[See page 5-328 for the original comment] See Response BBCAG-72.
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] Table 4.E-4 is the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, which is a qualitative scale that provides a descriptive measurement of likely observed effects from a range of earthquake magnitudes. The factor of safety measurements provided in the discussion on Draft EIR page 4.E-42 are widely accepted geotechnical thresholds that are used throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] Assuming the comment is referencing the factor of safety thresholds discussed on page 4.E-42 of the Draft EIR, the measurements apply to bedrock or unconsolidated deposits, as noted in the footnote, and are widely used across the San Francisco Bay Area.
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] Mapping under the Seismic Hazards Zonation Program is produced by the California Geological Survey (CGS). The Baylands site is located in an area where preparation and publication of the map is still in progress. Mitigation Measures 4.E-4a and 4.E-4b require that site-specific geotechnical investigations include slope stability evaluations that would be very comparable to any requirements that would be made for areas located in a Seismic Hazard zone for landslides. Implementation of the recommendations from these evaluations would be required as part of mitigation. As such, these mitigation measures would be effective in reducing impacts to less than significant levels regardless of the outcome of the seismic hazard mapping to be produced under the Zonation Program.
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] The text of the second paragraph on page 4.E-44 is revised as follows:
“Policy 152 requires, among other things, that soil and geologic investigations be done in areas identified as prone to slope instability. Program 152e specifically addresses areas that may be prone to erosion. Since protection of slope stability is often related to drainage control and prevention of soil erosion, adherence to Policy 152 could also be effective in minimizing the potential for soil erosion.”
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] See Response BBCAG-73.
[See page 5-328 for the original comment] The Draft EIR text referenced in this comment notes that estimates of 21-26 feet of settlement within the former landfill determined by Geosyntec (2008) assumed use of wick drains to facilitate primary settlement in Young and Old Bay Mud and secondary settlement of municipal waste after use of deep dynamic compaction. The reference to wick drains is limited to providing a basis for estimating settlement within the former landfill, and is not specifically proposed. See Master Response 13 for discussion