My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 2026023
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020-present
>
2026
>
RES 2026023
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/30/2026 9:30:47 AM
Creation date
4/28/2026 9:58:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/21/2026
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
RESO NO. 2026-023
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
285
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc. <br />CalVTP Project-Specific Analysis and Addendum <br />Augustin Bernal Community Park Fuel Reduction <br />November 2025 <br />A-97 <br /> <br /> <br />MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE? <br />(Y/N) TIMING IMPLEMENTING <br />ENTITY <br />VERIFYING/ <br />MONITORING <br />ENTITY <br />A qualified RPF or botanist with knowledge of the affected sensitive natural community <br />would review the treatment design and applicable impact minimization measures <br />(potentially including others not listed above) to determine if the anticipated residual <br />effects of the treatment would be significant under CEQA because implementation of the <br />treatment would not maintain habitat functions of the sensitive natural community or oak <br />woodland. If the project proponent determines the impact on sensitive natural <br />communities or oak woodlands would be less than significant, no further mitigation would <br />be required. If the project proponent determines that the loss or degradation of sensitive <br />natural communities or oak woodlands would be significant under CEQA after <br />implementing feasible treatment design alternatives and impact minimization measures, <br />then MM BIO-3b would be implemented. <br />The only exception to this mitigation approach is in cases where it is determined by a <br />qualified RPF or botanist that the sensitive natural community or oak woodland would <br />benefit from treatment in the occupied habitat area even though some loss may occur <br />during treatment activities. For a treatment to be considered beneficial to a sensitive <br />natural community or oak woodland, the qualified RPF or botanist would demonstrate <br />with substantial evidence that habitat function is reasonably expected to improve with <br />implementation of the treatment (e.g., by citing scientific studies demonstrating that the <br />community (or similar community) has benefitted from increased sunlight due to canopy <br />opening, eradication of invasive species, or otherwise reduced competition for resources), <br />and the substantial evidence would be included in the PSA. If it is determined that <br />treatment activities would be beneficial to sensitive natural communities or oak <br />woodlands, no compensatory mitigation would be required. <br />MM BIO-3b: Compensate for Loss of Sensitive Natural Communities and Oak Woodlands <br />If significant impacts on sensitive natural communities or oak woodlands cannot feasibly <br />be avoided or reduced as specified under MM BIO-3a, the project proponent would <br />implement the following actions: <br />• Compensate for unavoidable losses of sensitive natural community and oak <br />woodland acreage and function by: <br />Initial <br />Treatment: N <br />Treatment <br />Maintenance: <br />N <br />N/A N/A N/A
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.