2.
Response
to
Comment
2.4
Master
Responses
to
Comments
even
though
the
proposed
Specific
Plan
provides
more
detailed
information
on
proposed
development
than
is
available
for
the
CPP
and
CPP-V
Concept
Plan
scenarios,
subsequent
project-level
environmental
review
will
be
required
pursuant
to
the
provisions
of
CEQA
for
subsequent
site-specific
development
proposals
under
all
scenarios,
site
remediation,
and
the
proposed
water
supply
agreement.
The
last
paragraph
on
page
3-77
under
Section
3.15,
Use
of
the
EIR
,
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:
Section
15168
of
the
CEQA
Guidelines
defines
a
program
EIR
as
an
EIR
that
may
be
prepared
on
a
series
of
actions
that
can
be
characterized
as
one
large
project
and
are
related
either
(1)
geographically;
(2)
as
logical
parts
in
the
chain
of
contemplated
actions;
(3)
in
connection
with
issuance
of
rules,
regulations,
plans,
or
other
general
criteria
to
govern
the
conduct
of
a
continuing
program;
or
(4)
as
individual
activities
carried
out
under
the
same
authorizing
statutory
or
regulatory
authority
and
having
generally
similar
environmental
effects
that
can
be
mitigated
in
similar
ways.
Insofar
as
the
components
of
the
Project
Site
development,
as
approved,
would
include
a
plan
and
policy
framework
that
would
govern
future
development
within
a
discrete
geographic
area
within
Brisbane
(and
an
adjacent
portion
of
San
Francisco
and
other
offsite
infrastructure
locations),
such
a
program-level
approach
is
considered
appropriate.
Future
site-specific
development
projects
that
would
fall
within
the
purview
of
this
program-level
analysis
would
undergo
further
environmental
analysis
be
evaluated
in
light
of
the
program
EIR
to
determine
whether
their
implementation
would
require
preparation
of
an
additional
subsequent
or
supplemental
environmental
analysis
documentation
under
CEQA.
Additional
CEQA
compliance
documentation
for
site-specific
development
projects
or
implementing
activities
components
proposed
under
the
selected
Concept
Plan
scenario
would
be
required
where
the
site-
specific
impacts
of
the
development
proposal(s)
or
implementing
activity
were
not
addressed
at
a
sufficient
level
of
detail
in
this
program
EIR,
or
in
the
event
subsequent
changes
are
proposed
to
the
Project
Description
selected
scenario
that
were
not
analyzed
in
this
EIR.
This
includes
those
proposed
actions
over
which
other
agencies
have
approval
authority,
such
as
the
proposed
remedial
actions
overseen
by
the
RWQCB,
the
San
Mateo
County
Health
Agency
System,
and
DTSC;
the
water
supply
transfer
by
OID,
MID
and
SFPUC;
and
the
Recology
expansion
requiring
permits
from
both
Brisbane
and
San
Francisco.
The
approval
of
these
actions
would
rely
upon
the
analysis
presented
in
this
EIR,
provided
that
the
information
related
to
such
actions
that
is
analyzed
herein
is
sufficient
and
remains
current.
Overall,
the
analysis
of
the
Project
Site
development
components
identified
above
is
intended
to
avoid
duplicative
reconsideration
of
basic
policy
considerations
and
to
allow
the
City
of
Brisbane
as
Lead
Agency
to
consider
broad
policy
alternatives
and
program-wide
mitigation
measures
at
an
early
stage
when
it
has
greater
flexibility
to
avoid
or
mitigate
environmental
impacts.
By
doing
so,
the
program
EIR
for
the
Brisbane
Baylands
provides
a
starting
point
for
subsequent
planning,
design,
and
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.4-7
May
2015
Previous Page | Next Page