Atascadero council hears objections to draft 2045 EIR paleontological mitigation that council says could stall housing projects

Atascadero city staff presented the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2045 General Plan and fielded extended council questions Wednesday about paleontological mitigation, air‑quality modeling and wastewater capacity. The public comment period for the draft closes June 4, and staff said a draft fiscal analysis will be presented at the June council meeting with final plan adoption expected this fall after EIR comment responses.

Mr. Dunsmore, the staff presenter, framed the EIR as a disclosure document required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and summarized three CEQA impact classifications — significant and unavoidable (Class 1), significant but mitigable (Class 2) and less‑than‑significant (Class 3). He said the draft document and appendices are available at City Hall, the Atascadero Library and the city website and noted SWCA is a consultant on the project.

Kelly, a member of the project team, outlined technical findings: a mapped set of soils areas that the team identified as potentially containing paleontological resources, a mitigation measure that would require studies in some excavations in those mapped zones, wastewater collection and treatment upgrades anticipated to serve future capacity, and greenhouse‑gas (GHG) and vehicle‑miles‑traveled (VMT) impacts for which the city may exceed state thresholds despite proposed mitigation.

Council members pressed staff for specifics on how the paleontological measure would be implemented and what would trigger a study. "Is it going to require additional studying for somebody building a single‑family home, or only for large excavations?" asked Council member Peak. Staff replied that the policy in the general plan intentionally stays broad and that implementation criteria — including depth or size triggers and exemptions for previously graded sites — would be developed in zoning and implementation documents to limit studies to projects with a realistic potential to affect resources.

Council members repeatedly warned that broadly worded triggers could impose substantial costs on homeowners and developers and in some cases "kill" projects. "This just drives me nuts," said Council member Funk, referring to the paleontological requirements, adding that well‑intentioned protections can become a layer of cost and delay that undermines housing goals. Funk urged staff to scope the mitigation so it applies only where necessary and to consider legislative outreach to state representatives.

On air quality, council members asked whether the technical analysis relied on countywide datasets that might overstate impacts inside Atascadero. Staff said CEQA analyses sometimes must use larger regional datasets when local data lack the completeness required for the technical models. Staff also said greenhouse gases were the predominant air impact and recommended clarifying data sources in the EIR responses to comments.

Staff described next steps: city responses to the EIR comments, a draft fiscal analysis to come to council in June, and a fall timeline for final plan adoption after edits and responses. The EIR draft is roughly 900 pages, staff said, and comments will be accepted through June 4.

The council provided direction to staff to refine implementation language, to work on zoning and map integration that would notify prospective buyers and developers of restrictions (comparing the approach to a flood map), and to limit studies to situations where excavation depth and scope present a plausible paleontological risk. The council asked that staff clarify data sets used for air‑quality and GHG modeling in the administrative record.