2.
Response
to
Comments
2.5
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
State
Agencies
The
feasibility
of
project
alternatives
is
considered
at
two
stages
in
the
process,
and
differing
factors
come
into
play
at
each
stage.
When
selecting
alternatives
for
an
EIR,
the
lead
agency’s
task
is
to
identify
a
range
of
“potentially
feasible”
alternatives
that
will
satisfy
basic
project
objectives
while
reducing
significant
impacts.
Alternatives
that
are
not
at
least
potentially
feasible
are
excluded
at
this
stage,
because
there
is
no
point
in
studying
alternatives
that
cannot
be
implemented
or
will
not
succeed.
In
contrast,
at
the
project
approval
stage,
it
is
up
to
the
agency’s
decisionmakers
to
weigh
the
relative
advantages
and
disadvantages
of
the
project
and
the
alternatives
analyzed
in
the
EIR,
and
to
decide
whether
to
approve
the
project
or
adopt
one
of
the
alternatives.
A
decision
to
reject
the
alternatives
in
favor
of
the
project
is
referred
to
as
a
determination
that
the
alternatives
are
found
to
be
infeasible.
(Pub.
Res.
Code
§
21081(a)(3);
CEQA
Guidelines
§
15091.)
See
2
for
a
discussion
of
feasibility
under
CEQA.
An
EIR
does
not
need
to
explain
why
the
alternatives
selected
for
analysis
are
feasible
or
infeasible;
such
information
may
be
included
in
the
administrative
record.
(
San
Franciscans
Upholding
the
Downtown
Plan
v.
City
&
County
of
San
Francisco
(2002)
102
Cal.App.4th
656,
691.)
The
California
State
Lands
Commission
(CSLC)
maintains
jurisdiction
over
State-owned
tidelands,
submerged
lands,
and
navigable
waterways.
The
State
holds
these
public
trust
lands
for
the
benefit
of
its
citizens
for
water-related
commerce,
navigation,
fisheries,
recreation,
and
open
space.
State-owned
sovereign
land
establishes
a
public
trust
easement,
which
reserves
the
right
for
public
recreational
use
and
activities.
The
entire
Brisbane
Lagoon
area
encompasses
public
trust
land,
and
is
included
within
the
Baylands
Site.
The
DSP/DSP-V
applicant
(UPC)
owns
the
large
majority
of
the
upland
(non-water)
portion
of
the
Baylands
Site.
UPC
also
owns
approximately
75
acres
within
Brisbane
Lagoon.
The
remaining
lagoon
acreage
is
owned
by
the
City
of
Brisbane
and
other
private
owners.
The
lagoon
property
is
separated
from
UPC’s
upland
holdings
by
a
600-foot-wide
strip
(30-acre
area)
owned
by
the
State
Lands
Commission
(see
Figure
in
Chapter
3,
Project
Description
,
of
the
Draft
EIR).
Portions
of
the
Baylands
site
that
occupy
filled
and
unfilled
tidelands
and
submerged
lands
that
were
previously
sold
into
private
ownership
by
the
State
Lands
Commission,
and
that
remain
submerged
or
subject
to
tidal
action,
are
subject
to
a
Public
Trust
easement
retained
by
the
State.
Thus,
any
portion
of
Project
Site
development
located
within
the
Brisbane
Lagoon
and
Guadalupe
Canal
would
require
a
lease
from
the
State
Lands
Commission.
Site-specific
engineering
designs
for
development
and
infrastructure
within
the
Baylands
would
be
required
prior
to
determining
whether
any
State
Lands
Commission
approvals
are,
in
fact,
necessary.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.5.4-2
May
2015