2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
For
discussion
of
what
future
development
projects
were
included
in
the
analysis
of
Cumulative
Conditions
representing
year
2030
conditions,
see
For
discussion
of
impacts
of
proposed
Baylands
development
on
the
US
101
freeway,
see
23.
The
authority
that
designated
Bayshore
Boulevard
as
a
Congestion
Management
Program
(CMP)
Route
is
the
City/County
Association
of
Governments
of
San
Mateo
County
(C/CAG),
which
is
the
designated
Congestion
Management
Agency
for
San
Mateo
County.
In
response
to
this
comment,
the
following
text
changes
have
been
made
to
the
first
bullet
point
under
the
“Local
Roadways”
heading
on
page
4.N-4
of
the
Draft
EIR:
The
road
is
designated
as
a
Congestion
Management
Program
(CMP)
Route
by
the
City/County
Association
of
Governments
of
San
Mateo
County
(C/CAG)
in
both
San
Francisco
and
San
Mateo
Counties.
The
final
report
for
the
Bi-County
Transportation
Study
was
released
in
2013.
The
following
text
changes
have
been
made
to
the
second
bullet
point
under
the
“Local
Roadways”
heading
on
page
4.N-4
of
the
Draft
EIR:
Proposed
plans
were
identified
in
the
San
Francisco
and
San
Mateo
Bi-County
Transportation
Study
(2001
and
current
update
2013)
to
extend
Geneva
Avenue
through
the
Project
Site
to
a
proposed
interchange
with
US
101
that
would
replace
the
current
interchange
at
Beatty
Avenue.
The
comment
correctly
notes
that
the
US
101
interchange
at
Beatty
Avenue
is
currently
unfunded
and
being
studied
by
Caltrans.
The
interchange
is
also
part
of
the
San
Francisco
and
San
Mateo
Bi-
County
Transportation
Study.
CEQA
does
not
require
an
agency
to
await
the
outcome
of
a
pending
study
prior
to
completing
an
EIR,
nor
does
it
require
that
a
certified
EIR
be
updated
on
a
regular
basis
with
new
information.
Rather
CEQA
requires
that
EIRs
be
prepared
based
on
the
best
data
and
information
available
at
the
time
they
are
drafted
and/or
on
reasonable
forecasts
and
estimates
supported
by
expert
opinion.
As
of
this
date,
the
proposed
interchange
at
Beatty
Avenue
is
planned,
but
unfunded.
As
subsequent
site-specific
development
proposals
within
the
Baylands
are
submitted
and
considered
by
the
City,
current
conditions
in
relation
to
funding
of
the
US
101
interchange
at
Beatty
Avenue
will
be
updated.
As
noted
in
Draft
EIR
Table
4.I-1,
General
Plan
Policy
337
requires
development
within
Baylands
to
include
“a
phasing
schedule
for
development
to
limit
the
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.2-151
May
2015