2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
Figure
4.N-17
depicts
the
conceptual
location
of
the
future
Bay
Trail
as
it
was
originally
proposed
in
the
Concept
Plans
for
the
CPP
and
CPP-V
scenarios.
As
stated
in
Comment
under
the
CPP-V
scenario,
the
alignment
shown
in
Figure
4.N-17
would
traverse
through
the
expanded
Recology
facility,
necessitating
an
alignment
that
would
follow
the
Geneva
Avenue
extension
rather
than
the
existing
Beatty
Avenue.
See
for
information
regarding
how
trip
generation
and
internal
capture
trips
were
calculated.
The
Draft
EIR
concludes
that
the
Beatty
Avenue/Alana
Way
intersection
would
remain
at
LOS
E
under
the
CPP
and
CPP-V
scenarios
with
the
implementation
of
Mitigation
Measure
4.N-1c.
However,
the
analysis
and
conclusion
set
forth
in
the
Draft
EIR
are
for
the
peak
periods
assuming
full
build
out.
Recology
truck
operations
generally
do
not
coincide
with
peak
hour
traffic.
The
hardships
that
Recology
asserts
would
result
from
Baylands
development
will
be
considered
by
the
City
in
its
planning
review
and
decisionmaking
for
the
Baylands.
The
comment
does
not,
however,
raise
any
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
The
Draft
EIR
concludes
that
the
Harney
Way/Alana
Way/Thomas
Mellon
Drive
intersection
would
remain
at
LOS
F
under
the
CPP
and
CPP-V
scenarios
with
the
implementation
of
Mitigation
Measure
4.N-1d.
However,
the
analysis
and
conclusion
set
forth
in
the
Draft
EIR
is
for
the
peak
periods
assuming
full
build
out.
Recology
truck
operations
generally
do
not
coincide
with
peak
hour
traffic.
The
hardships
that
Recology
asserts
would
result
from
Baylands
development
will
be
considered
by
the
City
in
its
planning
review
and
decisionmaking
for
the
Baylands.
The
comment
does
not,
however,
raise
any
substantive
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
As
stated
on
page
4.N-98,
implementation
of
Mitigation
Measure
4.N-1c
is
beyond
Brisbane’s
jurisdiction
and
requires
Caltrans
approval.
Thus,
although
a
good
faith
effort
will
be
made
to
implement
this
measure,
such
implementation
cannot
be
guaranteed.
The
hardships
that
Recology
asserts
would
result
from
Baylands
development
will
be
considered
by
the
City
in
its
planning
review
and
decisionmaking
for
the
Baylands.
The
comment
does
not,
however,
raise
any
substantive
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.7-3
May
2015