2.
Response
to
Comment
2.4
Master
Responses
to
Comments
As
a
result
of
the
above
evaluation
of
CPA-proposed
alternative
analysis
methodology
as
well
as
review
of
the
Draft
EIR,
comments
on
the
Draft
EIR
regarding
windsurfing
resources
and
Master
through
and
Master
Response
34,
the
City
has
determined
that
(1)
the
analysis
methodology
presented
in
the
Draft
EIR
adequately
addresses
the
physical
impacts
of
proposed
Baylands
development
on
windsurfing
resources,
(2)
CPA
does
not
show
that
the
alternative
analysis
actually
can
achieve
its
stated
purpose,
and
(3)
it
is
therefore
not
necessary
to
undertake
the
alternative
analysis
recommended
in
the
CPA
comment
letter.
2.4.34
Master
Response
34,
Windsurfing:
Adequacy
of
the
Project
Description
Used
in
Analyzing
Impacts
of
Windsurfing
Comments
A
number
of
comments
questioned
the
adequacy
of
the
Project
Description
provided
in
the
Draft
EIR
for
use
in
analyzing
the
impacts
of
proposed
Baylands
development
on
windsurfing
resources
at
CPSRA.
Response
See
1
for
discussion
of
the
programmatic
nature
of
the
Draft
EIR
and
its
analyses.
As
detailed
in
Chapter
3,
Project
Description
,
of
the
Draft
EIR,
the
proposed
Baylands
development
program
analyzed
in
the
EIR
consists
of
four
Concept
Plans
(scenarios),
a
proposed
Specific
Plan
for
two
of
the
scenarios
(DSP
and
DSP-V),
amendments
to
the
General
Plan
to
ensure
consistency,
site
remediation,
and
a
proposed
water
supply
agreement.
No
specific
building
designs
or
locations
have
as
yet
been
proposed.
The
proposed
land
use
plans
for
each
scenario
described
in
Chapter
3,
Project
Description
,
as
well
as
the
proposed
Brisbane
Baylands
Specific
Plan
in
the
case
of
the
DSP
and
DSP-V
scenarios,
provide
information
on
the
distribution
of
proposed
land
uses,
location
of
proposed
roadways,
and
allowable
development
intensities
and
building
heights,
as
well
as
proposed
site
grading.
As
shown
in
Draft
EIR
Figures
and
proposed
roadway
systems
divide
Baylands
development
areas
into
discrete
blocks
within
which
one
or
more
buildings
could
be
developed.
The
modeling
of
development
for
wind
and
visual
analyses
assumed
the
maximum
allowable
development
intensity
and
building
height
for
each
of
these
blocks
based
on
proposed
land
uses
and
development
regulations
for
building
intensity
and
building
height.
Therefore,
each
wind
test
model
was
built
to
that
maximum
allowable
development
intensity,
height,
and
bulk
for
each
block
within
the
Baylands.
There
are
only
two
possible
variations
to
assuming
that
every
building
would
occupy
the
maximum
volume
and
height
allowed
within
the
individual
blocks
shown
on
land
use
plans
for
each
scenario:
Model
buildings
as
being
smaller
or
shorter
than
would
otherwise
be
the
maximum
permitted.
This
would
reduce
the
effect
of
each
building
and
so
would
not
represent
a
conservative
analysis.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.4-103
May
2015