Laserfiche WebLink
Fact: The revised plan proposes an open, <br />wrought-iron/pilaster-type fence along <br />Foothill Road and requires open fencing <br />at rear yards. <br />Fact: Fencing is subject to City review and <br />approval with each house plan. <br />3.e.2. Finding: Project alternatives described in the <br />EIR are unnecessary as this effect is fully <br />avoided. <br />Fact: See 3.e.1. <br />4. Vegetation and Wildlife <br />4.A. Significant Effect: Forty percent of heritage trees <br />would be destroyed or adversely affected. <br />4.a.1. Finding: The revised plan substantially <br />lessens this impact. <br />Fact: Only 18 heritage trees (estimated 6$ on <br />site) would be removed. <br />Fact: Project requirements and conditions <br />requires implementation of a tree <br />preservation plan during construction <br />and thereafter. <br />4.a.2. Finding: Project alternatives are either <br />infeasible or have similar, or worse, impacts <br />on trees than the revised plan. <br />Fact: See 3.c.2 and 3.c.3. <br />4.B. Significant Effect: Central Canyon Creek would be <br />subject to siltation. <br />4.b.1. Finding: The revised development plan avoids <br />this potential impact. <br />Fact: Grading on the south side of the upper <br />canyon wall has been eliminated, as has <br />most of the grading on the north side. <br />Fact: The creek is protected by a siltation <br />fence around all lots in hilly areas <br />above the creek, as well as City erosion <br />control standards. <br />-5- <br />