SU0014565 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIR The following responses address the comments which are contained in Section 1. The responses are keyed to specific comments identified by letter and number in the margin of the actual written comments contained in Section 1. A. KENNETH STEWART, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY SHERIFF -CORONER DEPARTMENT, JUNE 9, 1987 A.1 Error on Page 3.4-2. This comment is noted. The text in the first paragraph on page 3.4-2 is hereby corrected to read "The nearest (and only) station is located at French Camp, north of the project site." B. PETER D. VERDOORN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, JUNE 17, 1987 B.1 Proximity to Tracy Municipal Airport. The Draft EIR acknowledges operations at Tracy Municipal Airport as contributing only slightly to background sound levels (see pages 3.7-1 and 3.7-4) and, therefore, the Draft EIR agrees with the Council of Governments comment that "there does not appear to be any conflict with the aviation activities at the Tracy Municipal Airport." B.2 Activities at the Tracy Municipal Airport. These comments regarding existing and possible future increases in activity at the airport are acknowledged. The following mitigation measure is hereby incorporated into Section 3.7, Noise, of the EIR: - Current activities and the possibility of increased activity at the Tracy Municipal Airport should be included in the State Department of Real Estate public report on the subdivision so that future tenants in the area can be made aware of the noise potential from the airport. C. BERNARD AND MONIQUE ETCHEVERRY, LOCAL RESIDENTS, JULY 16, 1987 C.1 Study Area Inclusion in the General Plan Amendment. This comment is noted. However, because the comment and attached minutes refer to the project and not to the EIR, no response is necessary. D. DANA COWELL, CHIEF, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BRANCH, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS), JULY 17, 1987 D.1 Cumulative Impacts on Interstate 205. This comment is noted. Although the Draft EIR does not mention Interstate 205 specifically, the EIR does discuss trips from the proposed development and potential buildout of the study area as being oriented to jobs in the Bay Area, which would use Interstate 205 (see pages 3.3-3 and 3.3-7 of the Draft EIR). Thus, there would be a small, but incremental, increase in trips contributing to Interstate 205 resulting from development of the project area and the study area. 2-1