SU0004593 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that either mitigation measure will reduce the loss of habitat to less than significant (see Condition No. 6.a. Development Title Section 9-1510.5 states that parallel to any natural bank of a waterway, a natural open space for riparian habitat and waterway protection shall be maintained to provide nesting and foraging habitat and the protection of waterway quality. The minimum width of said open space shall be one- hundred (100) feet, measured from the mean high water level of the natural bank or fifty(50) feet back from the existing riparian habitat, whichever is greater. Water dependent uses may be permitted in this buffer. Because riparian habitat exists along the bank of Bear Creek, a natural bank buffer is required. The tentative map illustrates a one hundred (100) foot setback from the top of the bank, or the mean high water level. This open space buffer extends into the rear portion of lots 85 through 91. The applicants are proposing two mitigation measures to prevent future property owners from developing within the natural buffer zone. The first mitigation measure is to put a note on the Final Map and record a separate instrument for lots 85 through 91 stating that development is prohibited within the natural buffer area. The second mitigation measure is to erect a fence along the natural buffer line within lots 85 through 91 prior to approval of the subdivision improvements. Cultural Resources L. Kyle.Napton, Ph.D,. the archaeologist who prepared the cultural resource survey portion of the original EIR (ER-90-3), stated in a letter dated June 13, 2000, that there may be a subsurface archaeological site (CA-SJO-161) within the project vicinity along Bear Creek. The location is ambiguous, but a previous investigator in 1976 reported finding prehistoric remains in an area either adjacent to or within the proposed project area. As a result, Dr. Napton recommended that a professional archaeologist investigate the possibility of the buried archaeological site. In April of 2002, a cultural resource survey was prepared by Roger H.Wemer, Principal Investigator for ASI Archaeology and Cultural Resources Management. No cultural resources were identified within the surveyed project area. Mr. Wemer noted that locating the archaeological site referenced by Dr. Napton was his primary goal and, although no cultural resources were found, it is possible that the archaeological site could exist in another location, and that other undocumented archaeological sites could exist elsewhere on the project site. Mr.Wemer also states that caution is justified when excavation is ongoing and as a result, it is recommended as a condition of approval that a Native American monitor be hired by the applicant to be ! on the site during project ground disturbing activities associated with subdivision related construction. If resources are found, a qualified archaeologist shall determine their value and implement date recovery operations, protection in place, and/or archival research as required. Traffic Omni-Means. Ltd. Engineers and Planners conducted a traffic analysis for the proposed project This traffic study concluded that, with the recommended mitigation measures, traffic impacts could be reduced to less than significant with the exception of cumulative traffic impacts to State Route 12/88 through Lockeford. The previous EIR identified that"project traffic, when added to cumulative conditions, would result in LOS FJF operations on State Routes 12188 through Lockeford from Brandt Road to Tully Road." Impacts to State Route 12/88 through Lockeford from Brandt Road to Tully Road could not be mitigated or avoided to substantially lessen the significant impact This impact remains the same today. As a result, the Board of Supervisors adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration for cumulative traffic impacts on State Route 12188 through Lockeford from Brandt Road to Tully Road and approved SU-91-15. San Joaquin County SU-00-11Pestana Community Development Page 6