2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
That
there
have
been
a
greater
number
of
studies
in
one
area
than
another
provides
no
factual
basis
to
support
the
assertion
that
the
there
is
a
“general
lack
of
knowledge
of
how
groundwater
flows
on
OU-
2
and
the
Landfill.”
The
comment
it
self
acknowledges
the
number
of
studies
that
have
undertaken
on
each
site.
See
for
discussion
regarding
the
adequacy
of
existing
studies
for
use
in
the
Draft
EIR.
See
for
discussion
regarding
the
adequacy
of
existing
studies
for
use
in
the
Draft
EIR.
Mitigation
Measure
4.E-
2.b
states
“To
address
recovery
from
damage
to
future
structures
and
to
the
landfill
itself
that
may
be
caused
by
future
earthquakes,
a
Post-Earthquake
Inspection
and
Corrective
Action
Plan
(Plan)
for
the
site-
specific
development
projects
within
the
former
landfill
portion
of
the
Project
Site
shall
be
prepared
and
implemented
by
all
Project
applicants
in
accordance
with
Title
27
landfill
closure
requirements
as
approved
by
the
RWQCB
and
the
San
Mateo
County
Department
of
Environmental
Health
prior
to
issuance
of
a
building
permit.”
The
owner
of
the
property
on
which
the
former
landfill
sits
is
required
to
have
the
inspection
performed
pursuant
to
the
requirements
of
Title
27,
and
to
report
the
results
of
the
inspection
within
72
hours
of
the
event,
which
does
not
preclude
repairs
being
performed
in
that
time
if
needed.
A
specific
timeline
is
not
set
in
Title
27
for
completion
of
repairs
since
the
nature
of
repairs
to
each
specific
landfill
after
an
earthquake
cannot
be
known.
Emergency
repairs
to
address
immediate
threats
to
public
health
and
the
environment
will
be
completed
quicker
than
more
complex
long-term
repairs.
A
7.0
magnitude
earthquake
is
the
applicable
design
event
pursuant
to
current
state
requirements.
See
regarding
the
adequacy
of
existing
studies
for
use
in
the
Draft
EIR.
The
statement
cited
in
this
comment
does
not
refer
to
the
report
prepared
on
behalf
of
the
City
of
Brisbane
in
2005
10
,
but
to
CDM’s
subsequent
peer
review
of
existing
studies,
including
those
prepared
subsequent
to
2005.
Pursuant
to
the
requirements
of
CEQA,
the
Draft
EIR
analyzes
the
physical
environmental
effects
that
would
result
from
proposed
development
of
the
Baylands
Project
site.
See
5
for
discussion
of
compliance
with
the
law
as
mitigation
under
CEQA,
15
for
discussion
regarding
the
adequacy
of
studies
for
use
in
the
Draft
EIR,
and
for
discussion
of
the
cumulative
effects
of
multiple
toxins.
10
Camp
Dresser
&
McKee
(CDM),
Final
Report
of
Findings,
Environmental
Engineering
Peer
Review,
Baylands
Remediation
Efforts
,
November
2,
2005.
This
report
can
be
found
as
part
of
the
reference
documents
used
in
preparation
of
the
Brisbane
Baylands
Draft
EIR.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.1-28
May
2015