Attachment A
Resolution No.2025-70
18-10
18-11
70 18-12
18-13
18-14
18-15
18-16
18-17
18-18
18-19
5. T
he Pr
operty is also not identified as one of the twenty-eight Environmental Study Areas within the City under Figure NR2 (Environmentally Study Areas) of the General Plan’s Natural Resources Element. Additionally, the Property is not identified as a site with Biological Resources under General Plan Figure NR1 (Biological Resources) of the Natural Resources Element.
6. W
hile existing trees on the Property will be removed, the Project provides proper mitigation by proposing a tree species that supports heron nesting. The future removal of the eucalyptus tree and any remaining nests would be conducted outside of the nesting season (February through August) and after there is no active nesting, as determined by a biologist. Overall, the Project’s revised changes continue to comply with the MBTA.
7. T
he Appellant’s claim of an underground spring was not supported with supplemental evidence. Furthermore, upon review of the City’s municipal sources and the City’s senior engineer geologist, there is no evidence to suggest that the Property historically carries an underground spring. The Property is located on the Balboa Peninsula which is a relatively flat surface. The City’s geotechnical borings encountered groundwater six feet below the existing ground surface. 18-20
18-21