PC-2026-15 - Laserfiche WebLink

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ADDENDUM FCS 89 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx e) Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances Would the project: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Prior FEIR Conclusions Local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources applicable to the County Project include the ECAP and the Alameda County Ordinance Code Chapter 12.11. The Prior FEIR determined that the County Project would be consistent with the ECAP through the implementation of MM BIO-1a and MM BIO-1b, as well as MM BIO-2a and MM BIO-2b, if Design Option B is selected, which would protect and preserve sensitive habitat and special-status species with the potential to occur within the Study Area. Additionally, the requirements set forth in Alameda County Ordinance Code Chapter 12.11, which details the County’s Tree Preservation Guidelines, would be met as no trees stipulated as protected under the Chapter would be affected by the County Project. Therefore, with adherence to the Alameda County Ordinance Code, the ECAP, and implementation of MM BIO-1a and MM BIO- 1b, as well as MM BIO-2a and MM BIO-2b, if Design Option B is selected, the County Project would not conflict with the County’s local policies or ordinances. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (Draft EIR, p. 3.3-36, 6-13). Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion Given the proposed annexation, this Addendum considered local City policies or ordinances applicable to the proposed project, which include Goal 2, Policy 1 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan, which serves to “preserve and enhance natural wildlife habitats and wildlife corridors”; the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan; and Chapter 17.16 of the Municipal Code, which intends to preserve as many trees as possible throughout the City through staff review and the development review process. The proposed project would meet the requirements of the General Plan through the implementation of MM BIO-1a and MM BIO-1b, as well as MM BIO-2a and MM BIO-2b, which would protect and preserve sensitive habitat and special-status species with the potential to occur within the Study Area. Additionally, Chapter 17.16 of the Municipal Code and the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan, which set forth the City’s Tree Preservation Guidelines, would be met as no trees stipulated as protected under the Chapter would be affected by the proposed project. By following the City's Tree Preservation Guidelines; complying with Goal 2, Policy 1 of the City’s General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element; and the Urban Forest Master Plan; and implementing MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a, and MM BIO-2b, the proposed project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances. Thus, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation, consistent with conclusions from the Prior FEIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.