Reso25 16295 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

49 of the work proposed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2b is sufficient to ensure that potential impacts on wetlands and open waters are minimized and adequate replacement or compensatory mitigation is provided, reducing impacts to a less-than-significant level. See item b. above for a summary of the Commercial Component’s potential impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and regulated waters. The Commercial Component site contains jurisdictional aquatic, wetland, and riparian habitats in the existing on-site earthen channel. The Commercial Component site is also directly adjacent to a parcel that contains an underground segment of Redwood Creek. Mitigation Measure BIO-2b, therefore, applies to this component. The MMP prepared for the Commercial Component by H. T. Harvey & Associates implements the requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-2b for all project design modifications, habitat replacement, and mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project. The Commercial Component would implement the remaining requirement of Mitigation Measure BIO-2b, that is, to secure all required permits and approvals for its proposed modifications to potential wetlands, riparian zones, or regulated waters as a condition of approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits, per the MMRP. Because the Commercial Component would implement the requirements of DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-2b as a condition of approval, this component is consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR. The 901 El Camino Real project component would not create new impacts or increase impacts and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. d. The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (pp. 15-15 and 15-16) concluded that development occurring in conformance with the DTPP could impact nesting birds, representing a potentially significant impact on migratory wildlife. Mitigation 15-3 of the Downtown Precise Plan program EIR requires that all tree removal and trimming take place outside of the breeding season or that a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds prior to tree removal or trimming. The impacts were reduced to less than significant with this mitigation. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 15-14 through 15-15) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion and requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1b (as noted previously, Mitigation Measure BIO-1b restates Mitigation Measure 15-3 from the DTPP Final EIR with minor text revisions--“clarifying amendments”). As discussed in a. above, the site does not provide suitable habitat for any special-status wildlife species based on a survey conducted by H. T. Harvey’s wildlife ecologist on December 17, 2021 and no existing nests of raptors (e.g., hawks, owls, and falcons) were observed within the site or within a surrounding buffer of 300 feet, and only small numbers of other nesting birds are expected to be present on or adjacent to the site; however, Mitigation Measure BIO-1b as described in a. above would require tree removal, trimming, and ground disturbance to occur outside of nesting season (February 15 to August 31), or a nesting survey by a qualified biologist three days prior to such activity. The Commercial Component includes tree removal and ground disturbing activities and could potentially impact nesting birds which would be a potentially significant impact. Plan-Wide Amendments program Mitigation Measure BIO-1b (formerly 15-3), which shall be required as a condition of approval for the Commercial Component, would reduce the potential impacts of the project component on migratory wildlife, including movement of species and on established wildlife corridors, to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the Commercial Component would be less than significant with mitigation. This component is consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. e. The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (p. 15-16) concluded that development occurring in conformance with the DTPP could impact Heritage and Protected trees as defined by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 35 of the Municipal Code), resulting in a potentially significant impact. Also, street trees in Redwood City are regulated under Chapter 29 of the Municipal Code. DTPP Final EIR Mitigation Measure 15-4 was identified to reduce impacts related to tree removal to a less-than-significant level and would require that any project involving tree removal complete the application and review process specified in the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 35).Compliance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance and Mitigation Measure 15-4 was identified in the EIR as being sufficient to reduce impacts related to tree removal to a less than significant impact. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (p. 15-16) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion that the impacts would be less than significant with mitigation and restated former Mitigation Measure 15-4 as Mitigation Measure BIO-5. As described in item 8, Description of Project, there are 33 trees identified on site, including the creek area and the proposed Franklin Street extension, all of which the Commercial Component proposes to remove. An additional 29 trees are indicated on the site as “to be protected in place” include trees on the adjacent Joint Powers Board (JPB) parking lot, in City right-of-way areas, and along a portion of the El Camino Real median parallel to the project component frontage. The Commercial Component proposes to replace the removed on-site trees by planting a total of 81 new trees, including 37 along the project component perimeter (12 along El Camino Real; 15 along Winklebleck ATTY/RESO.0028/CC RESO CEQA GUIDLINES (920 SHASTA) - EXHIBIT A REV: 04-22-25 VR Page 49 of 148