6 2.7 22.1 22.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.22 0.22
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 359 305 337 294 428 1543 673 47 782 338
v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.16 c0.22 0.15 0.02 c0.19
v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.89 0.30 0.84 0.03 0.91 0.35 0.07 0.77 0.85 0.07
Uniform Delay, d1 39.1 34.3 39.3 33.3 36.8 18.8 16.4 48.3 37.4 30.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 22.0 0.5 16.6 0.0 22.4 0.6 0.2 50.5 11.5 0.4
Delay (s) 61.1 34.9 55.8 33.4 59.2 19.4 16.6 98.8 48.9 31.2
Level of Service E C E C E B B F D C
Approach Delay (s) 45.8 52.6 34.0 48.8
Approach LOS DDCD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 43.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.9% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 9
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 199 366 10 487 605 696 328
v/c Ratio 0.71 0.34 0.10 0.83 0.26 0.71 0.64
Control Delay 50.7 2.3 40.6 45.5 7.8 35.4 23.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 50.7 2.3 40.6 45.5 7.8 35.4 23.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 104 0 3 248 61 183 88
Queue Length 95th (ft) 228 47 23 #678 157 324 229
Internal Link Dist (ft) 486 78 253 275
Turn Bay Length (ft) 195 105 100
Base Capacity (vph) 511 1088 576 588 2353 1567 740
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.34 0.02 0.83 0.26 0.44 0.44
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
5: El Camino Real & Santa Rosa Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 173 10 337 0 5 5 448 557 0 0 640 302
Future Volume (vph) 173 10 337 0 5 5 448 557 0 0 640 302
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1775 1583 1677 1770 3539 3539 1512
Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1358 1583 1677 1770 3539 3539 1512
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 188 11 366 0 5 5 487 605 0 0 696 328
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 177 05000000104
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 199 189 0 5 0 487 605 0 0 696 224
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 3 10
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 3 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 3 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 19.2 50.2 0.9 31.0 62.0 26.0 26.0
Effective Green, g (s) 19.2 50.2 0.9 31.0 62.0 26.0 26.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.52 0.01 0.32 0.64 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 268 899 15 565 2259 947 404
v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.00 c0.28 0.17 c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm c0.15 0.05 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.74 0.21 0.34 0.86 0.27 0.73 0.55
Uniform Delay, d1 36.6 12.7 47.8 31.0 7.7 32.4 30.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 9.3 0.0 4.8 12.4 0.1 3.0 1.7
Delay (s) 45.9 12.8 52.6 43.4 7.7 35.4 32.2
Level of Service D B D D A D C
Approach Delay (s) 24.4 52.6 23.6 34.4
Approach LOS CDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 97.1 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
6: El Camino Real & San Gabriel Rd/Commercial Driveway HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 12
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 5 79 5 5 10 60 862 0 5 807 30
Future Vol, veh/h 40 5 79 5 5 10 60 862 0 5 807 30
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 5 0000510131301
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------0--0-0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 43 5 86 5 5 11 65 937 0 5 877 33
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1494 1968 440 1531 2001 487 911 0 0 950 0 0
Stage 1 888 888 - 1080 1080 -------
Stage 2 606 1080 - 451 921 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 85 62 565 80 59 526 743 - - 719 - -
Stage 1 305 360 - 233 293 -------
Stage 2 451 293 - 557 347 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 75 55 564 61 53 517 742 - - 710 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 181 161 - 150 148 -------
Stage 1 278 357 - 210 264 -------
Stage 2 393 264 - 462 344 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.6 22.2 0.7 0.1
HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 742 - - 316 231 710 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.088 - - 0.427 0.094 0.008 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 24.6 22.2 10.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - C C B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 2 0.3 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 13
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 104 159 183 11 106 97 189 15 205 152
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.31 0.32 0.03 0.21 0.29 0.22 0.06 0.38 0.27
Control Delay 18.6 17.9 4.9 15.4 15.8 23.7 10.7 25.5 19.4 5.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 18.6 17.9 4.9 15.4 15.8 23.7 10.7 25.5 19.4 5.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 24 37 0 2 22 24 23 4 46 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 67 92 38 13 62 80 108 23 133 40
Internal Link Dist (ft) 435 214 337 398
Turn Bay Length (ft) 265 265 155 120 160 160
Base Capacity (vph) 858 1246 1119 817 1215 1157 1420 1157 1443 1260
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.01 0.14 0.12
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)96 146 168 10 83 15 89 155 19 14 189 140
Future Volume (vph)96 146 168 10 83 15 89 155 19 14 189 140
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 1583 1770 1814 1770 1832 1770 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1283 1863 1583 1222 1814 1770 1832 1770 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 104 159 183 11 90 16 97 168 21 15 205 152
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 135 06003000103
Lane Group Flow (vph) 104 159 48 11 100 0 97 186 0 15 205 49
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 7.2 22.9 1.1 16.8 16.8
Effective Green, g (s) 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 7.2 22.9 1.1 16.8 16.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.14 0.44 0.02 0.32 0.32
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.7 5.7
Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.8 3.5 5.8 5.8
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 336 488 414 320 475 245 808 37 603 512
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.06 c0.05 0.10 0.01 c0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.03 0.01 0.03
v/c Ratio 0.31 0.33 0.12 0.03 0.21 0.40 0.23 0.41 0.34 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 15.4 15.5 14.6 14.3 15.0 20.4 9.0 25.1 13.3 12.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.5 1.2 0.4 8.4 0.9 0.2
Delay (s)16.5 16.3 14.8 14.4 15.4 21.6 9.4 33.4 14.2 12.5
Level of Service BBBBB CA CBB
Approach Delay (s)15.7 15.3 13.5 14.3
Approach LOS BBBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 14.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.9 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
7: El Camino Real & Santa Barbara Rd HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 15
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 96 146 168 10 83 15 89 155 19 14 189 140
Future Volume (veh/h) 96 146 168 10 83 15 89 155 19 14 189 140
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 104 159 183 11 90 16 97 168 21 15 205 152
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 485 513 435 406 424 75 151 532 66 34 488 414
Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.02 0.26 0.26
Sat Flow, veh/h 1282 1870 1585 1039 1545 275 1781 1630 204 1781 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 104 159 183 11 0 106 97 0 189 15 205 152
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1282 1870 1585 1039 0 1819 1781 0 1834 1781 1870 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 2.5 3.6 0.3 0.0 1.7 2.0 0.0 2.9 0.3 3.4 2.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.2 2.5 3.6 2.9 0.0 1.7 2.0 0.0 2.9 0.3 3.4 2.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 485 513 435 406 0 499 151 0 598 34 488 414
V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.31 0.42 0.03 0.00 0.21 0.64 0.00 0.32 0.44 0.42 0.37
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1190 1541 1306 977 0 1499 1420 0 1852 1420 1889 1601
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.2 10.8 11.2 12.0 0.0 10.5 16.7 0.0 9.5 18.2 11.5 11.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.7 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.4 5.4 0.0 1.0 10.2 1.9 1.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.2 1.2 0.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.6 11.6 12.6 12.0 0.0 11.0 22.1 0.0 10.5 28.4 13.4 13.1
LnGrp LOS BBBBABCABCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 446 117 286 372
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.2 11.1 14.4 13.9
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 18.0 14.9 7.2 15.5 14.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.7 4.6 4.0 5.7 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 38.0 31.0 30.0 38.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 4.9 6.2 4.0 5.4 4.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 3.9 0.3 4.4 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.1
HCM 6th LOS B
t
t .,, "i __ "i t
SimTraffic Performance Report
CM PM 07/02/2025
CM PM Atascadero General Plan Update SimTraffic Report
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Page 1
8: Ardilla Ave/Traffic Way & US 101 SB Ramp Performance by approach
Approach EB NB SB SE All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.4 0.5 2.5 0.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 12.7 1.8 3.8 46.3 14.0
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
9: Traffic Way & Via Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 74 187 52 53 128
Future Vol, veh/h 45 74 187 52 53 128
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 10110
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 49 80 203 57 58 139
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 488 234 0 0 261 0
Stage 1 233 -----
Stage 2 255 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 539 805 - - 1303 -
Stage 1 806 -----
Stage 2 788 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 513 803 - - 1302 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 513 -----
Stage 1 805 -----
Stage 2 750 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.8 0 2.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 662 1302 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.195 0.044 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.8 7.9 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.1 -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 17
Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 92 200 10 604 130 93 606
v/c Ratio 0.24 0.56 0.06 0.74 0.19 0.38 0.57
Control Delay 23.8 29.3 39.0 23.4 8.9 36.4 12.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.8 29.3 39.0 23.4 8.9 36.4 12.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 25 57 3 176 14 31 101
Queue Length 95th (ft) 84 167 24 450 62 108 389
Internal Link Dist (ft) 369 467 389 478
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 105 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1021 920 648 1669 1375 648 1654
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.22 0.02 0.36 0.09 0.14 0.37
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 18
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 55 15 76 47 69 10 580 125 89 561 21
Future Volume (vph) 18 55 15 76 47 69 10 580 125 89 561 21
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1794 1724 1770 1863 1540 1770 1851
Flt Permitted 0.93 0.86 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1687 1511 1770 1863 1540 1770 1851
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 19 57 16 79 49 72 10 604 130 93 584 22
RTOR Reduction (vph)06001600032010
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 86 0 0 184 0 10 604 98 93 605 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 4 4
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.1 14.1 0.7 30.7 30.7 6.8 36.3
Effective Green, g (s) 14.1 14.1 0.7 30.7 30.7 6.8 36.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.47 0.47 0.10 0.55
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.1 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 362 324 18 871 720 183 1024
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.32 c0.05 0.33
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.12 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.24 0.57 0.56 0.69 0.14 0.51 0.59
Uniform Delay, d1 21.3 23.0 32.3 13.7 9.9 27.8 9.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 1.4 19.4 1.9 0.0 0.8 0.6
Delay (s) 21.4 24.4 51.7 15.7 9.9 28.6 10.3
Level of Service C C D B A C B
Approach Delay (s) 21.4 24.4 15.2 12.8
Approach LOS C C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 15.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.6 Sum of lost time (s) 14.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
10: SR 41 & Curbaril Ave HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 19
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 18 55 15 76 47 69 10 580 125 89 561 21
Future Volume (veh/h) 18 55 15 76 47 69 10 580 125 89 561 21
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 19 57 16 79 49 72 10 604 130 93 584 22
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 147 224 55 218 89 101 23 715 603 145 783 30
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.08 0.44 0.44
Sat Flow, veh/h 200 1259 307 505 503 567 1781 1870 1577 1781 1790 67
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 92 0 0 200 0 0 10 604 130 93 0 606
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 0 1574 0 0 1781 1870 1577 1781 0 1858
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 11.5 2.2 2.0 0.0 10.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 11.5 2.2 2.0 0.0 10.6
Prop In Lane 0.21 0.17 0.39 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 426 0 0 409 0 0 23 715 603 145 0 813
V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.84 0.22 0.64 0.00 0.75
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1530 0 0 1377 0 0 912 2969 2503 912 0 2949
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.9 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 19.1 11.0 8.1 17.4 0.0 9.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 4.5 1.1 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.5 0.7 0.0 2.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.0 0.0 0.0 15.3 0.0 0.0 23.6 12.1 8.2 19.1 0.0 9.7
LnGrp LOS BAABAACBABAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 92 200 744 699
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.0 15.3 11.6 10.9
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.3 20.2 11.6 5.1 22.4 11.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.1 5.3 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 62.0 33.0 20.0 62.0 32.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 13.5 3.7 2.2 12.6 6.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.0 1.3 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave Queues
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 20
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 64 102 100 43 716 14 78 682 147
v/c Ratio 0.72 0.21 0.60 0.49 0.40 0.77 0.02 0.54 0.68 0.18
Control Delay 65.6 14.6 74.3 33.7 74.7 34.5 0.1 74.3 27.8 11.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 65.6 14.6 74.3 33.7 74.7 34.5 0.1 74.3 27.8 11.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 169 1 79 26 34 453 0 61 399 35
Queue Length 95th (ft) 314 45 170 98 89 812 0 138 709 92
Internal Link Dist (ft) 408 339 523 385
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 50 150 300 200 200
Base Capacity (vph) 598 540 610 566 365 1199 997 365 1207 995
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.60 0.01 0.21 0.57 0.15
Intersection Summary
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
11: SR 41 & Atascadero Ave HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 21
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 115 89 59 14 80 92 40 659 13 72 627 135
Future Volume (vph) 115 89 59 14 80 92 40 659 13 72 627 135
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1812 1506 1849 1583 1770 1863 1529 1770 1863 1522
Flt Permitted 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1812 1506 1849 1583 1770 1863 1529 1770 1863 1522
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 125 97 64 15 87 100 43 716 14 78 682 147
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 51 0 0 59 0070027
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 222 13 0 102 41 43 716 7 78 682 120
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 8 7
Turn Type Split NA Perm Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 7 8 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 7826
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.4 21.4 11.5 11.5 6.3 63.6 63.6 10.3 67.6 67.6
Effective Green, g (s) 21.4 21.4 11.5 11.5 6.3 63.6 63.6 10.3 67.6 67.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.51 0.51 0.08 0.54 0.54
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 5.3 5.3 4.6 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 307 255 168 144 88 941 772 144 1000 817
v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 c0.06 0.02 c0.38 c0.04 c0.37
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.08
v/c Ratio 0.72 0.05 0.61 0.28 0.49 0.76 0.01 0.54 0.68 0.15
Uniform Delay, d1 49.4 43.7 55.0 53.4 58.2 25.0 15.5 55.5 21.3 14.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 7.0 0.0 4.2 0.4 1.6 3.3 0.0 2.2 1.5 0.0
Delay (s) 56.4 43.8 59.2 53.8 59.8 28.3 15.5 57.8 22.8 14.7
Level of Service E D E D E C B E C B
Approach Delay (s) 53.6 56.5 29.9 24.5
Approach LOS D E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 125.9 Sum of lost time (s) 19.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
12: SR 41 & Mercedes Ave HCM 6th TWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 23
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 43 0 45 5 5 0 90 461 5 0 299 49
Future Vol, veh/h 43 0 45 5 5 0 90 461 5 0 299 49
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------285--165--
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 47 0 49 5 5 0 98 501 5 0 325 53
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1054 1054 352 1076 1078 504 378 0 0 506 0 0
Stage 1 352 352 - 700 700 -------
Stage 2 702 702 - 376 378 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 204 226 692 197 219 568 1180 - - 1059 - -
Stage 1 665 632 - 430 441 -------
Stage 2 429 440 - 645 615 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 187 207 692 171 201 568 1180 - - 1059 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 187 207 - 171 201 -------
Stage 1 610 632 - 394 404 -------
Stage 2 388 403 - 599 615 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 22.7 25.7 1.3 0
HCM LOS C D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1180 - - 298 185 1059 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 - - 0.321 0.059 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - 22.7 25.7 0 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - C D A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 1.3 0.2 0 - -
Atascadero General Plan Update CM PM
13: Atascadero Ave & Santa Rosa Rd HCM 6th AWSC
Central Coast Transportation Consulting Synchro 11 Report
Page 24
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.1
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 185 18 44 169 86 6 41 40 108 49 14
Future Vol, veh/h 15 185 18 44 169 86 6 41 40 108 49 14
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 16 201 20 48 184 93 7 45 43 117 53 15
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 10.8 11.9 9.4 10.9
HCM LOS BBAB
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 7% 7% 15% 63%
Vol Thru, % 47% 85% 57% 29%
Vol Right, % 46% 8% 29% 8%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 87 218 299 171
LT Vol 6 15 44 108
Through Vol 41 185 169 49
RT Vol 40 18 86 14
Lane Flow Rate 95 237 325 186
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.143 0.34 0.446 0.289
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.445 5.159 4.94 5.602
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 657 697 728 641
Service Time 3.486 3.19 2.968 3.638
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.145 0.34 0.446 0.29
HCM Control Delay 9.4 10.8 11.9 10.9
HCM Lane LOS ABBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 1.5 2.3 1.2