My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 06035
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
RES 06035
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2006 4:17:08 PM
Creation date
6/7/2006 4:02:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/16/2006
DOCUMENT NO
RES 06035
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.
/
377
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 />It is also recommended that Guideline 4,3 be amended to add the term "pre- <br />construction" as follows: <br /> <br />Guideline 4,3, Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted for the western pond <br />turtle and, if determined to be present on-site, suitable protective measures shall be <br />implemented through consultation with the California Department of Fish and <br />Game, <br /> <br />4 Comment: <br />CNPS recommends that an assumption be eliminated from Section 2b(3)a which <br />states that extensive disturbance from agricultural production, flood control improve- <br />ments, and intensive grazing eliminated suitable habitat for special status species <br />populations, Many highly disturbed ecosystems respond to restorative action once <br />they are managed for species of special interest. CNPS recommends that this <br />assumption be eliminated since the "habitat", if managed for non-native species <br />removal, may yield individuals of several species of potential occurrence that are <br />actually present. <br /> <br />Response: <br />It is true that portions of the site could be restored to provide habitat for special <br />status plant species, but under existing graded and disked conditions it is unlikely <br />that any such species occur on the development portion of the project site, <br /> <br />5 Comment: <br />Section 2(b)4 inconclusively states that other wetlands may be present on the site, <br />An EIR requires the evaluation of impact on Wetlands and Water of the US" all sites <br />must be mapped with certainty, Without a proper wetland survey, no EIR can <br />adequately, nor legally, determine impacts on Wetlands and Waters of the US, or as <br />predicted by guidelines in Section 3b3 (Significance criteria established by Section <br />4040 of the Clean Water Act,) <br /> <br />Response: <br />The 1997 Draft EIR on the Bernal Property (which covered the full 506-acre site) <br />included a review of potential wetlands on the site and described preliminary wetland <br />assessments conducted at that time, Followup jurisdictional determinations, subject <br />to the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, were conducted in <br />conjunction with the Phase I Specific Plan and approval and the construction of site <br />improvements and projects, <br /> <br />The DEIR (p, 66) refers to mitigation measures built into the Specific Plan addressing <br />potential impacts on wetlands, The commenter is referred to the Specific Plan, p, 73, <br />which requires at Guideline 1,3 that "Prior to the approval of final grading plans, the <br />locations of wetlands on the project development site shall be delineated and veri- <br />fied, If additional wetlands are delineated on the site that would be adversely affected <br />by the project, a mitigation plan shall be prepared, including an avoidance alternative, <br />that will meet federal and state requirements, , , " <br /> <br />39 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.