5G Consent - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

previously conducted as part of the project’s CEQA documentation, these databases were last assessed for the project over five years ago; therefore, it is necessary to update them. Based on these database searches and a review of other CDFW lists and publi cations, Consultant will generate a list of species with potential to occur within the vicinity of the project site. In addition, available aerial photography, U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) maps, and other sources will be reviewed to identify the current or historic extent of jurisdictional waters and wetlands. ● Prepare a biological resources technical memorandum that identifies existing conditions at the project site and potential biological and regulatory constraints, including plant and wildlife species (also fish) that are expected to be of concern to state and federal permitting agencies. The work product will include a map of sensitive and non -sensitive biological communities or land cover types and a map depicting the presumed extent of jurisdiction by applicable regulatory agencies. ○ The report will rely upon the 50% design and project description developed under Task 3.1 to present an analysis of anticipated project impacts to jurisdictional areas associated with the phases of the project. Consultant will quantify anticipated fill placement and fill removal. As part of this impact analysis, Consultant will prepare one or more maps that overlay grade and fill information within jurisdictional limits to depict anticipated impacts to jurisdictional features. These impact figures will be used for permit applications and supporting documents (Task 5). In addition, the resulting impact analysis will inform the compensatory mitigation strategy described in Task 2.9. ● This report will not be prepared as a CEQA-level technical report, but instead will draw upon relevant biological resources impacts and mitigation measures identified in the existing EIR. This report will integrate the prior CEQA analyses with the information Consultant collects regarding currently existing conditions to draw conclusions regarding species avoidance and minimization. Any species that were not addressed by the EIR but should be addressed due to changes in species status or agency practices will be discussed. This report will include maps depicting the land cover types and anticipated impacts to sensitive natural resources and species habitats. Task 2.9 – Compensatory Mitigation Strategy If the impact analysis conducted under Task 2.8 indicates the project will result in a net increase in Bay fill, regulatory agencies are likely to require the project provide a clear and implementable plan for compensatory mitigation. While the EIR for the City’s larger project acknowledges that compensatory mitigation will be required for net fill in jurisdictional wetlands and waters, the EIR does not appear to propose a mitigation option or concept. Because a feasible compensatory mitigation option has yet to be identified and vetted by the regulatory agencies, Consultant will coordinate with the City and the design team to identify a range of potential compensatory mitigation options for the project. The likely mitigation options will include: 1) purchase of tidal waters credits from the one existing mitigation bank in the Bay; 2) identifying another party’s tidal wetland restoration project that will accept funding from the City in lieu of on-site mitigation, and 3) providing on-site living shorelines enhancements as part of the project design. CONSULTANT will summarize the preliminary options in a memorandum to the City. With the City’s permission, these options will be presented to or discussed with the regulatory agencies at a pre -application