2.
Response
to
Comments
2.8
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Municipalities
While
a
land
use
mix
consisting
of
the
Recology
expansion,
rail
storage
yard,
renewable
energy
production,
and
existing
lumber
yard
and
industrial
uses
would
substantially
reduce
significant
traffic,
air
pollutant
and
GHG
emissions
impacts
of
proposed
Baylands
development,
such
a
land
use
mix
would
not
achieve
basic
project
objectives
for
the
Baylands
for
the
same
reasons
as
the
previously
rejected
Railyard
Rehabilitation
alternative.
In
addition,
the
operations
of
a
rail
yard
within
the
Baylands
would
constitute
a
substantial
new
stationary
source
of
air
pollutant
and
GHG
emissions,
reducing
or
eliminating
any
emissions
reductions
that
might
otherwise
be
achieved
in
such
an
alternative.
2.8.3.2
Office
of
Community
Investment
and
Infrastructure
SFOCII-1
[See page
5-55 for the original comment]
This
introductory
comment
does
not
raise
any
substantive
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
No
further
response
is
necessary.
[See page
5-55 for the original comment]
See
Master Response
1
for
discussion
of
the
use
of
a
Program
EIR
and
discussion
of
environmental
documentation
for
future
site-specific
development
projects.
[See page
5-55 for the original comment]
Actual
traffic
counts
used
in
the
existing
conditions
analysis
represent
conditions
at
the
time
of
NOP
for
proposed
Project
Site
de
velopment.
See
Master Response
7
for
discussion
of
the
EIR’s
2010
baseline
year.
Traffic
increases
due
to
nearby
developments,
such
as
Candlestick
Point
-
Hunters
Point
Shipyard,
as
well
as
background
traffic
growth
predicted
by
the
model
used
in
this
analysis,
only
apply
to
future
conditions,
and
are
analyzed
as
part
of
cumulative
conditions.
The
trip
generation
for
Candlestick
Point
-
Hunters
Point
Shipyard
used
in
the
analysis
is
consistent
with
the
information
contained
in
that
project’s
EIR
.
The
comment
is
correct
that
subsequent
development
plans
do
not
include
the
stadium.
Its
removal
would
reduce
project
site
trip
generation
for
Candlestick
Point
-
Hunters
Point
Shipyard;
therefore
the
analysis
contained
in
the
Draft
EIR
represents
a
conservative
estimate
of
development
for
those
sites.
See
Master Response 28
for
information
on
the
Caltrain
Station
relocation.
[See page
5-55 for the original comment]
As
discussed
in
Master Response 28,
the
location
of
the
Bayshore
Caltrain
Station
used
in
the
Draft
EIR
was
based
on
the
results
of
Bi-County
transportation
planning
efforts
undertaken
jointly
by
the
City
and
County
of
San
Francisco,
San
Mateo
County,
and
the
cities
of
Brisbane
and
Daly
City.
In
addition,
the
2012
Bayshore
Intermodal
Access
Study,
published
by
the
San
Francisco
County
Transportation
Authority,
recommended
two
station
alternatives
to
advance
forward
in
subsequent
planning
and
design
work,
both
of
which
proposed
moving
the
Caltrain
platform
to
the
south.
SFOCII-2
SFOCII-3
SFOCII-4
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.8.3-6
May
2015
Previous Page | Next Page