SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

XII. SUMMARY OF COMMMENTS AND RESPONSESB. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSESlettered Impact and Mitigation Measure format. Without this structure, the impacts andmitigation measures are indiscernible from other discussion. Conventional format for the EIRshould be adopted to avoid confusion.” (Alameda Creek Alliance)Comment C-4: “I found the EIR confusing to me and I heard other people talking about that,too. I’m not really sure what can be done about that at this point, but there’s just something aboutthat makes it very difficult to read, and I couldn’t put my finger on it, but I did want to make thatcomment just for what it’s worth. Then I wanted to make a few corrections to the textspecifically.” (Joanne Freemire – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Response: Because of the general nature of a planning document such as the draft AlamedaWatershed Management Plan, and the great variety and possible combinations of its policies andactions, the impacts of a Management Plan action cannot always be simply and concisely stated.Many actions have beneficial consequences as well as potential adverse impacts. Theconventional cause and effect analysis is thus more complicated than for a project specific EIR.Although the DEIR does not number impacts as preferred by the commentor, the DEIR doescontain tables throughout DEIR Chapter III that describe impacts for each impact topic and typeof action that could cause an impact. In addition, DEIR Chapter I, Summary, contains concisestatements of all potentially significant impacts, while DEIR Table VII-2 presents a comparisonof the impacts of the Management Plan and Management Plan alternatives. The San FranciscoPlanning Department prefers to list numbered mitigation measures in a separate chapter in orderto facilitate adoption, implementation, and monitoring of mitigation measures, includingpreparation and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as required byCEQA. Although this format may differ from the format used by other lead agencies, this formatprovides a clear description of the impacts associated with a project. The Management PlanDEIR includes impact discussions in a section header entitled ‘Program-level Impacts,’ clearlydiscerning impact discussions from setting discussions. Each impact discussion lists anddescribes the Management Plan actions that could result in the potential impact, and describeshow the impact could occur. The discussions also describe how other elements of theManagement Plan could prevent impacts from occurring, or reduce the severity of the impact. Atthe end of each impact discussion, it is clearly stated whether implementation of the associatedactions would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level, or whether mitigationmeasures would be required.Comment C-5: “Also, in a line along that when I have been through the EIR process, what I’veseen them do is take comments like this and then just sort of stick them at the end of the EIR andcall that revising the EIR. So, I’m hoping in this case you’re going to take these comments andincorporate them in the main body of the text.” (Joanne Freemire – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Response: In addition to preparing this response to comments document, which includeschanges to the Draft EIR based on public comments, a Final EIR will be prepared withincorporates all changes to the Draft EIR. Public comments on the Draft EIR, and theseresponses, will be included as a chapter of the Final EIR.NOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan C&R.15 ESA / 930385