Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 61 <br />C. The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (pp. I5-14 and I5-15) concluded that the potential for loss or <br />disturbance of jurisdictional wetlands or regulated waters existed only with DTPP facilitated development that is <br />adjacent to Redwood Creek. The project site is located approximately 210 feet from where Redwood Creek <br />daylights near Bradford Street, and therefore no impact is anticipated. <br />d. The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (pp. 15-15 and I5-16) concluded that development occurring in <br />conformance with the DTPP could impact nesting birds, representing a potentially significant impact. Mitigation <br />I5-3 of the Downtown Precise Plan program EIR requires that all tree removal and trimming take place outside of <br />the breeding season or that a qualified biologist conduct a survey for nesting birds prior to tree removal or <br />trimming. This measure, which shall be required as a condition of approval for the project, would reduce the <br />potential impacts of the project on migratory wildlife to a less -than -significant level. <br />e. The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (p. I5-16) concluded that development occurring in conformance with <br />the DTPP could impact heritage andprotected trees as defined by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (Chapter <br />35 of the Municipal Code), resulting in a potentially significant impact. Also, street trees in Redwood City are <br />regulated under Chapter 29 of the Municipal Code. <br />There are no trees on the project site. The project would require removal of three street trees on Bradford Street <br />and two street trees on Jefferson Avenue that are located within the public right-of-way (communication with Seth <br />Adams, Associate Planner, City of Redwood City, 212116). The five street trees are not designated as heritage or <br />protected trees and are not subject to the Tree Preservation Ordinance; thus, Impact I5-4 would not occur; and <br />Mitigation 15-4 is not required. The project proposes to plant eight new street trees per DTPP tree replacement <br />standards —four along Jefferson Avenue and four along Bradford Street (Plan Sheet L1.1, 3/14116). <br />Groundcover, shrubs, vines, and planting pots with native or adapted non-invasive species would be located along <br />the building frontage on Jefferson and Bradford. Turf would not be used. The landscape would emphasize water - <br />efficient irrigation in compliance with City regulations. The project would include common space for the building <br />tenants, including two outdoor terraces: a 5,200 square foot terrace on the podium level (second floor) at the <br />southeast corner of the building (next to the adjacent properties' parking lots), with benches and hardwood decking, <br />flow-through planters and landscaping, a greenwall, a water feature, and other amenities; and a 4,400 square foot <br />rooftop terrace with a dining table with chairs and benches, outdoor grills with wet bars/sinks, landscaping (shrubs, <br />grasses, succulents, and trees), sunshades, a wall fountain, and other amenities. (Plan Sheets A2.2 and A2.9, <br />314116, and Plan Sheets L1.2 and L1.3, 3114116) <br />As a standard condition of project approval, the landscape irrigation system would conform to the California <br />Water -Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881) and Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance requirements, <br />including a subsurface, drip, bubbler; and spray irrigation systems for the shrubs/groundcover areas and bubbler <br />irrigation system for trees. The project landscape plans are subject to City review and approval under the DTPP <br />standards and guidelines, as well as under standard City review procedures, including Chapter 29 of the Municipal <br />Code (regarding street trees). Based on the project components and requirements described in this item (e), the <br />project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. <br />g. The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of <br />avoiding or mitigating an adverse effect on vegetation or wildlife; nor would it conflict with an adopted habitat <br />conservation plan. No habitat conservation plan applies to the project site. Also see item (e) above. <br />Summary of Impacts <br />14 <br />Potentially <br />Less than Significant <br />Less than <br />Significant <br />With Mitigation <br />Significant <br />No <br />Impact <br />Incorporated <br />Impact <br />Impact <br />V. <br />CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: <br />a) <br />Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource <br />X <br />as defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5? <br />b) <br />Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological <br />X <br />resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5? <br />c) <br />Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or <br />X <br />unique geologic feature? <br />d) <br />Eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or <br />X <br />prehistory? <br />e) <br />Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal <br />X <br />cemeteries? <br />14 <br />