2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
adequate.
Water
(delivery
and
supply),
wastewater,
solid
waste,
and
drainage
were
analyzed
in
Section
4.O,
Utilities,
Services
Systems,
and
Water
Supply
.
As
with
the
public
services
analysis
methods,
demand
estimates
for
these
utilities
were
quantified
based
on
the
land
use,
population,
and
employment
data
developed
for
DSP,
DSP-V,
CPP,
and
CPP-V
scenarios.
Using
population
projection
data
and
other
sources
cited
in
Section
4.7,
the
Draft
EIR
concluded
that
each
of
the
proposed
development
scenarios
would
have
significant
impacts
to
these
public
services.
Multiple
mitigation
measures
are
also
provided
to
reduce
physical
impacts
from
both
operational
and
construction-related
activities.
Health
and
social
services
and
staffing
for
administrative
services
at
the
City
of
Brisbane
are
not
environmental
impacts
subject
to
analysis
in
an
EIR,
unless
they
are
shown
to
cause
specific
physical
environmental
effects
(CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15131).
The
planning
review
process
for
proposed
Baylands
development
would
address
municipal
administrative
needs
in
addition
to
the
existing
staffing
and
services
at
the
City
resulting
from
proposed
Baylands
development.
Refer
also
4
regarding
CEQA
and
planning
reviews.
Biological
resources
mitigation
measures
calling
for
avoidance
of
impacts
to
wetlands,
as
well
as
for
development
of
an
Open
Space
Plan
meeting
specified
performance
standards
would
lead
to
restoration
of
shoreline
wetland
habitat
along
the
edge
of
the
lagoon.
Implementation
of
these
measures,
along
with
Mitigation
Measure
4.E-4a
restricting
development
that
requires
the
placement
of
fill
materials
within
600
feet
of
the
Lagoon
will
preclude
future
recreational
improvements
and
use
of
the
lagoon
for
kayaking.
Recreational
use
of
the
lagoon
is
not
part
of
the
concept
plan
scenarios,
and
the
Draft
EIR
does
not
therefore
analyze
the
impacts
of
such
use,
nor
does
it
provide
environmental
clearance
for
recreational
use
of
the
lagoon.
This
comment
is
correct
in
its
observation
that
significant
unavoidable
traffic
impacts
would
result
from
each
of
the
four
development
scenarios
under
both
existing
plus
project
and
cumulative
conditions.
See
for
discussion
of
“internal
capture”
of
trips.
The
greater
traffic
generation
of
the
CPP/CPP-V
scenarios
as
compared
to
the
DSP/DSP-V
scenarios
is
also
discussed
Assumptions
for
the
roadway
systems
analyzed
in
the
Draft
EIR
are
provide
in
Section
4.N,
Traffic
and
Circulation
,
starting
on
page
4.N-52.
Widening
of
the
US
101
freeway
is
not
included
as
mitigation
since
Caltrans
has
no
plans
to
widen
the
freeway
and
the
City
of
Brisbane
has
no
authority
to
implement
such
a
measure.
In
addition,
widening
of
the
freeway
through
the
Brisbane
Baylands
would
not
solve
existing
or
projected
congestion
problems.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.2-5
May
2015