Fountaingrove Environmental Impact Report - City of Santa Rosa ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TABLE 4-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Documentation Additional Permit Enforcement Implementation Schedule Building Permits. Impacts Mitigation Measures Responsible Party MMRP signoff on the fencing off of sensitive trees’ root-protection zone. Rosa Public Works Department tree that has a diameter of 6 inches or greater, as measured 4.5 feet above the ground. Project plans designating construction staging areas and prohibition of parking, loading, and grading during construction activities within root zones of trees. Prior to commencement of any onsite or offsite construction activities. BMPs shall be included in the plans and specifications for the Project. These shall be reviewed in pre-construction meetings with City staff, the City’s contractor, and qualified biologists and shall, at a minimum, include the following provisions: Meeting Minutes from City/biologist/contractor meeting to review BMPs. MMRP sign-off on routing drainage swales and underground work outside the dripline where possible. MMRP sign-off on the placement of a 4-inch layer of chipped bark mulch over the soil surface within the fenced dripline. MMRP sign-off on pruning to clean and raise canopy per International Society of Arboriculture pruning standards, if necessary. Root protection zone maps, accompanied by documentation of other specific measures. • Construction drawings shall accurately locate areas to be avoided such as tree trunks and root protection zones. • Before construction, the root-protection zone (1.5 times the canopy area) of sensitive trees shall be fenced using wire mesh fencing. • Construction staging areas shall be designated on plans and prohibit parking, loading, and grading during construction activities within root zones of trees. • A pre-construction meeting conference shall be held with contractors to review BMPs and require bonding and fines to secure the replacement of inadvertently damaged trees. • Existing grade shall be maintained within the fenced portion of the dripline. Drainage swales and underground work shall be routed outside the dripline where possible. • A 4-inch layer of chipped bark mulch shall be placed over the soil surface within the fenced dripline prior to installing temporary fencing. Suitable mulch must contain bark “fines.” This layer of mulch shall be maintained throughout construction. • If pruning is necessary, pruning shall be done to clean and raise canopy per International Society of Arboriculture pruning standards. • A tree specialist shall be consulted during design to accurately locate root protection zones and identify other specific measures that would limit potential indirect impacts on trees that may be encroached upon. • A drainage plan shall be designed that will avoid oak trees to be preserved. Project drainage plan. Construction schedule. California Fish and Game Code. City of Santa Rosa Department of Community Development Mitigation Measure 3.4-3: Provide protection of nesting raptors, migratory birds, and nesting non-special-status birds. Impact 3.4-3: The Project would result in the loss of raptor and migratory bird nesting habitat and could result in impacts to nesting non-special-status birds. Avian Species Survey Report. Prior to commencement of any onsite construction activities. Several measures would be implemented to minimize impacts to nesting raptors, migratory birds, and nesting non-special-status birds: Qualified Biologist • To avoid impacts to nesting avian species, Project activity shall be avoided to the degree feasible during the breeding season (generally, March 1 through September 15). • If avoidance of Project activity during the nesting season is not feasible, pre-construction surveys for avian species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify active nests within or adjacent to the project site. To the extent feasible, avoidance or mitigation guidelines from U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish 4-6 ES092008001PHX\ BAO\082970001 The Project would result in the loss of individual trees potentially used for nesting by raptors and migratory birds. In addition, suitable nesting habitat for many other non-special-status bird species is present, and construction activities in the Project site may affect these species. Disturbance of nest sites could result in abandonment of eggs or young or actual destruction of nests. These impacts are potentially significant. However, most birds such as observed on the Project site have large home ranges, and existing adjacent habitat could provide alternative habitat during Project construction.
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TABLE 4-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Documentation Additional Permit Enforcement Implementation Schedule Impacts Mitigation Measures Responsible Party and Game (CDFG), and the qualified biologist will provide timing, methodology, and species-specific protocols to be followed. • If no nesting raptors or migratory birds are found in the survey area, no further mitigation is necessary. • If active nests are found, impacts shall be avoided by establishment of appropriate buffers, determined through coordination with CDFG or USFWS, as appropriate. No Project activity shall commence within the buffer area until a qualified biologist confirms that there is no longer active nesting activity or other mitigation and avoidance measures are authorized by USFWS or CDFG. Buffers may be adjusted if it is determined by a qualified biologist (in coordination with USFWS and/or CDFG) that it would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. Monitoring of the nest by a qualified biologist may be required if the activity could adversely affect the site. • To minimize the potential for birds to nest in the construction area, nest searches may be conducted, and tree removal and other vegetation removal may be performed without special regulatory approval between September 1 and February 1. This shall be noted on improvement plans, grading plans, and building plans. N/A Construction schedule. Mitigation 3.4-4: Provide protection for roosting and maternity colonies for special-status bat species. Impact 3.4-4: Project construction activities could result in impacts to roosting and maternity colonies of special-status bat species. Pre-construction survey report, including habitat assessment. Prior to commencement of any on-site construction activities. City of Santa Rosa Department of Community Development. Revised construction specifications. Qualified Biologist To avoid impacts to bat species, tree removal should be performed at appropriate times of the year. If trees must be removed outside of this time, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify all roosts. A 50-foot buffer zone shall be established around each snag or tree until the roosting period is over. Resident and migratory bat species may be located near the Project site during construction. These species are protected under the California Fish and Game Code. Disturbance of roost trees could result in significant disturbance or destruction of roosts or maternity colonies. This would be a potentially significant impact. However, existing adjacent habitat could provide alternate habitat during Project construction. Implementation of mitigation measures described below would further reduce this impact. A habitat assessment of each tree slated for removal shall be conducted to determine its potential for use by bats. If potential habitat exists in a tree, specific recommendations shall be made for that tree (such as selective removal of limbs or seasonal timing). Recommendations shall be incorporated into construction specifications. N/A Western pond turtle pre-construction survey report. Mitigation Measure 3.4-5a: Provide protection for western and northwestern pond turtle during construction. Impact 3.4-5: Project construction activities could result in impacts to western or northwestern pond turtle. MMRP signoff that construction zone limits, have been visibly established along the Project boundary near Piner Creek. Prior to commencement of any onsite construction activities. City of Santa Rosa Department of Community Development Qualified Biologist Design plans and specifications revised to establish protocol if turtles are found in construction zone. During all onand offsite construction activities. Pre-construction surveys for the western pond turtle (including northwestern pond turtle) shall be implemented. Individual western pond turtles found within the Project site during pre-construction surveys shall be relocated by a qualified biologist. Construction zone limits along the Project boundary near Piner Creek channel banks shall be set up using silt fencing that is keyed into the ground by burying the bottom of the fence. The fencing will restrict access by turtles, keeping them out of the construction area and indicating the construction area boundaries to construction workers. Signage shall also be placed indicating that the Piner Creek channel area is protected and not accessible for construction equipment and materials. Any turtle found in the construction area Although habitat for western pond turtle (including northwestern pond turtle) is limited to the southern portion of the Study Area along Piner Creek and no direct impacts to the creek would occur as a result of Project construction, impacts to western pond turtle during construction could occur from sediments and construction debris indirectly entering Piner Creek should the western pond turtle be present. In addition, the western pond turtle could potentially migrate to the Project site during construction and be inadvertently affected. These impacts could be potentially significant. However, with implementation of mitigation described below, potential impacts would be less than significant. ES092008001PHX\ BAO\082970001 4-7
Page 1:
Aegis Senior Living Continuing Care
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTS Response to Comment Letter
Page 6 and 7:
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS HFC hydr
Page 8 and 9:
1.0 INTRODUCTION were accepted. A p
Page 11 and 12:
2.0 List of Commenters and Response
Page 13 and 14:
2.0 LIST OF COMMENTERS AND RESPONSE
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23:
Page 27 and 28:
ES082008001BAO_Fountaingrove_public
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Response to Comment Letter from Ed
Page 47 and 48:
Response to Comment Letter from Ann
Page 49 and 50:
Response to Comment Letter from All
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
28) Comment noted. 2.0 LIST OF COMM
Page 73 and 74:
Response to Comment Letter from Tho
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Response to Comment Letter from Jim
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Response to Comment Letter from Jos
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Response to Comment Letter from Edw
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Response to Comment Letter from Car
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Response to Comment Letter from Lar
Page 145 and 146:
Response to Comment Letter from Lyn
Page 147 and 148:
Response to Comment Letter from Ala
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174: ES082008001BAO_Fountaingrove_public
Page 179 and 180: 2.0 LIST OF COMMENTERS AND RESPONSE
Page 185: 2.0 LIST OF COMMENTERS AND RESPONSE
Page 189: Executive Summary Project The Aegis
Page 193: Mendocino £¤ 101 0 ± 5 10 Miles
Page 197: 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Swimmin
Page 200 and 201: TABLE 3.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Sta
Page 202 and 203: 3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY
Page 215 and 216: 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Bec
Page 217: 3.13 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION Spr
Page 221 and 222: 4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPOR
Page 223: 4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPOR
Page 235: 5.0 References California Board of
show all

Fountaingrove Environmental Impact Report - City of Santa Rosa ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?