2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
Following
the
completion
of
the
CEQA
and
planning
review
processes,
the
City
Council
will
take
into
consideration
the
issues
raised
in
both
review
processes,
including
management
of
natural
resources,
as
well
as
the
extensive
community
input
received
throughout
these
processes,
in
determining
appropriate
land
uses/intensities
and
environmental
protection
for
the
Baylands.
This
comment
clarifies
the
structure
of
the
comment
letter
CPA-2,
and
does
not
raise
any
significant
environmental
issues
or
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR.
As
such,
CEQA
requires
no
further
response.
Overall,
this
comment
is
a
critique
of
broader
bay
front
development
patterns
within
the
region
and
does
not
raise
any
significant
environmental
issues
or
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
analyses
or
conclusions
of
the
Draft
EIR.
Thus,
CEQA
requires
no
further
response.
The
City
will
consider
the
planning-
and
development-oriented
comments
set
forth
in
this
comment
as
part
of
the
City’s
planning
review
and
decisionmaking
process.
This
comment
generally
advocates
alternative
development
concepts
for
the
Baylands,
citing
Chicago’s
waterfront
area
as
an
example,
including
a
preservation
zone
along
the
waterfront.
As
such,
the
comment
does
not
raise
any
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
Thus,
CEQA
requires
no
further
response.
The
City
will
consider
the
planning-
and
development-
oriented
comments
set
forth
in
this
and
other
comment
letters
as
part
of
the
City’s
planning
review
and
decisionmaking.
This
comment
provides
an
introduction
to
the
comments
that
follow,
and
reiterates
the
CPA’s
land
use
recommendation,
but
does
not
raise
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
The
land
use
recommendation
set
forth
in
Comment
will
be
considered
as
part
of
the
City’s
planning
review
for
the
Baylands.
The
comment
inaccurately
characterizes
the
height
and
extent
of
development
evaluated
in
the
EIR
as
a
“wall
of
buildings.”
See
for
a
discussion
of
allowable
building
heights
within
the
Baylands,
the
project
description
considered,
and
the
models
used
to
analyze
the
worst-case
wind
impact
of
the
project.
The
comment
incorrectly
asserts
that
the
Draft
EIR
does
not
address
windsurfing
resources.
The
Draft
EIR
describes
assessment
methods
and
evaluates
the
physical
changes
in
wind
speed
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.4-4
May
2015