2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
the
Baylands
Project
Site
development
required
that
Project
and
CPSRA
test
areas
be
segmented
to
complete
the
physical
measurements
for
each
of
the
four
wind
important
directions,
because
the
geographic
areas
of
concern
are
so
large.
However,
such
segmenting
is
common
practice,
and
does
not
introduce
appreciable
error
into
the
measurement
process.
The
test
point
spacing
and
locations
used
in
identifying
and
evaluating
the
effects
on
the
windsurfing
resource
at
CPSRA
included
and
expanded
on
the
test
grid
used
for
the
Executive
Park
wind
test,
and
were
appropriate
for
obtaining
the
level
of
detail
needed
to
identify
and
fully
describe
the
wind
effects
that
each
of
the
proposed
development
scenarios
would
have
within
the
windsurfing
area.
The
results
of
the
wind
tunnel
tests,
including
the
changes
in
wind
speed
and
turbulence
that
would
result
from
each
of
the
four
development
scenarios
are
presented
in
the
EIR,
starting
on
page
4.M-24.
The
EIR
then
evaluated
these
physical
changes
using
the
City’s
selected
impact
significance
threshold.
The
study
methodology
and
impact
significance
threshold
used
to
evaluate
the
result
are
the
same
as
used
to
evaluate
wind
impacts
on
the
CPSRA
windsurfing
resource
due
to
nearby
development
at
Executive
Park
in
San
Francisco.
For
these
reasons,
the
results
of
these
different
tests
may
be
compared
one
to
another.
In
addition
to
the
detailed
information
presented
in
Draft
EIR
Section
4.M
and
Appendix
J.1,
see
also
the
supporting
Wind
Tunnel
Testing
Technical
Memorandum,
dated
November
2,
2012,
from
Environmental
Science
Associates
to
the
City
of
Brisbane
(Appendix
J.2).
In
addition,
see
1
for
a
discussion
of
the
programmatic
nature
of
the
Brisbane
Baylands
EIR.
See
31,
regarding
use
of
a
wind
tunnel
in
analyzing
wind
impacts.
See
34
for
a
further
discussion
of
the
project
description
and
test
scenarios.
See
also
for
a
discussion
of
the
significance
threshold
used
to
evaluate
the
impacts
to
wind
in
windsurfing
areas.
Modeling
proposed
Baylands
development
as
a
maximum
height
wall
would
not
constitute
a
reasonable
worst
case
analysis
under
CEQA,
because
it
would
not
represent
any
potential
configuration
of
Baylands
development.
The
methodology
used
to
evaluate
impacts
to
windsurfing
are
described
starting
on
page
4.M-10
of
the
Draft
EIR.
See
for
a
discussion
of
the
project
description
used
to
analyze
project
impacts
on
windsurfing
resources.
Per
the
requirements
of
CEQA,
the
Draft
EIR
analyzes
changes
to
the
environment
that
would
result
from
proposed
Baylands
development.
Refer
for
discussion
of
the
impact
thresholds
used
in
the
Draft
EIR’s
impact
analysis.
Refer
for
discussion
as
to
why
the
analysis
undertaken
for
the
EIR
provides
a
reasonable
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.4-6
May
2015