Site. The pet policy shall limit the number of animals per residence and require adult cats, dogs, and rabbits to be spayed or neutered. Cats and dogs shall be required to be kept inside the residences and allowed outside residences only if on a leash and under the tenant’s control and supervision, except within areas specifically designed as dog parks. Pet owners shall be required to remove any pet waste from trails or any other areas within the Baylands to prevent potential introduction of pathogens to local wildlife populations via transmittal through fecal matter. To provide effective predator control, feral animal trapping may be necessary.
[See page 5-192 for the original comment] Revised Mitigation Measure 4.C-2c includes performance standards that must be met, consistent with (and more stringent than) the commenter’s recommendation that “measurable habitat goals” should be established. See -BCC-133 for discussion of required survival rates in restoration projects. However, mitigation also provides for additional methods of separation, such as barriers, where it is not possible to provide a large enough setback. Mitigation Measure 4.C-4b would allow fencing if adequate separation could not be provided, although separation is preferred. (See Response BCC-143.) Revised Mitigation Measure 4.C-1b requires that trail configurations provide a minimum 25-foot setback from special status plant populations, consistent with the commenter’s recommendation. (See Response BCC-107.)
[See page 5-193 for the original comment] The Draft EIR recognizes that the Brisbane Lagoon provides valuable habitat for avian species, and includes a performance standard of no in-water construction and no development in the lagoon as a means of protecting the habitat and preserving it even as the site-build out occurs. Because of the value of this habitat, even construction related to the creation of islands or any type of restoration action proposed in the Lagoon waters would require extensive coordination with resources agencies, and permitting for such an action would be a long process which may or may not be ultimately secured because there is no basis in the Draft EIR or related to site development as proposed for requiring such an improvement at the Lagoon. Altering sensitive aquatic habitat is subject to a very high degree of regulatory oversight, was not proposed, and is therefore not evaluated in the Draft EIR.
[See page 5-193 for the original comment] Table 4.C-1 of the Draft EIR, which evaluates potential for the Baylands Project Site and surrounding habitat to support spawning has been revised to better recognize that spawning is a critical life phase known to demand very specific conditions (see Final EIR Chapter 3.0). See also Response BCC-87 for an expanded discussion of special status fish within the Project Site that more clearly explains the reason for the conclusion that no spawning habitat occurs.