2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
CPA2-66
[See page
5-457 for the original comment]
This
comment
introduces
an
online
public
petition
created
by
the
Candlestick
Preservation
Association,
and
does
not
raise
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
[See page
5-457 for the original comment]
This
comment
presents
the
contents
of
the
online
public
petition
created
by
the
Candlestick
Preservation
Association,
and
does
not
raise
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
The
petition
will
be
considered
by
the
City
as
part
of
its
planning
review
for
the
Baylands.
[See page
5-457 for the original comment]
Impacts
of
Baylands
Project
Site
development
on
air
quality
are
identified
starting
on
Draft
EIR
page
4.B-20.
Impacts
of
Project
Site
development
on
the
recreational
windsurfing
resource
are
identified
in
the
discussion
of
Impact
4.M-2
starting
on
Draft
EIR
page
4.M-22.
[See page
5-457 for the original comment]
Discussion
of
the
water
area
evaluated
in
the
Draft
EIR
is
addressed
in
Master Response
32.
[See page
5-457 for the original comment]
Discussion
of
the
water
area
evaluated
in
the
Draft
EIR
is
addressed
in
Master Response 32.
[See page
5-458 for the original comment]
See
Master Response 30
for
discussion
of
the
significance
threshold
used
in
the
Draft
EIR.
[See page
5-458 for the original comment]
See
Master Response 30
for
a
discussion
of
the
significance
threshold
used
in
the
Draft
EIR.
[See page
5-458 for the original comment]
See
Master Response 30
for
a
discussion
of
the
significance
threshold
used
in
the
Draft
EIR.
See
Master Response
33
for
a
discussion
of
the
alternative
wind
impact
analysis
proposed
by
the
CPA.
[See page
5-458 for the original comment]
See
Response CPA
1-6.
[See page
5-458 for the original comment]
See
Response CPA
2-45.
The
City
will
consider
the
comment
as
part
of
its
planning
review
and
decisionmaking.
[See page
5-459 for the original comment]
This
comment
expresses
concurrence
with
Comments
CPA2-1
through
CPA2-65
for
which
responses
are
available
in
Reponses
CPA
2-1
through
CPA
2-65.
[See page
5-459 for the original comment]
A
list
of
153
petitioners
who
electronically
signed
the
online
public
petition
created
by
the
Candlestick
Preservation
Association
is
provided
in
this
comment,
which
does
not
raise
CPA2-67
CPA2-68
CPA2-69
CPA2-70
CPA2-71
CPA2-72
CPA2-73
CPA2-74
CPA2-75
CPA2-76
CPA2-77
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.4-27
May
2015
Previous Page | Next Page