My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-2026-08
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2026
>
PC-2026-08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/4/2026 8:27:46 AM
Creation date
8/4/2026 8:25:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/22/2026
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
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.
/
264
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of Pleasanton—Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Project <br />CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations <br /> <br /> <br />24 FirstCarbon Solutions <br />Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480016/FOF/21480016 Pleasanton Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Project FOF.docx <br />dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) to minimize the <br />potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. <br /> <br />Compensation <br />To ensure that mitigation habitat meets or exceeds the value of habitat lost to <br />development, Focal Species Impact/Mitigation Scoring Sheets located in Appendix E <br />of the EACCS were used as part of the assessment for suitability of mitigation lands <br />for the burrowing owl. Standardized mitigation ratios for the burrowing owl, <br />according to Table 3-10 in the EACCS, is 3:1 within the East Bay Hills Mitigation Area <br />where the project and associated conservation land is sited. <br />Facts in Support of Findings: <br />Congdon’s Tarplant <br />Congdon’s tarplant was observed on the project site during field and focus surveys. (Draft EIR, p. 3.3- <br />25). Although four new populations identified in 2023 would be located within the proposed <br />conservation area and would thus not be affected by project construction activities, the proposed <br />project would still result in significant harm or removal of Congdon’s tarplant during project <br />construction. (Draft EIR, p. 3.3-25). Therefore, the proposed project would be required to implement <br />MM BIO-1a which would involve the preservation of Congdon’s tarplant at an 8:1 ratio and <br />preparation of a sitewide Resource Management Plan (RMP) to manage the 104.6 acres of open <br />space for all potentially sensitive species, including Congdon’s tarplant. Through implementation of <br />MM BIO-1a, the proposed project would reduce potential impacts on Congdon’s tarplant during <br />grading and habitat modification to a less than significant level. <br />California Red-legged Frog <br />Approximately 104.6 acres of open space west of the project site within Parcel B is proposed for <br />conservation purposes and is classified as Critical Habitat Unit ALA-1b for the California Red-legged <br />Frog (CRLF). (Draft EIR, p. 3.3-25; Errata, p. 5-3). According to the results of the site-specific habitat <br />assessment, aquatic features on the project site lack suitable hydrology to provide breeding habitat <br />for the species. (Draft EIR, Appendix C) However, the CRLF may also occur within riparian corridors <br />on-site or in their immediate vicinity during movement and foraging activities. (Draft EIR, p. 3.3-25). <br />Although the proposed project would use clustering and siting features to reduce impacts on <br />riparian corridors that would qualify as potential CRLF foraging habitat to the extent feasible, the <br />proposed project would implement MM BIO-1b out of an abundance of caution to further reduce <br />these impacts. Through implementation of MM BIO-1b, the proposed project would reduce <br />potential impacts on the CRLF to less than significant. <br />Alameda Whipsnake <br />The project site is located almost entirely within Critical Habitat for the Alameda whipsnake. (Draft <br />EIR, p. 3.3-26). As a result, the proposed project would result in the loss of approximately 24 acres of <br />upland habitat suitable for all life stages of the whipsnake, which includes potential impacts to <br />Alameda Whipsnake habitat located adjacent to the proposed project’s boundaries. Therefore, the <br /> <br /><br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.