AgdaPkt 2012-02-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8. B. - Page 188 B. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO (LETTER 2), DECEMBER 13, 2011: Comment B-1: We provide these suppleinental cominents on behalf of fl7e BL�ilding a�ld Construction Trades CoL�ncil of San Mateo to fi�rther support Dr. James Clark's expert opinion that the Final EIR fails to disclose significant impacts from toxic air contanunants ("TACs") on futi�re Project residents. lil a�l einail dated Deceinber 13, 2011, flie Bay Area Air Ql�ality Ma��agement District stated that the reslilts of the City's TAC a�ialysis "seemed low." According to the BAAQMD, District Staff did not subnut conunents on the EIR oi�ly because it "didn't have the staff resoL�rces to pL�rsL�e this fi�rther." The BAAQNID's conclL�sion supports the conclL�sion of air quality expert, Dr. James Clarlc, and the conunents we subnutted on the Draft EIR and Final EIR. We urge fl�e Pla�uling Coinmission to deny certification of the EIR tu�til fl�e City has condL�cted a proper a��alysis of significa��t operational TAC iinpacts. The potential health effects associated with TACs incli�de cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, astluna, bronclutis, a��d genetic damage. If the Plannillg Conulussion approves tlus Project wifliout requiring the proper studies, it will be putting t11e health of Redwood City residents in j eopardy. Resuonse B-1: The email response from BAAQNID does not suppoi�t the conclusions of Dr. Clark. While BAAQNID indicates in the incomplete email chain attached to this letter that the findulgs of the City's a�lalysis seem low, BAAQMD states that they oi�ly briefly reviewed the proj ect, indicating that no substantive review of the analysis was completed. li� addition, neifl�er the BAAQNID email nor fl�e commentor have provided a��y substa��tive evidence in this letter to demonstrate that the Final EIlZ fails to disclose significant impacts from toxic air contamula��ts on fi�ture project residents. The unsL�pported, vague observation that the forecast TAC exposures "seemed lov�' raises no specific objections with the City's analysis. The sL�bject of TAC iinpacts on fi�tL�re residents of flie project site was fi�lly analyzed in the Draft EIR in accorda��ce with BAAQMD gL�idelines as discL�ssed in the Final EIR and in responses to the conu�lentor's first December 13 letter (shown above as Letter A). 2580 El Cainino Real Residenrial Project 20 Response to Conmients Recei��ed on Final EIR Cin� of Red��ood Cin� Jannai� 2012