HomeMy WebLinkAbout12_Sec4.7_TransportationCircula
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
4.7TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This section describes the existing transportation and circulation facilities and services in the vicinity of
the MEIR Study Area and describes whether implementation of the proposed project would have the
potential to cause adverse impacts to existing and future transportation and traffic conditions.
One comment letter related to transportation and circulation was received from the California Public
Utilities Commission regarding Rail Safety in response to the December 9, 2005, Revised Notice of
Preparation (NOP) circulated for the project. In addition, no comments were received at the public
scoping meeting held January 17, 2006. The NOP and comment letters are included in Appendix A of
the MEIR.
4.7.1Existing Conditions
This section provides an assessment of existing conditions (as of December 2005) in the MEIR Study
Area, including a description of the street and highway system, existing traffic conditions, operating
conditions of the selected study intersections, transit service, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Roadway Network
The MEIR Study Area would be served primarily by Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue,
with connections to Gull Drive, Forbes Boulevard, and Grandview Drive. Regional access would be
provided by US 101. Figure 4.7-1 displays the existing roadway network in the vicinity of the MEIR
Study Area, as well as the intersections studied in this traffic analysis. Figure 4.7-2 displays the freeway
mainline segments studied in this traffic analysis.
Regional Access
Regional access to and from the MEIR Study Area is provided primarily by US 101. In the vicinity of the
project, US 101 is an eight-lane freeway, with auxiliary lanes north and south of Oyster Point Boulevard
in the northbound direction, and in the southbound direction north of Oyster Point Boulevard. US 101
is a major north/south highway through the state of California, extending from San Francisco to Los
Angeles. US 101 serves as a major commuter route between San Francisco and South Bay/Peninsula. In
the vicinity of the MEIR Study Area, US 101 has southbound on-ramps from Dubuque Avenue and
Produce Avenue, and off-ramps to Oyster Point Boulevard, Miller Avenue, and South Airport
Boulevard. Access to and from northbound US 101 is provided with on-ramps from Dubuque Avenue,
Airport Boulevard, and South Airport Boulevard, and off-ramps to Dubuque Avenue, East Grand
Avenue, and South Airport Boulevard. Average daily traffic along US 101 in the MEIR Study Area is
8
approximately 200,000 vehicles.
8
Caltrans 2005 Traffic Volumes on California Highways (Caltrans 2005).
4.7-1
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
LocalAccess
Oyster Point Boulevard is a two- to six-lane arterial running in the east/west direction. Serving as a
connector to US 101, this roadway is the primary source of local access to and from the northern portion
of the MEIR Study Area. In the City of South San Francisco General Plan (General Plan), Oyster Point
Boulevard is classified as a major arterial between US 101 and Marina Boulevard and as minor arterial
west of Marina Boulevard. Within the MEIR Study Area, Oyster Point Boulevard has six lanes west of
Gateway Boulevard, four lanes between Gateway and Marina Boulevards, and two lanes east of Marina
Boulevard. Bicycle lanes are provided in both directions along the length of this roadway.
Gateway Boulevard is a four-lane arterial running in a north/south direction. This roadway serves as a
primary linkage between Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue. South of Mitchell Avenue,
Gateway Boulevard merges with South Airport Boulevard. In the General Plan, Gateway Boulevard is
classified as a major arterial.
Grand Avenue runs across the City of South San Francisco in an east/west direction. Grand Avenue is a
six-lane arterial east of Airport Boulevard, and a two lane arterial west of Airport Boulevard. To the east
of US 101, Grand Avenue is called East Grand Avenue. This roadway serves as one of the two
connectors providing access in South San Francisco between areas east and west of US 101. This
roadway also functions as a primary commuter route for the East of 101 Area. According to the General
Plan, Grand Avenue is classified as a major arterial to the east of US 101 and as a minor arterial to the
west of US 101.
Airport Boulevard is a four-lane arterial running along the west side of US 101 in a north/south
direction. This roadway continues north into the City of Brisbane and the City of San Francisco, where it
is called Bayshore Boulevard. South of San Mateo Avenue, Airport Boulevard merges with Produce
Avenue. In the General Plan, Airport Boulevard is classified as a major arterial.
East Grand Avenue is a four- to six-lane arterial running across the City of South San Francisco in an
east/west direction. This roadway serves as one of the two connectors providing access in South San
Francisco between areas east and west of US 101. To the west of US 101, East Grand Avenue is called
Grand Avenue and the connection across US 101 is provided by the East Grand Avenue over-crossing.
This roadway also functions as a primary commuter route for the East of 101 Area, and provides the
primary access to and from the southern portion of the MEIR Study Area. East Grand Avenue has six
lanes between the US 101 northbound off-ramp and the East Grand Avenue over-crossing, and four
lanes extending east from the East Grand Avenue over-crossing. According to the General Plan, East
Grand Avenue is classified as a major arterial to the east of US 101 and as a minor arterial to the west of
US 101.
San Mateo Avenue is a two-lane roadway running across the City of South San Francisco in a
north/south direction. San Mateo Avenue travels from Airport Boulevard near US 101 in the north to
State Route 82 (El Camino Real) in the City of San Bruno to the south.
4.7-2
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
SWIFT AVE
HARBOR MASTER RD
LEGEND
Mainline Locations
0 mi0.20.40.60.811.2
Scale In Miles
4.7-2
FIGURE
Study Mainline Locations
11117-00
Source:
Microsoft Streets and Trip, basemap, 2006; EIP Associates, 2006.
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
South Airport Boulevard is a four-lane divided roadway traveling from the Airport Boulevard/San
Mateo Avenue/Produce Avenue intersection in the north near US 101 to the San Bruno Avenue
East/North McDonnell Road in the south. Most of South Airport Boulevard runs parallel to US 101
near its northbound lanes
Dubuque Avenue is a two- to four-lane roadway running east of and almost parallel to US 101 in a
north/south direction. Extending from East Grand Avenue to Oyster Point Boulevard, this roadway
functions as a connector street for the traffic traveling between US 101 and Oyster Point Boulevard.
Dubuque Avenue has two lanes south of the Dubuque Avenue/US 101 Ramps and four lanes north of
this location. According to the General Plan, Dubuque Avenue is classified as a collector.
Sister Cities Boulevard is a four-lane divided roadway, extending from the Hillside Boulevard
Extension at Hillside Boulevard to Airport Boulevard. Sister Cities Boulevard follows an east/west
course and connects the Genentech site near US 101 to Colma, allowing vehicles to bypass the residential
neighborhoods of South San Francisco.
Forbes Boulevard is a four-lane divided roadway following an east/west course on the east side of
South San Francisco. Forbes Boulevard extends from East Grand Avenue in the west to DNA Way at its
east end.
Miller Avenue is a two-lane local roadway running in an east/west direction, extending from Chestnut
Avenue in the west to Airport Boulevard in the east. The eastern end of Miller Avenue is also the
location of the US 101 southbound off-ramp.
Mitchell Avenue is a two-lane roadway running in an east/west direction. Mitchell Avenue connects
Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard in the west to Harbor Way in the east.
Gull Road is a two-lane local roadway running in a north/south direction. This roadway connects the
Genentech site with Oyster Point Boulevard. The General Plan classifies this roadway as Other Street
(Local Street).
Allerton Avenue is a two-lane local roadway running in a north/south direction. This roadway connects
Forbes Boulevard on the north with East Grand Avenue on the south.
Grandview Drive is a two-lane local roadway, cutting through the Genentech site and winding a
primarily east/west course. Grandview Drive stretches from East Grand Avenue in the west and
becomes DNA Way at its eastern end.
DNA Way is a two-lane local street, running from Forbes Boulevard on the northeast to where it
becomes Grandview Drive at its western end.
4.7-6
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Study Intersections
A total of nineteen intersections were evaluated within and surrounding the MEIR Study Area as part of
the traffic analysis conducted for this proposed project (Figure 4.7-1). The study area intersections
include the following:
1. Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard;
2. Oyster Point Boulevard/US 101 Ramps;
3. Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue;
4. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard;
5. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive;
6. Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard;
7. Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue;
8. Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/US 101 SB Off-Ramp;
9. Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue;
10. Dubuque Avenue/Grand Avenue;
11. Industrial Drive/East Grand Avenue/US 101 NB Off-Ramp;
12. East Grand Avenue/East Grand Overcrossing
13. East Grand Avenue/Gateway Boulevard;
14. East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard;
15. East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue;
16. East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive;
17. Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue;
18. South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard; and
19. South Airport Boulevard/US 101 On- and Off-Ramps.
Study Freeway Segments
Freeway mainline, freeway on-ramp, and freeway off-ramp operating conditions during the weekday ..
AM
and.. peak hours were also evaluated as part of the traffic analysis conducted for this proposed
PM
project. The existing mainline volumes were taken from other sources (including Caltrans and recent
approved transportation studies within the City). Ramp volumes were taken from existing traffic counts.
The freeway mainline segments, on-ramps, and off-ramps studied in this report include the following
(Figure 4.7-2):
Mainline Segments:
US 101 northbound, north of Sierra Point Parkway
US 101 southbound, north of Sierra Point Parkway
US 101 northbound, north of I-380
US 101 southbound, north of I-380
4.7-7
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
On-Ramps:
US 101 northbound from Oyster Point Boulevard
US 101 southbound from Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue
US 101 northbound from Grand Avenue/Airport Boulevard
US 101 northbound from South Airport Boulevard
US 101 southbound from Produce Avenue
Off-Ramps:
US 101 southbound to Airport Boulevard
US 101 southbound flyover to Oyster Point Boulevard
US 101 northbound to Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue
US 101 southbound to Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue
US 101 northbound to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive
US 101 southbound to South Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue
US 101 northbound to South Airport Boulevard
Existing Intersection Conditions
9
Traffic counts used for the analysis were collected between December 13 and December 15, 2005.
.. peak hour (generally between 7:45
Intersection operating conditions were evaluated for the weekday
AM
and 8:45 ..) and for the .. peak hour (generally between 4:45 and 5:45 ..). It should be noted that
AMPMPM
these existing conditions do not include approved planned or programmed projects in the area (including
.. and .. peak hour traffic volumes
approved future Genentech development). The existing weekday
AMPM
at the study intersections are provided in the appendix.
Both signalized and unsignalized intersections in the MEIR Study Area are assessed through the
evaluation of peak hour Levels of Service (LOS), using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
software. The LOS concept qualitatively characterizes traffic
operations methodology and the
TRAFFIX
conditions associated with varying levels of traffic. An LOS determination is a measure of congestion,
which is the principal measure of roadway service. Levels of Service for signalized and unsignalized
intersections are illustrated in Table 4.7-1. These range from LOS A, which indicates a free-flow
condition, to LOS F which indicates a jammed condition. LOS A, B and C are generally considered to be
satisfactory service levels while LOS D is marginally acceptable, LOS E is undesirable and LOS F
conditions are unacceptable. The City of South San Francisco?s threshold of significance is LOS E for
10
signalized intersections. At two-way stop controlled intersections, the average delay per vehicle for its
worst minor street approach are provided. The worst minor approach to a two-way stop controlled
intersection is the stop-controlled approach to the intersection that experiences the most average delay.
The contribution from uncontrolled approaches to the total average delay for the intersection as a whole
is irrelevant due to the fact that these approaches would not experience delay. The City of South San
9
These counts were conducted after the new US 101 flyover to Oyster Point Boulevard was opened and operational.
10
Source: City of South San Francisco General Plan.
4.7-8
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Francisco?s threshold of significance for the worst minor street approach to unsignalized intersections is
11
LOS F.
Table 4.7-1 Intersection Level of Service Definitions
Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Level of Service Description
Unsignalized Intersections Signalized Intersections
A Little or no delay
10.0 10.0
B Short traffic delay
> 10.0 and 15.0 > 10.0 and 20.0
C Average traffic delay
> 15.0 and 25.0 > 20.0 and 35.0
D Long traffic delay
> 25.0 and 35.0 > 35.0 and 55.0
E Very long traffic delay
> 35.0 and 50.0 > 55.0 and 80.0
F Extreme traffic delay > 50.0 > 80.0
SOURCE: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board
Table 4.7-2 presents the results of the traffic analysis of existing conditions for the nineteen study
intersections.
As shown in Table 4.7-2, all of the study intersections currently operate at acceptable levels of service
(LOS D or better). Only one intersection (Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue) operates at LOS D (during
the weekday .. peak hour); all other intersections operate at LOS A, B, or C during both analysis
AM
periods under current conditions.
Existing US 101 Mainline Conditions
US 101 existing traffic conditions were evaluated for the weekday .. and .. peak hour. Existing
AMPM
traffic volumes used for the analysis were derived from Caltrans 2005 Traffic Volumes on California
Highways (Caltrans 2005). Freeway mainline analysis was performed using the HCS software based upon
the HCM methodology for freeway mainlines. A description of HCM analysis methodology is provided
in Appendix E.
Table 4.7-3 shows the freeway segment existing traffic volumes and corresponding levels of service. A
Level of Service (LOS) standard of ?E? for freeway segments in the study area has been established by
the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program. Currently, all US 101 freeway segments
operate at acceptable LOS E or better during the weekday .. and .. peak hour. As the table
AMPM
indicates, conditions are generally worse along US 101 to the north of Oyster Point Boulevard, and peak
in the southbound direction during the .. peak hour and in the northbound direction in the .. peak
AMPM
hour.
11
Source: City of South San Francisco General Plan.
4.7-9
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Table 4.7-2 Intersection Operating Conditions?Existing Conditions (December 2005)
Intersection Control AM LOS AM Delay PM LOS PM Delay
1. Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard Signal C 30.0 C 31.0
2. Oyster Point Boulevard/US 101 Ramps Signal B 12.2 B 16.6
3. Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue Signal C 24.8 C 27.8
4. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard Signal C 29.4 C 27.8
5. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive Signal C 32.7 C 29.8
6. Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard Signal C 24.1 B 13.8
7. Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue TWSC B 13.6 B 10.3
8. Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/US 101 SB Off-Ramp Signal C 25.4 C 24.5
9. Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue Signal D 35.7 C 34.6
10. Dubuque Avenue/Grand Avenue Signal A 7.9 A 6.9
11. Industrial Drive/East Grand Avenue/US 101 NB Off-Ramp TWSC A 0.0 B 10.0
12. East Grand Avenue/East Grand Overcrossing Signal B 20.0 B 15.7
13. East Grand Avenue/Gateway Boulevard Signal C 25.9 B 18.9
14. East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard Signal C 21.8 C 29.9
15. East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue TWSC B 12.6 C 15.0
16. East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive TWSC B 14.8 C 17.7
17. Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue Signal C 28.6 C 30.2
18. South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard Signal C 26.9 C 33.2
19. South Airport Boulevard/US 101 On- and Off-Ramps Signal C 26.9 C 30.7
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
TWSC = Two-Way Stop Controlled
Delay indicates Average Vehicle Delay in seconds.
Bold indicates unacceptable intersection operating conditions.
Table 4.7-3 US 101 Segment Operating Conditions?Existing Conditions (December 2005)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
US 101 Segment
Volume LOSDensity Volume LOSDensity
North of Oyster Point Boulevard
Northbound Direction 7,129 D 28.6 8,374 E 37.8
Southbound Direction 8,246 E 36.6 6,802 D 26.8
North of I-380
Northbound Direction 5,366 C 20.5 5,484 C 20.9
Southbound Direction 6,567 C 25.6 6,294 C 24.4
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile.
Density is not computed when free-flow speed is less than 55 mph.
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway segment operating conditions.
4.7-10
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
ExistingUS101On-RampConditions
US 101 on-ramp conditions were evaluated for the weekday .. and .. peak hours. The existing on-
AMPM
ramp volumes were taken from the existing traffic counts at the adjacent study intersections, and the
freeway counts were derived from Caltrans 2005 Traffic Volumes on California Highways (Caltrans
2005). Freeway on-ramp analysis was performed using the HCS software based upon the HCM
methodology for freeway/ramp junctions. A description of HCM analysis methodology is provided in
Appendix E.
Table 4.7-4 shows the freeway on-ramp volumes and corresponding levels of service. As shown, all on-
.. and .. peak hours.
ramps currently operate at LOS C or better during the weekday
AMPM
Table 4.7-4 US 101 On-Ramp Operating Conditions?Existing Conditions (December 2005)
AMPeakHourPMPeakHour
US 101 On-Ramp
Volume LOSDensity Volume LOSDensity
US 101 NB from Oyster Point Boulevard 632 A 9.2 1,235 B 15.0
US 101 SB from Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue 653 A 7.7 1,113 B 10.2
US 101 NB from Grand Avenue/Airport Boulevard 512 B 15.8 622 B 17.2
US 101 NB from South Airport Boulevard 291 B 16.5 498 B 19.5
US 101 SB from Produce Avenue 958 B 15.2 1,880 C 20.4
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS=Level of Service
Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile.
Density is not computed when free-flow speed is less than 55 mph.
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway on-ramp operating conditions.
NB=Northbound
SB=Southbound
Existing US 101 Off-Ramp Conditions
US 101 off-ramp conditions were evaluated for the weekday .. and .. peak hours. The existing off-
AMPM
ramp volumes were taken from the existing traffic counts at the adjacent study intersections and the
freeway counts were derived from Caltrans 2005 Traffic Volumes on California Highways (Caltrans
2005). Since the HCM does not include a methodology for the analysis of off-ramps, for the purpose of
this study, the freeway off-ramp analysis was performed by analyzing the level of service of the approach
th
at the downstream intersection, as well as evaluating the 95 percentile queue lengths.
Table 4.7-5 shows the freeway off-ramp volumes, corresponding levels of service, and the ramp capacity
utilizations. As shown, all off-ramps currently provide sufficient capacity for queued vehicles during the
weekday.. and .. peak hours; therefore, all study off-ramps would be considered to operate
AMPM
acceptably under existing conditions.
4.7-11
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Table 4.7-5 US 101 Off-Ramp Operating Conditions?Existing Conditions (December 2005)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
LOSRamp LOSRamp
(Approach Capacity (Approach Capacity
US 101 Off-Ramp
Delay) Utilization Delay) Utilization
US 101 SB to Airport Boulevard C (34.8) 11.6% C (26.9) 20.0%
US 101 SB flyover to Oyster Point Boulevard E (65.5) 27.2% D (35.4) 2.4%
US 101 NB to Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue B (11.0) 29.5% C (32.0) 29.5%
US 101 SB to Airport Boulevard / Miller Avenue B (19.7) 34.7% C (21.8) 34.7%
US 101 NB to East Grand Avenue / Executive Drive A (0.0) 0% A (0.0) 0%
US 101 SB to South Airport Boulevard / Produce Avenue C (22.7) 24.4% C (29.7) 21.7%
US 101 NB to South Airport Boulevard B (19.7) 49.1% D (36.5) 31.3%
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS=Level of Service NB=Northbound SB=Southbound
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway off-ramp operating conditions.
Existing Transit Services
The MEIR Study Area is currently served by both local and regional public transit service. Local transit
service is provided by SamTrans (operated by San Mateo County Transit District) while regional transit
service is provided by Caltrain (operated by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board) and BART (Bay
Area Rapid Transit). In addition, Genentech is served by employer shuttles run by the 2006 Peninsula
Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (ALLIANCE). The ALLIANCE Shuttles connect the Genentech
campus with the South San Francisco Caltrain and South San Francisco BART stations. Figure 4.7-3
illustrates the existing transit routes serving the MEIR Study Area. The frequency of transit service in
South San Francisco and the location of transit stop locations are shown in Table 4.7-6. Figure 4.7-3
identifies the transit routes in the MEIR Study Area.
SamTrans
SamTrans is a primary provider of local and regional bus transit service for the City of South San
Francisco. Presently SamTrans does not provide service in the East of 101 Area. The closest SamTrans
bus service to and from the Genentech Central Campus area is provided by SamTrans bus routes 130,
132, and 133. The SamTrans bus terminal located at Airport Boulevard and Linden Avenue is the nearest
to the Genentech Central Campus, at a distance of about one mile. Regional SamTrans bus service for
Genentech is provided by SamTrans bus routes 390 and 391. The nearest regional bus stop to the MEIR
Study Area is located at the San Bruno BART Station.
4.7-12
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Table 4.7-6 Transit Service?South San Francisco
Frequency
AM/PM
Service Route Stop Locations Nearest to the MEIR Study Area
Peak
Midday
Airport/Linden—Daly City and Colma
20/20 30 Airport Boulevard/Linden Avenue
BART stations (130)
South SF Bart Station (132) 30/30 60 Airport Boulevard/Linden Avenue
Airport/Linden-Serramonte (133) 30/30 60 Airport Boulevard/Linden Avenue
SamTrans
Palo Alto—Daly City (390) 30/30 30 South SF BART Bay 3
Redwood City—Colma BART Station (391) 15/30(a) 15(a) El Camino Real/ South SF BART Station
San Mateo—SF (292) 15/15(a) 30 Airport Boulevard/Baden Avenue
Caltrain Gilroy—SF 30/30 60 South SF Caltrain Station
Pittsburg—Daly City 15/15 15 Daly City BART Station
Fremont—Daly City 15/15 15 Daly City BART Station
BART
Richmond—Daly City 15/15 — Daly City BART Station
Dublin—Millbrae 15/15 15 South SF BART Station
Gateway Area 30/30 — Genentech Bldgs B9, B5
Oyster Point Area 30/30(a) — Gull/Oyster Point and 384 Oyster Point
Caltrain Shuttle to
SSF Station
Sierra Point Area 30/30(a) — 5000 Shoreline Ct.
Utah—Grand Area 30/30(a) — Cabot/Allerton
Sierra Point Area 35/35 — 5000 Shoreline Ct.
Gateway Area 20/20 — 1000 Gateway
BART Shuttle to
Genentech 15/15 — Genentech Bldgs B9, B54
SSF Station
Oyster Point Area 23/23(a) — Gull/Oyster Point and 384 Oyster Point
Utah—Grand Area 23/23(a) — Cabot/Allerton
SOURCE: Metropolitan Transportation Commission (511.org), San Mateo County ALLIANCE (Commute.org).
Frequency of transit service is presented in minutes.
SF=San Francisco
a=average frequency period
Caltrain
The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) provides passenger rail service, with a combination
of express and local service between Gilroy and San Francisco. It connects the City of South San
Francisco with Santa Clara County, San Mateo County, and San Francisco. Caltrain offers transit service
in the MEIR Study Area during peak hours every thirty minutes and during off peak hours every hour.
The South San Francisco Caltrain station located closest to the MEIR Study Area is near the intersection
of Dubuque Avenue and Grand Avenue, at a distance of approximately one mile from the Genentech
Central Campus.
BART
BART provides regional rail transit service within the San Francisco Bay Area. It connects the East Bay
(Pittsburg, Richmond, Dublin, and Fremont) and San Mateo County (Millbrae and San Francisco
4.7-15
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
International Airport) with San Francisco. The BART stations nearest to the MEIR Study Area are the
San Bruno Station located at Huntington Avenue near the Tanforan Shopping Center and the South San
Francisco Station located on Mission Road near El Camino Real. Both these stations are approximately
two miles from the Genentech Central Campus. It should be noted that three of the four BART lines
(Richmond, Pittsburg/Bay Point, and Fremont) travel as far south as the Daly City BART station; only
the Dublin/Pleasanton line provides service through the nearby stations. In general, service on this line is
every fifteen minutes throughout the day.
Genentech Campus Shuttles
The Genentech Campus Shuttles provide the following high frequency service between the various parts
of the campus and to the local/regional transit operators:
Off-campus shuttles access the South San Francisco BART station, Glen Park BART station, and
the South San Francisco Caltrain Station. These shuttles are provided by Genentech and the San
Mateo County Transit Authority, and operate on 30 minute headways during the peak hours.
Genentech provides shuttles to the other Genentech campuses in Vacaville and Redwood City.
These shuttles operate three times a week (Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday), and once per day.
Internal shuttles are provided by Genentech to serve employees within the various campus areas.
The Gateway Express shuttle provides service from the Gateway Campus to the Central Campus
with 7.5 minute headways all day. The DNA shuttle provides service throughout the northern half
of the Central Campus with five minute headways all day. The South Campus shuttle provides
service from the southern half of the Central Campus to South Campus with 15 minute headways
all day.
Other Area Shuttles
To improve the accessibility of Caltrain and BART stations in South San Francisco, ALLIANCE shuttles
run between the stations and major employment centers during the morning and evening commute
hours. These are free and open to the public. Shuttles are financed by SamTrans, the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB), and
participating employers. In addition to the Genentech service, three shuttles are available from the
Caltrain station and four shuttles are accessible from the BART station.
The peak hour frequency of ALLIANCE shuttles serving Caltrain and BART stations and the location of
shuttle stops that are nearest to the MEIR Study Area are shown in Table 4.7-7.
4.7-16
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Table 4.7-7 ALLIANCE Shuttle Service?South San Francisco
Stations
Shuttle ServedSchedule Area Served
BART eight .. & nine .. trips
Oyster Point Boulevard, Gull Dr, Eccles Avenue, Forbes Boulevard,
AMPM
Oyster Point
Veterans Boulevard
Caltrain seven .. & seven .. trips
AMPM
BART nine .. & nine .. trips
AMPM
Utah—GrandE Grand Avenue, Utah Avenue, Harbor Way, Littlefield Avenue
.. & seven .. trips
Caltrain seven
AMPM
BART ten .. & twelve .. trips
Gateway Boulevard—BART Gateway Boulevard, Genentech Office—
AMPM
Gateway Area
Caltrain
Caltrain six .. & five .. trips
AMPM
BART four .. & four ..
AMPM
Sierra Point Sierra Point, Shoreline
.. & four ..
Caltrain four
AMPM
SOURCE: San Mateo County ALLIANCE (Commute.org)
Each shuttles alternates between 15 and 30 minute headways during both peak hours.
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Numerous bicycle facilities are available in the study area. Bike lanes are available along Sister Cities
Boulevard, Oyster Point Boulevard (east of Gateway Avenue), Gull Drive, and Gateway Avenue (south
of East Grand Avenue). Bike routes are available on South Airport Boulevard, and on East Grand
Avenue between Executive Drive and the East Grand Overcrossing. Bike Paths are available along side
12
Executive Drive, and along shoreline. Future bike lanes are planned along Gateway Avenue, East
Grand Avenue, Allerton Avenue, and Forbes Boulevard (east of Allerton Avenue). Future bike routes are
planned along Forbes Boulevard (west of Allerton Avenue). Future bike paths are planned along side
Caltrain, and off-street through the Genentech Central Campus. The proposed future bike lanes, routes,
and paths are designated in the General Plan Transportation Element.
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, paths, pedestrian bridges, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and
resting areas. In the MEIR Study Area, primary on-street paths exist along Forbes Boulevard, DNA Way,
Grandview Drive, Cabot Road, and Allerton Avenue. Additionally, the ?Campus Loop? provides an off-
street path that includes the major circulation routes within each neighborhood Central Spine, as well as
the connective elements between them.
In general, the sidewalks provided throughout the study area provide connections to areas west of the
Genentech area for both bicyclists and pedestrians.
12
Bike Lanes provide preferential use of the paved area of roadway for bicyclists by establishing specific lines of demarcation
between areas reserved for bicycles and motorists. Bike Routes are shared facilities with automobiles and other vehicles
(roadways are demarcated by signage). Bike Paths provide exclusive rights-of-way for bicyclists with cross flows by motorists
minimized.
4.7-17
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Existing Parking Conditions
Currently, there are approximately 5,525 parking spaces within the main Genentech campus. Parking lots
are provided for each section of the Genentech campus, as detailed in Table 4.7-8. Within the majority of
the parking lots, separate spaces are designated for visitors.
Table 4.7-8 Genentech Parking Demand?Existing Conditions (December 2005)
Parking Location Parking Supply Parking Demand Capacity Utilization
Lower Campus2,224 1,918 86%
West Campus136 0 0%
Mid Campus 1,436 876 61%
Upper Campus1,729 1,657 96%
Total 5,525 4,451 81%
According to parking demand rates provided by Genentech (based on land use categories), the average
peak hour parking demand is approximately 4,451 spaces, which represents approximately eighty-
one percent of the total available parking supply. Detailed information on parking demand is provided in
Appendix E.
It should be noted that supplementary parking supply is provided at the Gateway Campus, which is
located west of Gateway Boulevard, between Oyster Point Boulevard and Corporate Drive. Currently,
there are about 2,040 spaces which are generally fully occupied by Genentech employees. These
employees are able to access the main campus via one of the Campus shuttles.
4.7.2Regulatory Framework
Federal
There are no federal regulations regarding transportation effects that apply to the project.
State
There are no state regulations regarding transportation effects that apply to the project.
Local
San Mateo County Congestion Management Plan Roadway System
The San Mateo County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Roadway System designates various
roadways and segments of the county roadway system for use in annual monitoring of level of service
standards, and identifies potential street segment and intersection candidates for the capital improvement
program. Near the MEIR Study Area, the CMP roadway system includes the US 101 segments only.
4.7-18
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
The level of service (LOS) standards established for roads and intersections in the San Mateo County
CMP street network vary based on geographic differences. For roadway segments and intersections near
the county border, the LOS standard was set as LOS E, in order to be consistent with the
recommendations in the neighboring counties. If the existing LOS in 1991 baseline was F, the standard
was set to LOS F. If the existing or future LOS in the 1991 baseline was predicted to be E, the standard
was set to E. For the remaining roadways and intersections, the standard was set to be one letter
designation worse than the projected LOS in the year 2000. The CMP standard for the US 101 study
segments in the MEIR Study Area is LOS F (C/CAG 2005).
City of South San Francisco Transportation Demand Management
The City of South San Francisco (Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management) (refer to
Appendix F) requires that all nonresidential development expected to generate one hundred or more
average daily trips, based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates or a project
seeking a floor area ratio (FAR) bonus implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
measures to reduce vehicle traffic. The purposes of the TDM ordinance are as follows:
Implement a program designed to reduce the amount of traffic generated by new nonresidential
development, and the expansion of existing nonresidential development, pursuant to the city?s
police power and necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
Ensure that expected increases in traffic resulting from growth in employment opportunities in the
city of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated.
Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of services,
incentives, and facilities.
Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that new
developments are designed in ways to maximize the potential for alternative transportation usage.
Establish minimum TDM requirements for all new nonresidential development.
Allow reduced parking requirements for projects implementing the requirements of this chapter.
Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that the measures are
implemented.
The analysis prepared for the General Plan Amendment includes the assumption that a moderate TDM
program will reduce peak hour traffic generation by an additional 9.5 percent compared to existing traffic
generation rates. The objective of TDM programs is to reduce vehicle trips at commercial/residential
developments by incorporating project components such as encouraging increased transit use,
carpooling, and providing facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians.
South San Francisco has a ?menu? of potential TDM programs, each with a specific number of points
that relate to the programs? effectiveness. Examples of TDM programs include bicycle racks and lockers,
free carpool parking, shuttle services, and on-site amenities. Genentech is required to implement
sufficient programs to achieve a target mode shift of 30 percent.
4.7-19
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
In an effort to minimize the traffic associated with this new development as well as the costs of building
new parking structures, Genentech is currently exploring the following new TDM strategies as integral to
its Master Plan:
Shuttle Service Improvements. Genentech plans to improve the efficiency of its existing intra-
campus shuttle, and it is exploring expansion of its connections to BART, Caltrain and potentially
Muni.
Shuttle Facility Improvements. Genentech is exploring improvements to shuttle stops, including
new shelters and signs, and improved pedestrian connections to its buildings.
Parking Cash-Out. As Genentech puts buildings on its existing parking lots, it must build costly
parking structures. It is now exploring whether it would be more cost effective to pay its
employees not to drive, rather than provide them with ever-more-expensive structured parking.
Similar strategies have worked for a variety of other employers, and they have produced significant
traffic reductions.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements. As its shifts from being more of an industrial facility to
more of a pedestrian-oriented campus, Genentech is considering significant improvement to its
overall bicycle and pedestrian networks.
It should be noted that these programs are not assumed to be in place with the proposed project.
4.7.3Project Impacts and Mitigation
Analytic Method
The impacts evaluation presented below includes traffic impacts on study area intersections and regional
freeway segments, site access, parking, transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. For this analysis,
proposed project traffic impacts have been evaluated and compared with 2005 existing conditions for the
following scenarios:
2015 Future Without Project
2015 Future Plus Project
Year 2015 peak hour Future Without Project conditions were developed by adding traffic expected to be
generated by all the approved and proposed development projects in the greater East of 101 Area (as
provided by the City of South San Francisco) to the existing traffic network. The number of trips
generated by future developments is provided in Table 4.7-9 (Table 5-1 identifies the land uses by
Campus and type of use). Overall, there is anticipated to be a growth of over 4.6 million sf by year 2015,
primarily office/R&D space. It should be noted that these background growth values do not include any
planned or programmed projects within the Genentech Campus. The 2015 Future Plus Project scenario,
thus, isolates Genentech growth, so that the proposed project impacts can be clearly identified.
Table 4.7-9 Background Growth?2015 Future Without Project Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
InboundOutbound Total InboundOutbound Total
East of 101 Area Grand Total 2,108 786 2,894 1,150 2,371 3,521
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
4.7-20
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Freeway segment traffic volumes for 2015 peak hour Future Without Project conditions were developed
by adding traffic expected to be generated by all approved development projects and by applying an
annual 0.5 percent growth rate to existing volumes (as documented in approved transportation studies).
The growth in freeway on- and off-ramp volumes was based on the anticipated traffic increases
generated by the approved development projects. The tables which detail the development of 2015 peak
hour US 101 segment volumes are provided in the Appendix E.
Project Trip Generation
Trip generation rates for the proposed project land uses were developed from the recent East of 101
13
Study, adjusted to reflect the modal split characteristics of current Genentech employees.
As part of the East of 101 Study, daily and peak hour vehicular activities were counted at several existing
buildings within the area, and trip generation rates were developed based on the size of the proposed
buildings and the land uses (office, lab, and manufacturing/warehouse). These rates were reduced to
account for the percentage of employees and visitors that do not travel by private vehicles. The East of
101 Study determined that approximately 9.5 percent of the employees and visitors would arrive and
depart the buildings not by single-occupancy autos (i.e., transit, walk/bike, or other modes).
However, since mode split rates for current Genentech employees was available (based on surveys
conducted by Genentech), the reported East of 101 Study trip generation rates were modified to reflect
the travel characteristics of Genentech employees (including carpool rates and average vehicle
occupancy, and use of transit/shuttles). In general, the resulting specific Genentech trip generation rates
are slightly higher than the East of 101 Study rates, as a lower percentage of non-auto use is
demonstrated by current Genentech employees (about 7.5 percent), as shown in Table 4.7-10.
The Genentech employee modal split is provided in Table 4.7-10.
Table 4.7-10 Genentech Mode Split (Current Employees)
Mode Percent Mode Split
Drive Alone79.2%
Carpool13.3%
Transit5.3%
Walk/Bike0.6%
Other1.6%
Total 100%
SOURCE: Genentech, Korve Engineering 2006
Trip generation rates for the proposed project land uses are presented in Table 4.7-11. It should be noted
that Genentech provides the following services on-site, all of which considered ?amenities?: ATMs,
credit union, barber shop, dental facility, video rentals, film developing and dry cleaning. Since these
13
T.Y. Lin International/CCS, 2003.
4.7-21
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
amenities would be used by Genentech employees, the trips generated by each amenity can be seen as an
internal trip to the Genentech campus. Thus, trip generation specific to each amenity would not be
applicable.
Table 4.7-11 Genentech Trip Generation Rates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use
InboundOutbound Total InboundOutbound Total
Office 0.83 0.12 0.95 0.12 0.60 0.72
Lab 0.49 0.10 0.59 0.07 0.38 0.45
Manu/Ware 0.42 0.06 0.48 0.05 0.40 0.45
Amenity 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
All rates are shown in Trips per 1,000 sf
The proposed project land uses are presented in Table 4.7-12. As part of the proposed project, some
existing land uses within the MEIR Study Area would be displaced and replaced with new Genentech
land uses. These displaced uses are represented by negative values. Overall, the proposed project would
contain approximately 3.2 million sf of new Genentech-related land uses and the elimination of about
0.8 million sf of existing uses, for a net increase of 2.4 million sf of development.
Table 4.7-12 New Genentech Project Land Uses
Neighborhood Office LabManufacturing Amenities Total
Lower Campus A 5,108 169,108 -153,113 31,000 52,103
Lower Campus B 85,000 320,000 -53,500 25,000 376,500
Lower Campus C -28,114 150,000 150,000 0 271,886
Lower Total 61,994 639,108 -56,613 56,000 700,489
West Campus A 0 0 0 52,000 52,000
West Campus B 630,000 0 -234,004 55,000 450,996
West Campus C 150,000 200,000 -27,158 0 322,842
West Total 780,000 200,000 -261,162 107,000 825,838
Mid Campus -25,900 302,000 0 95,000 371,100
Mid Total -25,900 302,000 0 95,000 371,100
Upper Campus A 150,000 0 0 0 150,000
Upper Campus B 405,000 -58,000 -86,370 20,000 280,630
Upper Campus C 249,500 -93,300 -36,400 -25,500 94,300
Lower Total 804,500 -151,300 -122,770 -5,500 524,930
Total 1,620,594 989,808 -440,545 252,500 2,422,357
SOURCE: Genentech, Korve Engineering 2006
All values are shown in square feet
Table 4.7-13 shows the estimated peak hour vehicle trips generated by the proposed project. These trips
represent the net-new trips that would be generated by the new Genentech uses (a credit was taken, via
4.7-22
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
the negative growth numbers presented in Table 4.7-11, for the trips that would be eliminated with the
proposed project).
Table 4.7-13 Genentech Net-New Vehicle Trips Generated
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Neighborhood
InboundOutbound Total InboundOutbound Total
Lower Campus A 33 5 38 6 29 35
Lower Campus B 237 32 270 35 214 249
Lower Campus C 112 17 129 13 107 121
Lower Total 383 54 437 53 350 404
West Campus A 116 17 133 14 111 125
West Campus B 550 63 614 95 467 562
West Campus C 275 36 310 41 245 286
West Total 941 116 1,057 150 823 973
Mid Campus 158 24 181 20 148 168
Mid Total 158 24 181 20 148 168
Upper Campus A 131 15 146 23 111 134
Upper Campus B 290 32 321 53 240 293
Upper Campus C 155 16 171 29 126 156
Upper Total 576 63 639 104 478 583
Total 2,057 257 2,314 328 1,800 2,128
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
Because Table 4.7-13 presents the net-new Genentech growth, in some cases there would be a decrease
in square footage or a downgrade in intensity with the proposed project. As a result, the proposed
project may result in a decrease in the number of trips being generated in a certain area.
Overall, the proposed project would generate approximately 2,314 new vehicle trips during the weekday
..peak hour (89 percent inbound and 11 percent outbound) and 2,128 new vehicle trips during the
AM
weekday.. peak hour (15 percent inbound and 85 percent outbound).
PM
As shown in Table 4.7-11, approximately 5.3 percent of the current Genentech employees use transit to
access the campus. As such, the proposed project would generate about 135 new transit trips during the
.. peak hour (89 percent inbound and 11 percent outbound) and 125 new transit trips during the
AM
weekday.. peak hour (15 percent inbound and 85 percent outbound).
PM
Project Trip Distribution/Assignment
Table 4.7-14 presents the trip distribution patterns for the proposed project land uses (see Figure 4.7-4).
Project vehicle trips were distributed to the study area network based on the place of residence of
existing Genentech employees (as provided by Genentech). This origin/destination data was then used
to assign the trips to the regional (US 101) and local roadways. As shown, there are approximately equal
amounts of current Genentech employees that utilize US 101 to the north and south of the MEIR Study
Area, with a smaller percentage of employees that utilize local roadways.
4.7-23
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Table 4.7-14 Genentech Trip Distribution Pattern
Place of Trip Origin/Destination Trip Distribution
Peninsula 39.6%
San Francisco 25.0%
North Bay 4.4%
East Bay 18.9%
South Bay 6.9%
Other 5.2%
Total 100%
Assignment Percentage
Points north via US 101 41.8%
Points south via US 101 45.8%
Points west via Oyster Point/Sister Cities 4.1%
Points west via Grand Avenue 8.3%
Total 100%
SOURCE: Genentech, Korve Engineering 2006.
Project trips which travel from points north via US 101 are likely to use the US 101 southbound flyover
off-ramp to the Oyster Point Boulevard flyover to enter the MEIR Study Area (Figure 4.7-5). The
project trips would then travel along Oyster Point Boulevard to Gull Drive, then on to Forbes
Boulevard, where the Genentech parking lots can be accessed. A small percentage of these trips may also
use the US 101 southbound off-ramp to Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue to enter the MEIR Study
Area. These trips would then travel south along Airport Boulevard, east along Grand Avenue, and finally
north along Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue, or Grandview Drive, depending on which parking lot
they intend to park in. Project trips departing to points north via US 101 are likely to travel north along
Gull Drive, and west along Oyster Point Boulevard to leave the MEIR Study Area. The project trips
would then use the US 101 northbound on-ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard to access US 101. A small
percentage of these trips may also use East Grand Avenue to leave the MEIR Study Area. These trips
would then use the US 101 northbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue to access US 101.
Project trips which travel from points south via US 101 will use either the US 101 northbound off-ramp
to South Airport Boulevard or the US 101 northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive
Drive to enter the MEIR Study Area. From either off-ramp, the project trips would eventually travel to
East Grand Avenue, where they turn north along Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue, or Grandview
Drive, depending on which parking lot they intend to park in. Project trips departing to points south via
US 101 will travel west along East Grand Avenue, south along Gateway Boulevard, West along South
Airport Boulevard, and finally south along Produce Avenue to leave the MEIR Study Area. The project
trips would then use the US 101 southbound off-ramp from South Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue
access US 101.
Project trips which travel from points west via Oyster Point Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard will travel
east along Oyster Point Boulevard to Gull Drive, then on to Forbes Boulevard, where the Genentech
parking lots can be accessed. These trips would use the same roads to return to their place of origin.
4.7-24
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
SWIFT AVE
HARBOR MASTER RD
SWIFT AVE
HARBOR MASTER RD
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Project trips which travel from points west via Grand Avenue will travel east along Grand Avenue, and
then north along Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue, or Grandview Drive, depending on which parking
lot they intend to park in. These trips would use the same roads to return to their place of origin.
Trip distribution percentages are shown in Figure 4.7-4.
Measures Incorporated from the East of 101 Study
As shown in Table 5-1, the City of South San Francisco has approved over 4.5 million sf of new
office/R&D space and 2,000 new hotel rooms in the East of 101 Area. The City retained T.Y. Lin
International/CCS to prepare the East of 101 Transportation Improvement Plan (East of 101 Study),
which evaluated potential improvement needs at various intersections to accommodate such a build out
in the East of 101 Area. Consequently, the East of 101 Study identified mitigation measures at several of
the study intersections that were analyzed for this proposed project. These measures were assumed in the
analysis only when warranted by poor operating conditions. Mitigation measures from the East of 101
Study are identified below for each impact to which they apply. The final step after identification of the
?mitigated? scenario (scenario with application of East of 101 mitigation measures) was identification of
new mitigation measures.
Thresholds of Significance
Applied Criteria
The following significance criteria were obtained from the San Francisco General Plan and the San
Mateo County Congestions Management Plan Standards, and used for the analysis of the proposed
14
project:
Intersections
An adverse effect would occur if the proposed project would do any of the following:
Degrade a signalized intersection to LOS E or worse.
Cause the level of service at a signalized intersection operating at LOS E under future baseline
conditions to deteriorate to LOS F.
Increase the average critical movement vehicle delay by five or more seconds (attributable to
Project-generated traffic) at a signalized intersection operating at LOS E or F under future baseline
conditions.
Degrade an unsignalized intersection at one or more approaches to worse than LOS D as a result
of Project-generated traffic, and if Caltrans signal warrants are met (i.e., if traffic volumes along the
major and minor streets require a signal).
14
All applied criteria are consistent with City of South San Francisco standards, and have been used for projects throughout
the area.
4.7-29
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Increase the average vehicle delay by five or more seconds at the worst approach of an
unsignalized intersection that operates at LOS E or F under existing or future baseline conditions,
and if Caltrans signal warrants are met.
Freeway Mainlines and On-Ramps
An adverse effect would occur if the proposed project would do any of the following:
Degrade a freeway mainline or the on-ramp/freeway junction to worse than LOS D as a result of
Project-generated traffic.
Cause the level of service at a freeway mainline or on-ramp operating at LOS E under future
baseline conditions to deteriorate to LOS F as a result of Project-generated traffic.
Cause an increase (attributable to Project-generated traffic) in volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio of
0.05 or more at freeway mainlines and increase the density (passenger cars per mile per lane) by at
least four at on-ramp/freeway junctions operating at LOS E or F under future baseline conditions.
Parking
An adverse effect would occur if the proposed project would do any of the following:
Substantially reduce parking supply such that parking demand cannot be accommodated.
Cause an unmet parking demand that would result in other significant physical effects, such as a
substantial alteration of neighborhood character or creation of hazardous conditions caused by
illegally parked vehicles, or would result in secondary traffic impacts due to vehicles circling and
looking for parking spaces in areas of limited parking supply.
Transit
An adverse effect would occur if the proposed project would do any of the following:
Substantially increase transit demand that could not be accommodated by existing or planned
transit capacity, resulting in unacceptable levels of transit service.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
An adverse effect would occur if the proposed project would do any of the following:
Result in substantial overcrowding on public sidewalks.
Create potentially hazardous conditions for pedestrians.
Interfere with pedestrian accessibility to adjoining areas.
Create potentially hazardous conditions for bicyclists.
Substantially interfere with bicycle accessibility to the MEIR Study Area and/or adjoining areas.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
2015 Conditions at Intersections?With and Without Project
As stated earlier, Year 2015 peak hour Future Without Project conditions were developed by adding
traffic expected to be generated by all the approved and proposed development projects in the greater
East of 101 Area (as provided by the City of South San Francisco) to the existing (December 2005)
4.7-30
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
traffic network. It should be noted that these background growth values do not include any planned or
programmed projects within the Genentech Campus. The 2015 Future Plus Project scenario, thus,
isolates Genentech growth, so that the proposed project impacts can be clearly identified. Table 4.7-15
presents the Year 2015 Future Without Project and Year 2015 Future Plus Project traffic conditions at
study intersections with and without the applicable East of 101 mitigations, discussed above. Intersection
LOS calculations are provided in Appendix E. The year 2015 intersection turning movement volumes for
the weekday .. and .. peak hours with Project-generated traffic are provided in Appendix E.
AMPM
As shown in Table 4.7-15, under the 2015 Future Baseline conditions, the intersections of Oyster Point
.. peak hour), Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (.. peak
Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue (
PMPM
hour), and East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (both peak hours) would operate at LOS E. With
implementation of the relevant East of 101 Study mitigation measures (as documented in the previous
section), the Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue and East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive
intersections would improve to LOS C or better conditions. However, the East of 101 Study does not
identify a mitigation measure for the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection; therefore,
this intersection would be considered to operate with unacceptable conditions during both analysis
periods.
Table 4.7-15 Intersection Operating Conditions?2015 Future Without Project and 2015
Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 (Without Project) 2015 Future Plus Project
w/o East of 101 w/ East of 101 w/o East of 101 w/ East of 101
Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations
Intersections
AMPMAMPMAMPMAMPM
CDCDD
1. Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard N/A N/A N/A
(32.5)(40.1)(32.7)(41.2)(37.2)
BCBC
2. Oyster Point Boulevard / US 101 Ramps — — — —
(14.8)(26.1)(15.7)(30.1)
CECCFD
3. Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue N/AN/A
(27.4)(75.7)(31.9)(29.8)(>80)(47.1)
DEEF
4. Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard — — — —
(48.1)(56.1)(68.7)(>80)
CCFFFD
5. Oyster Point Boulevard / Gull Drive N/A N/A
(33.3)(30.0)(>80)(>80)(>80)(48.3)
CBCE
6. Gull Drive / Forbes Boulevard — — — —
(24.4)(14.6)(27.4)(76.3)
CBFC
7. Forbes Boulevard / Allerton Avenue* — — — —
(22.4)(12.1)(79.7)(16.0)
Airport Boulevard / Miller Avenue / US 101 SB Off-CCCC
8.N/A N/A N/A N/A
Ramp(25.6)(24.2)(25.9)(24.5)
DDEDC
9. Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue N/A N/A N/A
(40.7)(37.4)(58.5)(39.0)(33.1)
AAAA
10. Dubuque Avenue / Grand Avenue N/A N/A N/A N/A
(7.4)(8.4)(7.0)(8.4)
Industrial Drive / East Grand Avenue / US 101 NB ABAB
11.— — — —
Off Ramp (0.0)(10.4)(0.0)(10.7)
4.7-31
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Table 4.7-15 Intersection Operating Conditions?2015 Future Without Project and 2015
Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 (Without Project) 2015 Future Plus Project
w/oEastof101w/Eastof101w/oEastof101w/Eastof101
Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations
Intersections
AMPMAMPMAMPMAMPM
BBDB
12. East Grand Avenue / East Grand Overcrossing — — — —
(19.1)(14.5)(35.3)(14.0)
CBDC
N/A N/A N/A N/A
13. East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard
(28.0)(19.6)(44.0)(25.7)
East Grand Avenue / Harbor Master Road / Forbes CDFFED
14.N/A N/A
Boulevard(34.3)(44.0)(>80)(>80)(61.1)(49.0)
CCFFBB
15. East Grand Avenue / Allerton Avenue N/A N/A
(16.7)(22.3)(62.5)(>80)(10.2)(15.8)
EEBCFFBF
16. East Grand Avenue / Grandview Drive
(42.5)(47.5)(16.2)(31.4)(>80)(>80)(18.6)(>80)
Produce Avenue / Airport Boulevard / San Mateo CDCFD
17.N/A N/A N/A
Avenue(29.4)(37.4)(30.1)(>80)(36.0)
CDCEC
18. South Airport Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard N/A N/A N/A
(27.5)(38.3)(27.6)(63.5)(34.3)
South Airport Boulevard / US 101 On- and Off-CCCC
19.— — — —
Ramps(27.9)(31.2)(30.1)(31.6)
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
Delay indicates Average Vehicle Delay in seconds.
Bold indicates unacceptable intersection operating conditions.
N/A indicates that East of 101 Mitigation would not be needed. Dashed line indicates that no East of 101 Mitigation is available.
* Intersection would not meet the Caltrans Peak Hour Warrant.
The East of 101 Study does not identify a mitigation measure for the Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard intersection.
Under the 2015 Future Plus Project conditions, the following 11 study intersections are projected to
operate unacceptably (i.e., from LOS E to F, or increase of delay of five seconds or more at LOS E or F
intersection) during either the ..or.. peak hour without implementation of the applicable East of
AM PM
101 Study improvements:
Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive
Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard
Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue
Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue
East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard
East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue
East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive
Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue
South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard
After implementing the applicable East of 101 Study mitigation measures, the Oyster Point
Boulevard/Gull Drive (.. peak hour), East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard
AM
4.7-32
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
(.. peak hour), and East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (.. peak hour) intersections would
AMPM
continue to operate with unacceptable conditions. As stated earlier, the East of 101 Study does not
identify a mitigation measure for the Oyster Point Boulevard Gateway Boulevard intersection. It is
important to note that although the Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue intersection would operate at
LOS F in the a.m. peak hour, it would not meet the Caltrans peak hour signal warrant. Therefore, the
intersection would not be considered to operate unacceptably.
This section presents the significant impacts created by the addition of Project generated trips to the
surrounding traffic network. For each significant impact, a corresponding mitigation measure is
identified. Figures 4.7-6A and 4.7-6B illustrate the pre- and post- mitigated intersection geometry.
Table 4.7-16 summarizes operating conditions for intersections after the implementation of mitigation
measures in the Year 2015 Future Plus Project conditions.
Threshold Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load
and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections). Specifically, the project would create a significant impact if it would
cause the Level of Service at a signalized intersection to degrade to LOS E or worse,
or cause the Level of Service at an unsignalized intersection to degrade to LOS F.
Impact 4.7-1 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue intersection during the P.M.
peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation
of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-1 (East of 101) would reduce
less than significant
this impact to .
Westbound right-turn volumes at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue intersection are
expected to increase significantly with the addition of project-generated traffic. In order to restore
acceptable operating conditions, the East of 101 Study mitigation measure for this intersection should be
implemented.
15
MM 4.7-1 Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue (East of 101):
Re-stripe and shift median of westbound Oyster Point Boulevard to add one right turn lane
making it a total of two 650-foot right-turn lanes to the northbound 101 onramp
Existing signal modification
By applying the mitigation measure previously identified by the East of 101 Study, the proposed project?s
less than significant
impact would be reduced to . As such, Genentech shall be responsible for funding
its fair share to the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of this measure.
15
Mitigation measures that are taken from the East of 101 Study have ?East of 101? in parentheses.
4.7-33
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Not to Scale
4.7-6A
FIGURE
Mitigated Intersection Diagrams
11117-00
Source:
City of South San Francisco
East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Produce Avenue/South Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard
Existing GeometryMitigated Geometry
Not to Scale
4.7-6B
FIGURE
Mitigated Intersection Diagrams
11117-00
Source:
City of South San Francisco
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Impact 4.7-2 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions
at Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the ..
AM
peak hour, and LOS F during the .. peak hour. This would be a
PM
significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation
less-than-
measure MM 4.7-2 (new) would reduce this impact to a
significant
level.
The addition of over 800 Project vehicles in both the .. and.. peak hours would cause the Oyster
AM PM
Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection to operate at unacceptable conditions. In order to
restore acceptable operating conditions, a new mitigation measure for this intersection should be
implemented.
MM 4.7-2 Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (New):
The southbound approach to the intersection must be reconfigured to only allow right turns.
Additionally, the southbound right-turn should have an overlap phase with the eastbound
(flyover) phase.
After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the East Grand
less than significant
Avenue/Grandview Drive intersection would be reduced to . During the .. peak
AM
hour, this intersection would operate at LOS D with an average delay of 49.6 seconds. During the ..
PM
peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS D with an average delay of 51.0 seconds. Genentech
would be solely responsible for the implementation of this measure.
Impact 4.7-3 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection during the .. and
AM
P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However,
implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-3 (new)
less-than-significant .
would reduce this impact to a level
Northbound left-turn and eastbound right-turn volumes at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive
intersection are expected to increase significantly with the addition of project generated traffic. The East
of 101 Area Plan identifies the following measure for Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive:
Widen northbound Gull Drive to provide two left-turn lanes and one through/right-shared lane
Existing signal modification
However, in order to restore acceptable operating conditions, an alternate mitigation measure must be
implemented.
MM 4.7-3 Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive (New):
The existing northbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured to be an all-
movement lane;
The northbound and southbound phasing shall be changed to split-phasing;
The eastbound right-turn movement shall have an overlap phase with the northbound phase.
4.7-36
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the Oyster Point
less than significant
.. peak
Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection would be reduced to . During the
AM
hour, this intersection would operate at LOS C with an average delay of 31.7 seconds. Genentech would
be solely responsible for the implementation of this alternate measure.
Impact 4.7-4 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions
at Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard intersection during the .. peak hour.
PM
This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the
identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-4 (new) would reduce this impact to
less-than-significant .
alevel
Eastbound left-turn and westbound right-turn delays at the Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard intersection
are expected to increase significantly with the addition of Project generated traffic. In order to restore
acceptable operating conditions, a new mitigation measure for this intersection should be implemented.
MM 4.7-4 Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard (New):
The existing westbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured to be a right-
turn only lane;
The westbound right-turn movement shall have an overlap phase with the southbound
movement;
The southbound right-turn movement shall have an overlap phase with the eastbound left-
turn phase.
After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the proposed project?s impact at this location
less than significant
would be . As such, Genentech would be solely responsible for the implementation
of this measure.
Impact 4.7-5 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions
at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the .. peak
PM
hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the
identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-5 (East of 101) would reduce this
less-than-significant .
impact to a level
Eastbound left-turn and southbound left-turn volumes at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue
intersection are expected to increase significantly with the addition of Project generated traffic. In order
to restore acceptable operating conditions, implement the East of 101 Study mitigation measure for this
intersection.
MM 4.7-5 Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue (East of 101):
Re-stripe existing southbound Airport Boulevard right turn lane to a shared through-right
lane and southbound shared through/left lane to a left turn lane
Widen eastbound Grand Avenue to add two left turn lanes; re-stripe the eastbound
through/left shared lane to a through lane and eastbound right turn lane to shared
through/right lane
4.7-37
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck traffic on westbound
Grand Avenue
Exiting signal modification
By applying the mitigation measure previously identified by the East of 101 Study, the proposed project?s
less than significant
impact would be at this location. As such, Genentech would be responsible for
funding its fair share to the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of this
measure. It is important to note that this mitigation requires major reconfiguration of the intersection.
Impact 4.7-6 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard
intersection during the A.M. and .. peak hour. This would be a
PM
significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation
measure MM 4.7-6(a)(East of 101) and 4.7-6 (b)(new) would reduce this
less-than-significant
impact to a level.
At the East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard intersection, eastbound volumes are
expected to exceed capacity with the addition of Project generated traffic. In order to restore acceptable
operating conditions, the following additional mitigation measure?in conjunction with the mitigation
measure proposed in the East of 101 Study?would need to be implemented:
MM 4.7-6(a) East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard (East of 101):
Widen westbound Grand Avenue to add one additional through lane and one additional left
turn lane.
Widen southbound Forbes Boulevard to add one through lane and change the existing shared
through-right lane to a right turn only lane
Widen northbound Harbor Way to add one through lane, one right turn lane and change the
existing shared through-right turn lane to a right turn lane to a through lane
New signal installation
Signal interconnection installation
MM 4.7-6(b) East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard (New):
The eastbound approach to this intersection shall be widened to allow the existing shared
through/right-turn lane to be reconfigured into separate through and right-turn lanes.
After implementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation measure and the new mitigation
measure, the impact at the East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard intersection
less than significant
would be reduced to . During the .. peak hour, this intersection would operate at
AM
LOS D with an average delay of 40.1 seconds. Genentech would be solely responsible for the
implementation of the additional measure, and would be expected to pay its fair share towards the
implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of the East of 101 Study mitigation
measure.
4.7-38
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Impact 4.7-7 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue intersection during the A.M. and
.. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However,
PM
implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-7 (East of
less than significant.
101) would reduce this impact to
Increased eastbound and westbound volumes at the East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue intersection
would cause delays at the stop-controlled southbound approach to reach unacceptable levels. This
intersection would meet the Caltrans peak hour volume signal warrant. In order to restore acceptable
operating conditions, implement the East of 101 Study mitigation measure.
MM 4.7-7 East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue (East of 101):
New signal installation
Signal interconnection installation
By applying the previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the proposed project?s
less than significant
impact would be at this location. As such, Genentech would be responsible for
funding its fair share to the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of this
measure.
Impact 4.7-8 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersection during the A.M. and
.. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However,
PM
implementation of the identified mitigation measures MM 4.7-8(a)(East of
less than significant.
101) and 4.7-8(b)(new) would reduce this impact to
At the East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersection, even after the implementation of the East of
101 Study mitigation measure, delays at the southbound right-turn and eastbound left-turn movements
would be unacceptably high. In order to restore acceptable operating conditions, the East of 101 and a
new mitigation measure must be implemented:
MM 4.7-8(a) East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (East of 101):
New signal installation
Add one southbound Grandview Avenue right turn lane; add one northbound Grandview
Avenue thru lane (merging back to one lane after 110 feet); re-stripe eastbound East Grand
Avenue to provide one left turn lane and one shared left/through lane.
Signal interconnection installation.
4.7-39
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
MM 4.7-8(b) East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (new):
The westbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured into a right-turn only
lane. The southbound right-turn lane would then be able to become a free right turn, and
shall be striped as such. These reconfigurations would cause the southbound approach to
16
require less green time, creating more available green time for the eastbound approach.
After implementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation measures and the new mitigation
less
measure, the impact at the East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersection would be reduced to
than significant
. During the .. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS B with an average
PM
delay of 14.4 seconds.
Impact 4.7-9 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions
at Produce Avenue/South Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue
intersection during the .. peak hour. This would be a significant impact.
PM
However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-9
less than significant.
(East of 101) would reduce this impact to
Westbound left-turn and southbound through delays at the Produce Avenue/South Airport
Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue intersection are expected to increase significantly with the addition of
project generated traffic. In order to restore acceptable operating conditions, implement the East of 101
Study mitigation measure.
MM 4.7-9 Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue (East of 101):
Widen westbound Airport Boulevard to add one additional left-turn lane and re-stripe the
existing through/left shared lane to a left-turn lane to make it a total of three left-turn lanes.
Modify northbound Produce Avenue to bring the southbound 101 to eastbound Airport
Boulevard traffic to stop at the intersection to eliminate the merging and weaving conflicts on
eastbound Airport Boulevard
New signal installation
By applying the previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the proposed project?s
less than significant
impact would be . As such, Genentech would be responsible for funding its fair
share to the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of this measure.
Impact 4.7-10 Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions
at South Airport/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the .. peak
PM
hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the
identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-10 (East of 101) would reduce this
less than significant.
impact to
16
?Green time? is the amount of green light allotted to any given phase at a traffic signal.
4.7-40
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Southbound right-turn delays at the South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection are
expected to increase significantly with the addition of proposed project generated traffic. In order to
restore acceptable operating conditions, implement the East of 101 Study mitigation measure.
MM 4.7-10 South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (East of 101):
Widen eastbound Airport Boulevard to add one additional right-turn lane; re-stripe the
existing through/left shared lane to a through lane
Widen Mitchell Avenue to add two additional through lanes and a right-turn lane
Widen southbound Gateway to add one right turn lane and change the existing shared
through-right lane to another right-turn lane
New signal installation
By applying the mitigation measure previously identified by the East of 101 Study, the proposed project?s
less than significant
impact would be at this location. As such, Genentech would be responsible for
funding its fair share to the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of this
measure.
Table 4.7-16 summarizes operating conditions for intersections after the implementation of mitigation
measures in the Year 2015 Future Plus Project conditions.
Table 4.7-17 outlines who is responsible for funding the proposed mitigation measures throughout the
MEIR Study Area. It should be noted that at intersections where an ?X? is only present in the ?2015
Future Without Project Mitigations? column, the East of 101 Study has identified a mitigation measure at
an intersections where the proposed project would not create an impact. In these cases, Genentech
would not be responsible to pay a share of the cost of implementing the proposed improvements. In
cases where an ?X? is present in both the ?2015 Future Without Project Mitigations? and ?2015 Plus
Project Mitigations (per East of 101)? columns, the implementation of the East of 101 mitigation
measures is recommended to mitigate cumulative impacts created by the proposed project. In these
cases, Genentech may be responsible to pay its share of the cumulative growth in traffic volumes at the
intersection in question. However, if the intersection is projected to operate at unacceptable conditions
prior to the addition of proposed project generated trips, Genentech would not be responsible to pay for
improvements to the intersection. In cases where an ?X? is present in both the ?2015 Future Without
Project Mitigations? and ?2015 Plus Project Mitigations (Genentech Only)? columns, the
implementation of the East of 101 mitigation measures is not recommended, as it would not mitigate
cumulative impacts created by the proposed project. Instead, the implementation of an alternate
mitigation measure would be required to mitigate the cumulative impacts created by the proposed
project. In these cases, Genentech would be solely responsible for the funding of the alternate mitigation
measure. In cases where an ?X? is present in all three columns, not only is the implementation of the
East of 101 mitigation measures is recommended, but the implementation of an additional mitigation
measure would be required to mitigate cumulative impacts created by the proposed project. In these
cases, Genentech would be responsible to pay its share of the cost of the East of 101 mitigation measure,
as well as fully funding the additional mitigation measure. Lastly, in cases where an ?X? is only present in
4.7-41
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
the ?2015 Plus Project Mitigations (Genentech Only)? column, the proposed project would be solely
responsible for the funding of the necessary improvements.
Table 4.7-16 Mitigation Summary?2015 Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 Future Plus Project with
2015 Future Plus Project with East Alternate/Additional Mitigation
of 101 Mitigation Measures
Intersections
AMPMAMPM
D
1. Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard N/A N/A N/A
(37.2)
D
3. Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue N/A N/A N/A
(47.1)
DD
4. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard — —
(49.6)(51.0)
FDA
N/A
5. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive
(>80)(48.3)(31.7)
D
6. Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard — — N/A
(48.7)
8. Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/US 101 SB Off-Ramp N/A N/A N/A N/A
C
9. Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue N/A N/A N/A
(33.1)
10. Dubuque Avenue/Grand Avenue N/A N/A N/A N/A
13. East Grand Avenue/Gateway Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A
EDD
14. East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard N/A
(61.1)(49.0)(40.1)
BB
15. East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue
N/A N/A
(10.2)(15.8)
BFB
16. East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive N/A
(18.6)(>80)(14.4)
D
17. Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue N/A N/A N/A
(36.0)
C
18. South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard N/A N/A N/A
(34.3)
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
Delay indicates Average Vehicle Delay in seconds.
Bold indicates unacceptable intersection operating conditions.
N/A indicates that a mitigation measure would not be needed. Dashed line indicates that no East of 101 Mitigation is available.
As shown in Table 4.7-17, Genentech would be solely responsible for paying for improvements at the
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection. At the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive
intersection, the proposed East of 101 Study mitigation measure would not mitigate the proposed
project?s impact. Thus, Genentech would be responsible for providing an alternate mitigation measure
and the payment thereof. At the East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard and East
Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersections, the proposed East of 101 mitigation measure, in
conjunction with an additional mitigation measure, would mitigate the project?s impact. As a result,
4.7-42
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Genentech would be responsible for contributing its fair share towards the cost of implementing the
East of 101 mitigation measure, as well as fully funding the proposed additional measure.
Table 4.7-17 Mitigation Responsibility?Year 2015 Conditions
2015 Future Without
2015 Plus Project 2015 Plus Project
Project Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations
Intersection (Not Project Impact) (Genentech Fair Share) (Genentech Only)
1. Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard X — —
3. Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue X X —
4. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard ---- — X
5. Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive X — X
6. Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard X — —
Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/US 101 SB
8.X — —
Off-Ramp
9. Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue X X —
10. Dubuque Avenue/Grand Avenue X — —
13. East Grand Avenue/Gateway Boulevard X — —
East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master
14.X X X
Road/Forbes Boulevard
15. East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue X X —
16. East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive X X X
Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San
17.X X —
Mateo Avenue
South Airport Boulevard/Gateway
18.X X —
Boulevard
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
X indicates responsible party
Threshold Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks
Impact 4.7-11 The project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
less-than-significant
substantial safety risks. This would be a impact.
The MEIR Study Area is located approximately 1.5 miles north of SFIA. The entire MEIR Study Area is
within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) height limits for the SFIA. The proposed project does
not propose any changes that would affect the SFO airport or flight operations and does not propose
less-
any structures of substantial height to interfere with existing airspace or flight patterns. This is a
than-significant
impact.
4.7-43
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Threshold Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.
Specifically, the project would create a significant impact if it would cause the Level of
Service at a freeway segment or freeway ramp to degrade from LOS D to LOS E or
worse, from LOS E to F, or cause an increase in the volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.5 or
more and cause an increase in density by four passenger cars per lane per mile.
Impact 4.7-12 Implementation of the proposed project would result in a volume-to-
capacity increase of 0.05 or more along the already deficient (LOS F) US
101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the southbound direction
during the A.M. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the
P.M peak hour. This would be a significant impact. As potential mitigation
measures to reduce this impact would require approval from outside
significant and unavoidable.
agencies, this impact would remain
2015 Conditions at US 101 Mainline?With and Without Project
Table 4.7-18 presents the 2015 Future Without Project and 2015 Future Plus Project traffic volumes and
levels of service for US 101 study segments (the HCS freeway segment calculation sheets are provided in
Appendix E.
Table 4.7-18 US 101 Segment Conditions?2015 Future Without Project and 2015
Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 Future Without Project 2015 Future Plus Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
US 101 Segment
LOSDensity LOSDensity LOSDensity LOSDensity
North of Oyster Point Boulevard
Northbound Direction D 32.4 F N/A D 33.0 F N/A
Southbound Direction F N/A D 31.2 F N/A D 32.0
North of I-380
Northbound Direction D 26.1 C 24.5 D 30.5 C 25.1
Southbound Direction D 29.5 D 32.6 D 30.1 E 38.2
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile.
Density is not computed when free-flow speed is less than 55 mph. Under LOS F conditions, free-flow speed drops to below 55 mph.
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway segment operating conditions.
As noted in Table 4.7-18 above, in the 2015 Future Without Project conditions, the US 101 segment
north of I-380 is expected to operate at LOS D or better in the 2015 Future Without Project conditions
during both peak hours. The segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard would operate at LOS F in the
southbound direction during the .. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the .. peak
AMPM
hour.
In the 2015 Future Plus Project conditions, the US 101 segment north of I-380 are expected to
deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E in the southbound direction during the .. peak hour with the
PM
4.7-44
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
addition of Project generated traffic. However, as stated earlier, the LOS standard for these freeway
segments has been established as LOS E by the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program.
Conditions at the US 101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard would continue to operate at LOS F
in the southbound direction during the .. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the ..
AMPM
peak hour with the addition of Project generated traffic. Thus, the project would contribute to
.. peak hour traffic volume for
cumulative impacts at these locations. The 2015 Future Plus Project
AM
this segment in the southbound direction (10,008 vehicles) would be greater than the .. peak hour
AM
traffic volume for this segment (9,280 vehicles) in the 2015 Future Without Project condition. The
Project would add about 728 vehicles to the southbound direction of US 101 north of Oyster Point
.. peak hour. During the .. peak hour, 2015 Future Plus Project traffic volume
Boulevard during the
AMPM
for this segment in the northbound direction (10,093 vehicles) would be greater than the Year 2015
Future Without Project conditiontraffic volume for this segment (9,490 vehicles). As such, the proposed
project would add about 603 vehicles to the northbound direction of US 101 north of Oyster Point
.. peak hour.
Boulevard during the
PM
Cumulative impacts to this freeway segment could be considered potentially significant for both peak
hours. According to the significance threshold criteria listed in the Environmental Criteria section, the
proposed project would cause a significant cumulative impact if it would do the following:
Cause an increase (attributable to Project-generated traffic) in volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio of
0.05 or more at freeway mainlines and increase the density (passenger cars per mile per lane) by at
least four at on-ramp/freeway junctions operating at LOS E or F under future baseline conditions
According to the 2015 Future Without Project traffic conditions noted in Table 4.7-17, during the ..
AM
peak hour, the segment of US 101 north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the southbound direction would
operate with a v/c ratio of 1.16. With the addition of Project-generated traffic, the v/c ratio is expected
to increase to 1.25, which represents an increase of 0.09. Therefore, the proposed project would create a
significant cumulative impact along the southbound direction of US 101 north of Oyster Point
Boulevard. Likewise, the addition of Project-generated traffic to the northbound direction of US 101
north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the .. peak hour would create a significant impact because it would
PM
significant and
cause an increase in the v/c ratio of 0.07. Therefore the project would have a
unavoidable impact
.
2015 US 101 On-Ramp Conditions?With and Without Project
Table 4.7-19 shows the 2015 Future Without Project and 2015 Future Plus Project freeway on-ramp
density, and the corresponding levels of service. As shown, all off-ramps would operate at LOS D or
.. and .. peak hours under both scenarios. Although the addition of the
better during the weekday
AMPM
Project-generated vehicle trips to the freeway mainlines and on-ramps would result in an increase in the
density at the freeway mainline/on-ramp junctions, all locations would continue to operate with
less-than-significant
acceptable conditions. The project would have a impact.
4.7-45
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
Table 4.7-19 US 101 On-Ramp Conditions?2015 Future Without Project and 2015
Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 Future Without Project 2015 Future Plus Project
AMPeakHourPMPeakHourAMPeakHourPMPeakHour
US 101 Segment
LOSDensity LOSDensity LOSDensity LOSDensity
US 101 NB from Oyster Point Boulevard B 11.3 B 19.7 B 11.7 C 23.3
US 101 SB from Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque
B 10.4 B 15.3 B 10.5 B 16.5
Avenue
US 101 NB from Grand Avenue/Airport Boulevard B 17.8 B 21.3 B 18.1 C 22.5
US 101 NB from South Airport Boulevard B 19.1 C 21.7 B 19.1 C 21.7
US 101 SB from Produce Avenue B 17.2 C 25.2 B 17.9 D 29.1
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS = Level of Service
Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile.
Density is not computed when free-flow speed is less than 55 mph.
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway on-ramp operating conditions.
2015 US 101 Off-Ramp Conditions?With and Without Project
Table 4.7-20 shows the freeway off-ramp levels of service, and the ramp capacity utilizations for the 2015
Future Without Project and 2015 plus Project conditions. As shown, all off-ramps provide sufficient
.. and .. peak hours under both scenarios.
capacity for queued vehicles during the weekday
AMPM
Although the addition of the project-generated vehicle trips to the freeway off-ramps and the adjacent
local intersections would result in an increase in the queues along the off-ramps, all locations would
continue to operate with acceptable conditions and the off-ramps would be long enough to
accommodate the projected queues. It should be noted that although the approach to the intersection of
Oyster Point and the US 101 flyover would operate at LOS E and F in the future, the off-ramp
operations would not be substantially affected.
One method to try to minimize the proposed project?s effect on freeway segment operations would be to
implement a more aggressive TDM program. Although the TDM program in place for Genentech can be
seen as aggressive due to the availability of transit throughout the area, 92.5 percent of trips are still via
automobile. It is possible to reduce this number by implementing the programs discussed in the
Regulatory Framework (Section 4.7.2): shuttle service improvements, shuttle facility improvements,
parking cash-outs, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements. This aggressive TDM program would
assume that transit and carpool usage would double. Although this method would reduce the proposed
project?s effect on freeway segment operations, the increase in the v/c ratio would remain above 0.05
during both peak hours. Other mitigation possibilities include a ramp metering program, widening of the
freeway, the addition of auxiliary travel lanes, or the improvement of parallel local roadways. However,
any of these possibilities would require approval from outside agencies. Therefore, feasible mitigation
measures cannot be developed.
..
The proposed project?s impact at the US 101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard in both the
AM
significant and unavoidable
.. (northbound) peak hour is .
(southbound) and
PM
4.7-46
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Table 4.7-20 US 101 Off-Ramp Conditions?2015 Future Without Project and 2015
Future Plus Project Conditions
2015 Future Without Project 2015 Future Plus Project
AMPeakHourPMPeakHourAMPeakHourPMPeakHour
LOS Ramp LOS Ramp LOS Ramp LOS Ramp
(Approach Capacity (Approach Capacity (Approach Capacity (Approach Capacity
US 101 Segment
Delay) Utilization Delay) Utilization Delay) Utilization Delay) Utilization
US 101 SB to Airport
D (36.9) 15.7% D (35.9) 32.6% D (36.9) 15.7% D (37.3) 32.6%
Boulevard
US 101 SB flyover to
E (76.1) 31.2% D (37.0) 5.6% F (> 80) 53.6% D (37.0) 5.6%
Oyster Point Boulevard
US 101 NB to Oyster
B (13.3) 55.1% D (37.1) 49.2% B (14.5) 65.0% D (43.6) 55.1%
Point/Dubuque
US 101 SB to Airport
B (18.7) 48.6% C (24.6) 39.3% B (17.7) 57.9% C (24.5) 41.7%
Boulevard/Miller Avenue
US 101 NB to East
A (0.0) 0% A (0.0) 0% A (0.0) 0% A (0.0) 0%
Grand/Executive Drive
US 101 SB to South
C (22.7) 24.4% C (27.0) 21.7% C (22.7) 24.5% C (24.9) 21.7%
Airport/Produce Avenue
US 101 NB to South
B (18.9) 69.2% D (37.0) 33.5% B (19.8) 87.1% D (37.3) 37.9%
Airport Boulevard
SOURCE: Korve Engineering 2006
LOS=Level of Service
Bold indicates unacceptable freeway off-ramp operating conditions.
Threshold Substantially increase transit demand that could not be accommodated by existing or
planned transit capacity, resulting in unacceptable levels of transit service
Impact 4.7-13 Implementation of the proposed project would not cause an increase in
transit use that is substantial in relation to existing transit conditions. This
less than significant
impact is .
2015 Transit Conditions?With and Without Project
Based on the Genentech mode split survey results, about 5.3 percent of all trips generated by Genentech
developments use transit and the associated shuttles to travel to and from work (Table 4.7-1). Based on
the amount of development proposed as part of the proposed project, there would be an increase of
about 135 transit trips during the .. peak hour (120 inbound and 15 outbound), and 125 transit trips
AM
during the .. peak hour (20 inbound and 105 outbound).
PM
Assuming the same trip distribution used for automobile trips, these new transit trips would be spread
throughout the various local and regional transit operators within the area, including SamTrans, Caltrain,
BART, and the proposed new WTA ferry service to Oyster Point. SamTrans would be likely to carry the
bulk of transit trips to and from the Peninsula, which would represent up to 53 trips during the .. peak
AM
hour (47 inbound and 6 outbound), and up to 50 transit trips during the .. peak hour (8 inbound and
PM
42 outbound). Since SamTrans runs 17 buses during the .. peak hour and 16 during the .. peak
AMPM
hour, the average load per bus would increase by no more than 3 project-generated transit trips in any
4.7-47
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
given direction during either peak hour. Caltrain would carry passengers to and from the South Bay,
.. peak hour (8 inbound and 1 outbound), and up to 9
which would represent up to 9 trips during the
AM
transit trips during the .. peak hour (2 inbound and 7 outbound). Caltrain runs two trains per hour to
PM
the South San Francisco BART Station during both peak hours, so the average load per train would
increase by no more than 4 project-generated transit trips. BART can be expected to carry the vast
.. peak
majority of the remainder of transit trips, which could represent as many as 73 trips during the
AM
hour (65 inbound and 8 outbound), and up to 66 transit trips during the .. peak hour (11 inbound and
PM
55 outbound). Since BART runs four trains during either peak hour to the South San Francisco BART
Station, the average load per train would increase by no more than 16 project-generated transit trips in
any given direction during either peak hour. As such, the addition of the Project-related transit trips
would not result in a substantial increase in transit ridership for any one provider.
It is anticipated that the majority of these transit riders would use the Genentech shuttle or one of the
other shuttle systems to travel between the campus and the nearby transit stations.
Genentech is currently undergoing a review, reorganization, and expansion of their shuttle system. As
part of this effort, new shuttle vehicles and increased service levels are being proposed. When
implemented, the enhanced shuttles should be sufficient to address the future ridership demand. In
addition, the shuttle program would allow for expansions to meet demand levels, so that all riders could
less than significant
be accommodated. This impact is .
Threshold Reduce parking supply such that parking demand cannot be accommodated. Cause
an unmet parking demand that would result in other adverse effects, such as
hazardous conditions caused by illegally parked vehicles, or secondary traffic impacts
due to vehicles circling and looking for parking spaces.
Impact 4.7-14 Implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate
parking capacity. This impact is less than significant.
2015 Parking Conditions?With and Without Project
As part of the proposed project, the number of parking spaces serving Genentech will increase from
5,525 to 10,874. Parking demand for the 2015 Future Plus Project condition was calculated using rates
provided by Genentech (based on land use categories), described earlier. Using the calculated parking
demand, the expected parking lot occupancy associated with the buildout of the project was determined
and is presented in Table 4.7-21.
As shown in Table 4.7-21, Genentech is expected to create a daily parking demand of approximately
10,204 spaces in the 2015 Future Plus Project condition, which represents approximately 94 percent of
the total available parking supply. Thus, the number of parking spaces made available as part of the
buildout of the proposed project would accommodate the expected increase in peak hour parking
demand. At specific locations, such as Mid Campus and Upper Campus, the projected parking demand
would exceed capacity. As a result, the excess vehicles would be expected to either park in less utilized
lots, or park in the Gateway Campus lot and access the main campus via one of the Campus shuttles.
4.7-48
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
Table 4.7-21 Genentech Parking Demand?Year 2015 Future Plus Project Conditions
Existing 2015 Plus Project
Parking Location
Parking Supply Parking Demand Capacity Utilization Parking Supply Parking Demand Capacity Utilization
Lower Campus2,224 1,918 86% 5,318 2,877 54%
West Campus136 0 0% 2,736 2,646 97%
Mid Campus 1,436 876 61% 1,100 1,310 119%
Upper Campus1,729 1,657 96% 1,720 3,371 196%
Total 5,525 4,451 81% 10,874 10,204 94%
Neither the proposed project buildout nor the proposed improvements to the surrounding traffic
less
network would increase hazards due to design features or incompatible uses. Thus, the impact is
than significant.
Threshold Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)
Impact 4.7-15 Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase
hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). This impact is
less than significant.
Design Impacts
The development of the proposed project uses would be similar uses which are compatible and
complimentary to the existing surrounding uses on the Genentech campus. The proposed development
would not include any uses that would be hazardous to existing uses.
The MEIR Study Area would be served primarily by Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue,
with connections to Gull Drive, Forbes Boulevard, and Grandview Drive. During morning and evening
peak commute periods, the MEIR Study Area and local access roads would likely experience a
concentration of vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle activity.
The design of MEIR Study Area access points and on-site roads and circulation system is not anticipated
to include any design features that would result in a substantial increase in vehicular or pedestrian
hazards. Pedestrian corridors would be provided throughout the campus and designated parking areas.
Proper design of parking facilities would seek to separate and control potential conflicts and to reduce
possible congestion and areas of constraint. Well-designed crosswalks, traffic calming measures (speed
reducing strategies) and secure bicycle parking facilities would be provided as part of the design to ensure
overall access and circulation operational safety.
Genentech will have overall responsibility for the design and construction of the proposed project, and
will ensure conformance with traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle safety City standards. The project design
plans would be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineering Department to ensure compliance with all
vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle accessibility and design requirements.
4.7-49
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
Chapter 4 Environmental Analysis
In consideration of the project?s compatibility with surrounding uses and the incorporation of design
less than
features to ensure traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle safety, the project impact would be
significant
.
Threshold Result in inadequate emergency access
Impact 4.7-16 Implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate
emergency access. This impact is less than significant.
Emergency Access
Emergency vehicle access to the MEIR Study Area would be from Oyster Point Boulevard and East
Grand Avenue, with connections to Gull Drive, Forbes Boulevard, and Grandview Drive. The onsite
roadway infrastructure and parking areas are currently and would continue to be designed to
accommodate emergency vehicle access. Vehicle access drives to/from and within the MEIR Study Area
are currently and would continue to be designed to meet the City of South San Francisco design
requirements for emergency vehicle accessibility. Genentech will have overall responsibility for the
design and construction of the proposed project, and will ensure conformance with City standards. The
project design plans would be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineering Department to ensure
compliance with all accessibility and design requirements.
In consideration of the incorporated design features to ensure adequate emergency access, the project
less-than-significant
would have a impact upon emergency access..
Threshold Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)
Impact 4.7-17 Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks). This impact is less than significant.
ConflictswithAdoptedAlternativeTransportationPolicies,Plans,orPrograms
Based on the Genentech mode split survey results, bicycles and pedestrians trips currently make up less
than 1 percent of the current mode share. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Project would not
substantially increase bicycle and pedestrian travel in the area. There are currently (and proposed)
pedestrian and bicycle facilities on the major streets that serve the Genentech campus (such as Oyster
Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue). As such, the new activity generated by the Project could be
accommodated without resulting in significant impacts to operations.
In consideration of the fact that the project would include TDM, would be designed to accommodate
and encourage bicycle and pedestrian connections and access/use throughout the Genentech Campus,
the project would result in a less than significant effect upon these alternative transportation modes.
Since the City has a TDM ordinance and requires implementation of TDM programs, development of
4.7-50
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR
4.7 Transportation and Circulation
less-than-significant
the project would result in a impact on alternative transportation as the project is
expected to exceed the City?s TDM requirements.
4.7.4References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2005. Traffic Volumes on California Highways.
Website source: www.dot.ca.gov/hp/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/index.htm.
City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. Final Congestion Management
Program for 2005. 2005.
Dyett & Bhatia. 2003. Transportation Element. City of South San Francisco General Plan. Adopted
October 13, 1999. Updated and amended December 2003.
South San Francisco, City of. 2003. East of 101 Transportation Improvement Plan. City of South San
Francisco Amended General Plan Policy 4.2-I-6. Updated and amended December 2003.
4.7-51
Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR