2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
On
page
4.G-89,
the
Draft
EIR
states
“Project
Site
development
is
not
anticipated
to
include
t
he
type
of
large
scale
manufacturing
or
processing
facilities
that
would
use,
store
or
transport
use
[
sic
]
large
quantities
of
hazardous
materials
that
would
present
a
substantial
risk
to
people.”
The
Draft
EIR
acknowledges
on
page
4.G-89
that
during
operation
of
onsite
uses
“Hazardous
materials
would
routinely
be
transported
to,
from,
and
with
the
Project
Site,
and
small
amounts
of
hazardous
waste
would
be
removed
and
transported
offsite
to
licensed
disposal
facilities.
The
specific
types
and
amounts
of
hazardous
materials
transported
to
or
from
the
Project
Site
as
a
result
of
Project
Site
development
cannot
be
quantified.”
As
noted
in
Response
the
Draft
EIR
takes
a
conservative,
worst
case
approach,
as
is
appropriate
under
CEQA.
Draft
EIR
Chapter
3,
Project
Description
,
provides
a
detailed
description
of
what
uses
are
proposed
to
be
permitted
within
the
Baylands
under
each
development
scenario.
In
addition,
all
permitted
uses
proposed
in
any
specific
plan
approved
by
the
City
within
the
Baylands
will
be
required
to
be
consistent
with
the
provisions
of
the
Brisbane
General
Plan,
which
restricts
the
range
of
industrial
uses
and
the
types
of
uses
permitted
within
the
Baylands
that
might
use
or
generate
large
quantities
of
hazardous
materials.
None
of
the
project
components
described
in
Chapter
3,
Project
Description
,
proposes
any
modification
to
the
City’s
existing
limits
on
industrial
development
within
the
Baylands.
Thus
the
existing
prohibitions
cited
in
this
comment
against
“certain
types
of
hazardous
materials
users
and
infectious
disease
handling”
would
be
enforced
for
all
new
development
within
the
Baylands.
Uses
that
are
prohibited
by
the
Brisbane
General
Plan
or
City
ordinance
would
be
prohibited
within
the
Baylands
unless
these
regulations
are
otherwise
amended.
Therefore,
contrary
to
the
commenter’s
assertion,
an
additional
mitigation
measure
prohibiting
certain
hazardous
uses
and
practices
is
not
required.
The
first
sentence
on
page
4.G-89
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:
Project
Site
development
is
not
anticipated
to
include
the
type
of
large-
scale
manufacturing
or
processing
facilities
that
would
use,
store
or
transport
use
large
quantities
of
hazardous
materials
that
would
present
a
substantial
risk
to
people.
See
for
discussion
regarding
the
remediation
review
and
approval
process.
Regulatory
authority
for
remediation
within
rests
with
the
RWQCB.
Because
the
land
uses
currently
proposed
within
are
different
than
those
proposed
in
2002,
along
with
advances
in
remedial
technologies,
a
new
Remedial
Action
Plan
for
is
required.
As
part
of
that
plan,
a
human
health
risk
assessment
will
be
undertaken
under
RWQCB
oversight
to
establish
risk-based
cleanup
goals
for
the
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.1-76
May
2015