Laserfiche WebLink
<br />6-3 Minimize pollutants entering riparian areas (Draft ErR, page <br />6-7). said mitigation measures were considered and adopted <br />with any pertinent changes in condition 6-2 Exhibit "B" of the <br />planning commission staff report dated May 27, 1992. <br /> <br />Finding: Mitigation Measures 6-1 through 6-3 Feasible and Required <br /> <br />The city finds that it is feasible to mitigate this impact to a <br />less-than-significant level by requiring the applicant and <br />successors in interest to incorporate the specific provisions of <br />Mitigations 6-1 through 6-3, as listed above, into the project <br />design. The applicant and successors in interest shall incorporate <br />said biological impact reduction provisions into project design as <br />a "Condition of Approval" to the project. <br /> <br />Loss of Heritage Valley Oaks <br /> <br />Impact: Removal of non-heritage oaks/potential loss of heritage <br />oaks <br /> <br />The city finds that the project, as currently proposed, would <br />result in the removal of four non-heritage valley oaks during <br />development and the potential subsequent loss of 13 heritage valley <br />oaks from potential filling or grading within the drip lines of <br />said trees. This is a potential significant impact (Draft EIR, <br />page 6-6). <br /> <br />Proposed Mitigation Measures of the EIR <br /> <br />The EIR identified the following mitigation measures which would <br />SUbstantially avoid this biologic impact. <br /> <br />6-4 Protect oaks during construction and bY project design (Draft <br />EIR, page 6-7). Said mitigation measures were considered and <br />adopted with any pertinent changes in Condition 6-3 Exhibit <br />"B" of the planning commission staff report dated May 27, <br />1992. <br /> <br />6-5 Replace lost or damaged oaks and maintain them (Draft EIR, <br />page 6-7). Said mitigation measures were considered and <br />adopted with any pertinent changes in Condition 6-4 Exhibit <br />"B" of the planning commission staff report dated May 27, <br />1992. <br /> <br />Finding: Mitigation Measures 6-4 and 6-S Feasible and Required <br /> <br />The city finds that it is feasible to mitigate this impact to a <br />less-than-significant level by requiring the applicant and <br />successors in interest to incorporate the specific provisions of <br />Mitigations 6-4 and 6-5, as listed above, into the project design. <br />The applicant and successorS in interest shall incorporate such <br />biological impact reduction provisions into project design as a <br />"condition of Approval" to the project. <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />I <br />