|
d. The Focused GPU program EIR (Focused GPU program EIR pp. 4.4-32 through 4.4-35 and 4.4-36 through 4.4-37)
<br />concluded that development facilitated by the Housing Element Update could impact nesting birds and habitat
<br />providing roosting habitat for bats, representing a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-5 of the
<br />Focused GPU program EIR provides protection for burrowing owl nesting and wintering burrows; Mitigation Measure
<br />BIO-7 requires that all tree removal and trimming take place outside of the breeding season or that a qualified biologist
<br />conduct a survey for nesting birds prior to tree removal or trimming; and Mitigation Measure BIO-8 requires bat
<br />habitat assessments prior to any demolition or construction activities. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-13 requires
<br />uniformly applied design standards for housing projects to reduce the risk of avian collision. The impacts were reduced
<br />to less than significant with mitigation.
<br />These mitigation measures, which shall be required as a condition of approval for this project component, would
<br />reduce the potential impacts of this project component on migratory wildlife, including movement of species and on
<br />established wildlife corridors, to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the 847 Woodside project component would
<br />have no impact. This project component is consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR because it would not
<br />create new impacts or increase impacts and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes.
<br />e. The Focused GPU program EIR (Focused GPU program EIR p. 4.4-48) concluded that development facilitated by the
<br />Focused GPU would be consistent with relevant General Plan policies and the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance
<br />(Chapter 35 of the Municipal Code), resulting in no impact. Also, street trees in Redwood City are regulated under
<br />Chapter 29 of the Municipal Code.
<br />According to the arborist report prepared for the project component by SBCA Tree Consulting (5/12/23), there are 14
<br />trees onsite: one Black Walnut and 13 Coast Redwood. According to the project arborist report, all but one of the
<br />Coast Redwood onsite are showing drought stress and if they are to be retained would require supplemental
<br />summertime irrigation and additional attention to soil conditions. The project component proposes to retain 11 onsite
<br />trees and plant 21 new trees at ground level (six Vine Maple, seven Rocky Mountain Maple, two Japanese Cedar, six
<br />Japanese Stewartia) and 11 new trees at podium level (four Japanese Maple, seven Japanese Stewartia) (Plan Sheets
<br />PL2.0, PL3.0, and PL3.1; 2/2/24). In addition, seven new street trees would be planted along the project component
<br />frontage along Woodside Road (Plan Sheet PL1.0, 2/2/24).
<br /> According to the SBCA arborist report, all existing onsite trees are considered “protected” by the City of Redwood
<br />City. The project component would be required to comply with the City’s Street Tree Ordinance and Tree Preservation
<br />Ordinance, which shall be required as a condition of approval for the project component, and would reduce the
<br />potential impacts of the project component related to conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological
<br />resources to a less-than-significant level.
<br /> In addition, the project component proposes a multi-level courtyard for residents, with a play area for children, garden
<br />beds, patio seating, benches, and related amenities, at podium level (Plan Sheets PA3.4 and PL1.2; 2/2/24). The
<br />project component includes a conceptual landscaping plan with plant lists and irrigation needs (Plan Sheets PL1.0,
<br />PL1.1, PL1.2, PL3.1, PL3.2, PL3.3, and PL4.0; 2/2/24). As a standard condition of project approval, any landscape
<br />irrigation system would conform to the California Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881) and Model Water
<br />Efficiency Landscape Ordinance requirements, including a drip or other point-source irrigation systems for the
<br />shrubs/groundcover areas and a bubbler irrigation system for trees. The project component’s landscape plans are
<br />subject to City review and approval under standard City review procedures, including Chapter 29 of the Municipal
<br />Code (regarding street trees). Based on the project component and requirements described in this item (e), the project
<br />component would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, the
<br />847 Woodside project component would have no impact. This project component is consistent with the analysis in
<br />the Focused GPU EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts and there is no new information
<br />of substantial importance for CEQA.
<br />f. The Focused GPU EIR did not discuss this impact because no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
<br />Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan applies to the area. The same
<br />is true today. For that reason, the project component would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
<br />regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an adverse effect on vegetation or wildlife; nor would it
<br />conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan. No habitat conservation plan applies to the project component site.
<br />Also see item (e) above. Therefore, the 847 Woodside project component would have no impact. This project
<br />component is consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase
<br />impacts and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />ATTY/RESO.0070/CC RESO 1900 BROADWAY (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECK LIST
<br />REV: 10-23-24 VR
<br />
<br />Page 47 of 135
|