MO 2014-008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No impact Comment a-b: The California Natural Diversity Database(CNDDB)for the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS)San Leandro, Hayward,Oakland East, Oakland West,Las Trampas Ridge and Newark 7.5-minute quadrangles identifies 82 special- status plant and animal species,and four sensitive natural communities in the database. This includes species listed as rare,threatened,endangered,or proposed for listing as such, under the California and Federal Endangered Species Acts, species of special concern to California Department of Fish and Game(CDFG), and plants on the California Native Plant Society(CNPS)list 1 or 2(considered rare or endangered within California and elsewhere). The extensive species lists generated by the CNDDB and CNPS queries are the result of populations of sensitive species associated with freshwater wetlands and undisturbed native grasslands found within the region(primarily east of the project site);and species associated with the brackish and freshwater habitats of San Francisco Bay(approximately two miles west of the project site). Although the distance to some of these known resources is less than two miles,the site does contain vacant land. Plant species within and adjacent to the project sites are limited to ruderal vegetation and ornamental species confined to limited landscaping on the property,and introduced weedy annual grasses and forbs occurring in pavement cracks,or other highly disturbed unpaved areas. No sensitive natural communities such as vernal pools,marshes or riparian areas are present within,or adjacent to the project boundaries. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts on any special-status plant or wildlife species or on any sensitive natural communities. An examination of the limited number of trees and shrubs on the site during the field investigation did not reveal the presence of any nests of birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. However,any project activities that would result in the removal of existing woody vegetation could potentially impact nesting birds; that is,the loss of young birds or the abandonment of an active nest,which would be a violation of Fish and Game Code Section 3503 and the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and would be potentially significant impact. The mitigation measure below would reduce potential impacts to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure #3: The applicant shall conduct pro-construction surveys for the presence of nesting birds within each of the project sites. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a pre- construction breeding-season survey (approximately February 1 through August 31)to determine if any birds are nesting on or directly adjacent to the project area. The survey shall be conducted during the same calendar year that construction is planned to begin, If no nesting birds are found,no further action would be required. If nesting birds are found within the trees on or directly adjacent to the project area,the project applicant shall avoid all birds nest sites located in the project area during the breeding season(approximately February 1 through August 31), or until It Is determined by a qualified biologist that all young have fully fledged(left the nest). If the construction cannot be delayed,avoidance shall include the establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone around the nest site. The size of the buffer zone will be determined in consultation with the CDFG. The buffer zone shall be delineated by highly visible temporary construction fencing,and shall remain In place until it is determined by a qualified biologist that all young have fully fledged(left the nest). Implementation of Mitigation Measure#3 reduces potential impacts to a less than significant level. Comment c-d: No wetlands or other waters of the United States"are present within,or adjacent to the project boundaries, as the surrounding sites are almost entirely developed. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any wetland protected by state or federal regulations. As the surrounding area is almost entirely developed,it does not serve as a migratory corridor for native species;nor does it provide nesting sites for wildlife species. Therefore,no further analysis is necessary. Comment e-f: Implementation of the project will not result in conflicts with any local tree protection ordinances and will likely result in a net increase in tree cover,as the property is developed and landscaped. The project site and surrounding area does not lie within or adjacent to an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan. Accordingly,there would be no impact to these resource. areas. • V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical X resource as defined in Sec. 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X archaeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or '. unique geologic feature? X d. Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of formal j cemeteries? X 7