Laserfiche WebLink
<br />F. BIOLOGY <br /> <br />1. ImDact 03. Potential for removal of heritage trees located in the study area. <br /> <br />MitilZation Measure: <br />Measure 03. Prior to the approval of a grading plan for the site, require the preparation <br />and approval of a Master Landscape Plan and Tree Preservation Plan. <br /> <br />Findin~: Specific economic, social or other considerations made infeasible mitigation <br />measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. <br /> <br />Facts in SUDDort of FindiDlz: The following facts demonstrate that it is not feasible to <br />mitigate the impact to a less than significant level. <br /> <br />a. Heritage trees were found in four primary areas: (I) adjacent to the <br />Arroyo de la Laguna corridor, (2) proximate to the old farmstead in the West Parcel, <br />(3) bordering Bernal Avenue, and (4) proximate to the knoll on the East Parcel. <br /> <br />b. The fmdings set forth above under Visual Resources Impact N5 are <br />incorporated by reference. <br /> <br />c. The Conservation and Environmental Mitigation Element of the September <br />1998 Specific Plan addresses tree removal and protection by encouraging retention of as <br />many mature, healthy trees as feasible and requiring replacement planting. <br /> <br />d. Master PUD Condition 90 requires the Property Owner to retain as many <br />mature, healthy trees as feasible, recognizing that implementation of the Land Use Plan <br />will result in removal of certain trees within planned development areas. Retention and <br />removal of trees will occur in accordance with the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan, <br />referenced as PUD Exhibit 11. <br /> <br />e. Master PUD Condition 91 requires that a Master Landscape Plan be <br />prepared for the entire site. The plan is to be prepared by a registered landscape architect, <br />and submitted with either the Golf Course PUD or Village Center PUD, whichever occurs <br />first. Condition 92 details the Plan requirements and calls for a tree planting program. <br /> <br />f. The distribution ofland uses under each of the development alternatives <br />would result in the loss of a significant number of major trees on the site. The No Project <br />Alternative is rejected because it would not meet any of the Project Sponsor's objectives <br />nor would it fulfill any of the City's objectives for this site, including provision of <br />additional housing, open space and public improvements. <br /> <br />SF:FMP\AGR\WEX\61131664.2 <br />062499 <br /> <br />A-67 <br /> <br />WEX-66013 <br />