HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 18-2007
RESOLUTION NO. 18-2007
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CERTIFYING THE MASTER
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
GENENTECH CORPORATE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT
EXPANSION AND MASTER PLAN UPDATE, MEIR05-0004
WHEREAS, Genentech, Inc. has sublnitted a request to the City of South San
Francisco to approve the "Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan" update ("Master Plan
Update"), including an Implementation Plan, as well as a Transportation Delnand
Management Plan, an amendment to the Zoning Map to reclassify ten parcels totaling
approximately 36 acres in the Planned Industrial Zoning District to the Genentech Research
& Development Overlay District, and amendlnents to Chapters 20.39 and 20.40 of the South
San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC); and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco Planning COlnlnission held duly noticed
study sessions on Septelnber 7, 2006, September 21, 2006, October 5, 2006, and October 19,
2006; and
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco Planning Comlnission held duly noticed
public hearings February 1,2007, February 15,2007, and March 1,2007; and
WHEREAS, a Final Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) for the
Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and
Master Plan Update was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California
Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code SS 21000, et seq.), attached to
this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Master Enviromnental Impact Report (DMEIR) was circulated
for a 45-day public/agency review period beginning on August 28, 2006 and ending on
October 11, 2006. Public notice of availability of the Draft Master Enviromnental hnpact
Report was published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed to agencies. In
addition, all persons who had requested notification were Inailed a notice; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared responses to COlnments on environmental issues
received during the public review period and at the public hearing, which responses clarify,
amplify, and make minor corrections to the information contained in the DMEIR, providing
good faith reasoned analysis supported by factual information. The comments were published
in the FMEIR, dated February 9, 2007, and were distributed to or otherwise made available
to the City Council, the Planning Commission, responsible agencies, and other interested
parties; and
WHEREAS, a Partially Revised Draft Master Enviromnental Impact Report
(PRDMEIR) was prepared for the project, and was available for public review and COlnlnent
for 45 days beginning on Decelnber 11, 2006 and ending on January 25, 2007, described as
follows:
a. Chapter 4.7, Transportation and Circulation of the August 23, 2006 DMEIR
was revised and recirculated per CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which
requires the lead agency to recirculate an EIR if significant new infonnation is
added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the Draft
EIR for public review, but before certification.
b. The PRDMEIR was prepared and issued in response to a request from the
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to determine the 95th percentile
vehicle queuing on the approaches to three study intersections, including an
off-ralnp frOln the u.s. 101 freeway. Caltrans' Inain concern was that off-
ramp traffic not queue back onto the freeway mainline during peak traffic
periods. To provide Caltrans the Inost accurate queuing evaluation, a different
software package was used to evaluate the three subject intersections than had
been used to evaluate all other intersections in the study. Thus, updated levels
of service using the new software were incorporated into the revised
circulation section. The revised section identifies potentially significant
impacts to traffic and that were not identified in the DMEIR; and
WHEREAS, the Planning COlll1nission held a public hearing on October 5, 2006 on
the DMEIR and on February 1, 2007, and February 15, 2007, considered the FMEIR,
including the recirculated Chapter 4.7. The Planning Commission received written and oral
comlnents on the DMEIR and written COlnlnents on the PRDMEIR from the public,
responsible agencies, and other governmental and private organizations; and
WHEREAS, staff reports, dated October 5,2006, February 1,2007, and February 15,
2007, and incorporated herein by reference, were prepared for distribution to the Planning
COlnmission for review, which reports describe and analyze the DMEIR and PRDMEIR, the
reclassification of ten parcels, and the amendlnents to the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the findings and detenninations contained herein constitute the
independent judgInent and analysis of the City Council and are supported by substantial
evidence in the entire record, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San
Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental doculnents supporting the
General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update
enviromnental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; COlnments received on
the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations
submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board
meeting of October 17, 2006; Planning Commission Ineetings, including minutes, staff
reports, and consultant reports, "of February 1,2007, February 15,2007, and March 1,2007;
City Council meeting, including minutes, staff reports and consultant reports, of March 14,
2007.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and
correct and Inade a part of this Resolution, and the City Council of the City of South San
Francisco hereby adopts the following findings, based on the entire record for the Genentech
Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General
Plan adopted in 1999 and enviromnental documents supporting the General Plan; the
Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental iInpact
report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; COlnments received on the draft environmental
impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations sublnitted in connection with
the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board Ineeting of October 17, 2006;
Planning Commission meetings, including Ininutes, staff reports, and consultant reports, of
February 1, 2007, February 15, 2007, and March 1, 2007; City Council meeting, including
minutes, staff reports and consultant reports, of March 14, 2007:
I. General Findings
1. Doculnents and other Inaterial constituting the record of the proceedings upon which
the City's decision and its findings are based, are located at the Planning Department
of the City of South San Francisco, in the custody of Chief Planner, Susy Kalkin.
2. The proposed project is consistent and cOlnpatible with all elelnents in the City of
South San Francisco General Plan. The 1999 General Plan includes policies and
programs that are designed to encourage the developlnent of high technology
campuses in the East of 101 Area, allow for elnployee-serving vendor services,
preparation of a TDM plan and traffic improvement plan to reduce congestion
ilnpacts, and provision of a framework for requiring future circulation systeln
improvelnents as they are needed to prevent deficient levels of service frOln being
reached.
II. Environmental Impact Report
As required by CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, SS 21000, et seq.), the following
findings are Inade in support of approval of the Final Master Environmental Impact Report
(FMEIR) and Statelnent of Overriding Considerations, based on the entire record for the
Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco
General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the
Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact
report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental
impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with
the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board Ineeting of October 17, 2006;
Planning Commission meetings, including minutes, staff reports, and consultant reports, of
February 1, 2007, February 15, 2007, and March 1, 2007; City Council meeting, including
minutes, staff reports and consultant reports, of March 14, 2007:
1. Pursuant to CEQA, the adoption of the South San Francisco General Plan and
certification of the South San Francisco General Plan EIR on October 13, 1999,
included findings that addressed significant and potentially significant environmental
impacts of the South San Francisco General Plan Update and measures to Initigate
those impacts. All findings from the October 13, 1999 hearing are hereby restated in
their entirety and incorporated herein by reference to support adoption of the
proposed proj ect.
2. A Notice of Preparation was prepared on Decelnber 15, 2005, published in a
newspaper of general circulation, and Inailed to responsible agencies, public agencies
having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, and other
interested parties.
3. The DMEIR and the PRDMEIR for Chapter 4.7 were prepared for the proposed
project. Two Notices of Completion were filed with the State Secretary of Resources
State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2005072165) on August 23, 2006, and Decelnber 11,
2006, respectively.
4. The FMEIR for this project, dated February 9, 2007, has been completed in
cOlnpliance with CEQA, and consists of and incorporates the DMEIR, dated August
23, 2006, the PRDMEIR, dated Decelnber 11, 2006.
5. The FMEIR was presented to the City Council and the City Council reviewed and
considered the infonnation contained in the FMEIR prior to taking action on this
matter.
6. The project will result in some significant and potentially significant enviromnental
impacts, Inost of which can be Initigated to a less-than-significant level through
mitigation measures required as part of the project. As required by CEQA, specific
findings regarding significant effects and proposed mitigation, as well as project
alternatives, are discussed in Exhibit B, and incorporated herein by reference. Where
significant impacts related to the project cannot be sufficiently mitigated, a Statelnent
of Overriding Considerations has been prepared, attached hereto as Exhibit C and
incorporated herein by reference. Additionally, a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program has been prepared and incorporated into the FMEIR, attached to
this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of South San
Francisco does hereby:
Certify, in accordance with the California Enviromnental Quality Act, the Final
Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) for the Genentech Corporate
Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan
Update, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by
reference, as well as the following findings assessing significant impacts, mitigation,
and alternatives associated with the project:
a. Findings regarding significant itl1pacts, l11itigation, and project
alternatives, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by
reference;
b. A statement of overriding considerations, attached hereto as Exhibit C
and incorporated herein by reference;
c. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prograll1 (MMRP), incorporated
into the FMEIR and attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by reference.
*
*
*
*
*
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted
by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular l11eeting held on the 14th
day of March 2007 by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers Mark N. Addiego, Joseph A. Fernekes and Karvl Matsumoto,
Vice Mayor Pedro Gonzalez and Mayor Richard A. Garbarino
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
EXHIBIT A
Final Master Environmental Impact Report and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
-8-
Volume 1'8
Final Master Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2005072165
Prepared for
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, California 94080
Prepared by
EIP Associates
12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
Los Angeles, California 90025
February 9/2007
-10-
Contents
Volume IB: Final Environmental Impact Report
rnAP"IER. 7 Introduction..... ............................................ ..... ......................... ......... .............. 7-1
7. 1 Overview ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7-1
7.2 Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report-Revised
Section 4.7 (Transportation and Circulation) .. .... .. .. . . . . .. .. '" . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... 7-1
7.3 Use of the Final MEIR.. ................. ..... ... ........ ..... .... ..... ... .... ...... ....... .....7-2
rnAP"IER. 8 Response to Comments ....... ............. ........... ........................................ .............. 8-1
8 . 1 Overview ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8-1
8.1.1 Partial Revision of the Draft MEIR-Section 4.7 (Transportation and
Circulation) ........................................................................... 8-1
8.2 Individual Response to Comments........................................................... 8-2
rnAP"IER.9 Text Changes ..... ............... ....... .................... ........... ......... ....... ...........................9-1
9. 1 Format of Text changes ........................................................................ 9-1
9. 2 Text Changes....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9-1
9.2. 1 Executive Sumlnary .....................................:........................... 9-1
9.2.2 Project Description.. . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .... . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. 9-4
9.2.3 Biological Resources................................................................. 9-5
9.2.4 Air Quality............................................................................ 9-5
9.2.5 Noise and Vibration................................................................. 9-6
9.2.6 Geology and Soils.................................................................... 9-6
9.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials..... .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . . . . .. .... 9 - 7
9.2.8 Transportation and Circulation.. ... .. . ...... .. ....................... . ............ 9-7
9.2.9 Land Use........... ..... ............. ..... ............ ......... ... .... ..... .... ........9-7
9.2.10 Aesthetics.............................................................................. 9-8
9.2.11 Cultural Resources................................................................... 9-8
9.2. 12 Population, Employment, and Housing ......................................... 9-8
9.2. 1 3 Public Services.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 - 9
9.2.14 Utilities and Service Systems. .. .... .... ............ ....... ......... ........ ........ 9-9
9.2.15 Other CEQA Considerations..................................................... 9-1 0
CHAPTER 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program............................................ 10-1
10.1 Introduction.....................................................................................1 0-1
10.2 Purpose...........................................................................................1 0-1
10.3 Responsibilities and Duties..... .... .. " . . . .. ... ... ...... .. . .. . .. ......... .. ...... . ... . .... .. . 10-1
10.4 List of Mitigation Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10- 2
CHAPTER 11 Updated Report Preparers ............................ ......... ......... ....................... .... ..... 11-1
Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update iii
-12-
Contents
Tab I es
Table 8-1
Table 10-1
List of Agencies and Persons Submitting Comments.............................................. 8-2
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix. ... ........ ..... ... ... ............ ...... .10-3
iv Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
-13-
CHAPTER 7
Introduction
7.1 OVERVIEW
Before approving a project, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the Lead Agency to
prepare and certify a Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR). The contents of a Final EIR are
specified in Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that:
The Final EIR shall consist of:
a. The Draft EIR or a revision of the Draft.
b. Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary.
c. A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR
d. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and
consultation process.
e. Any other information added by the Lead Agency.
In summary, this Final Master EIR (MEIR) consists of three volumes, including:
II Volume 1- Draft MEIR for Genentech Research and Development Overlay District
Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
II Volume lA- Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR) Revised
Section 4.7 - Traffic and Circulation
II Volume IB-Final MEIR Text Changes, Responses to Comments, Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, and Updated Report Preparers
II Volume 2-Technical Appendices to the Draft MEIR
The determination that the City of South San Francisco ("City") is the "lead agency" is made in accordance
with Sections 15051 and 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, which defme the lead agency as the public agency
that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. The Lead Agency must provide
each agency that commented on the Draft MEIR with a copy of the Lead Agency' proposed response at least
10 days before certifying the Final EIR.
7.2 PARTIALLY REVISED DRAFT MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT-REVISED SECTION 4.7 (TRANSPORTATION AND
CIRCULATION)
In the course of preparing responses to comments, and in discussions vvith agencies, it became apparent that
it was necessary to clarify the traffic and circulation impacts. As a result of discussions with the California
Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"), as well as a comment letter from Calrrans dated October 6,
2006, the City determined that a clarification of the traffic-related impacts was necessary to be consistent
Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 7 - 1
-14-
7 Introduction
with other regional projects. To this end, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c), on December
11, 2006 the City recirculated a Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report Revised
Section 4.7 - Traffic and Circulation (PRDMEIR) for public review and comment. Comments received
regarding the PRDMEIR, and responses to those comments, are included in this Final MEIR.
7.3 USE OF THE FINAL MEIR
The Final MEIR allows the public and the City an opportunity to review revisions to the Draft MEIR, the
response to comments, and other components of the MEIR, such as the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, prior to approval of the project. The Final MEIR serves as the environmental document
to support approval of the proposed project, either in whole or in part, if the project is approved.
After completing the Final MEIR, and before approving the project, the Lead Agency must make the
following three certifications, as required by Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidelines:
iii The Final EIR has been completed in compliance Virith CEQA
III The Final EIR was presented to the deCision-making body of the Lead Agency, and that the decision-
making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project
fII The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis
As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, no public agency shall approve or can-y out a
project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of
the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those
significant effects , accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding supported by
substantial evidence in the record. The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project wbich avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technologica~ or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures
or project alternatives identified in the final ErR.
These certifications and the Findings of Fact are included in a separate Findings document. Both the Final
EIR and the Findings are submitted to the City for consideration of the proposed project.
7 -2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
-15-
CHAPTER 8
Response to Comments
8.1 OVERVIEW
The Draft Master EIR for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate
Facilities Master Plan Update was circulated for review and comment by the public and other interested
parties, agencies, and organizations for a 45-day public review period that began on August 28, 2006, and
concluded on October 11, 2006. During the public review period, four vvritten comment letters on the
Draft MEIR and the proposed project were received by the City, in addition to oral comments received
during the October 5, 2006 public hearing.
During the public review period, copies of the Draft MEIR were distributed to public agencies through the
State of California, Office of Planning and Research. In addition, the Draft MEIR was available for public
review during normal business hours at the City of South San Francisco Economic and Community
Development Department and the South San Francisco Main Library.
A pubnc hearing was held on October 5, 2006, in the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South
San Fr.ancisco, CA 94080, during which the public was given the opportunity to provide comments on the
Draft MEIR. One member of the public provided oral comments. In addition, several City of South San
Francisco Planning Commissioners presented oral comments on the proposed project and the Draft MEIR
during the public hearing. .
8.1.1
PARTIAL REVISION OF THE DRAFT MEIR-SECTION 4.7 (TRANSPORTATION
AND CIRCULATION)
As a means of providing clarification and in response to comments received on the Draft MEIR, the City
determined that a partial revision of the Draft MEIR (PRDMEIR) was warranted, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088.5. As such the City circulated for public review and comments a new and revised
analysis of Section 4.7 , Traffic and Circulation on December 11, 2006 for a 45 -day public review period,
which closed on January 25, 2007. During public review, two comment letters were received on the
PRDMEIR, which are incorporated into this FMEIR as letter R-A and R-B, as described below.
Table 8-1 provides the following information: (1) the reference code used to identify the commenter; and
(2) a comprehensive list of commenters.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distrid Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8- 1
- 16-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Comment Reference Commenting ,Agency/Person I Date of Comment Type of Comment
A California Department of Fish and Game 09/19/06 L
8 California Public Utilities Commission 09/19/06 L
C City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County 09/22/06 L
D California Department of Transportation 10/06/06 L
E Planning Commissioner Teglia 10/05/06 0
F Planning Commissioner Prouty 10/05/06 0
G Planning Commissioner Zemke 10/05/06 0
H Jackie Williams, Resident City of South San Francisco 10/05/06 0
COMMENTS ON THE PRDMEIR
R-A California Department of Transportation 01/24/07 L
R-B California Department of Transportation 01/25/07 L
L = Letter; 0 = Oral
The complete text of the written and oral comments-and the City's response to environmental issues
raised in those comments-is presented in this chapter. A copy of each comment letter is followed by its
response(s).
8.2 INDIVIDUAL RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The follovving section contains all of the responses to individual comments received on the Draft MEIR,
isolated by individual commenter. All of the original comment letters, in their entirety, are provided before
the responses. Pursuant to CEQA, the purpose of the Draft MEIR is to evaluate the significance of physical
changes in the environment resulting from approval of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay
District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update. See, for example, CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064(d). See also CEQA Guidelines Section 15358(b) (impacts analyzed in an EIR must be "related
to a physical change" in the environment). Therefore, consistent with Sections 15088(a) and 15088(b) of the
CEQA Guidelines, comments that raise significant environmental issues are provided with responses. No
responses to comments that do not address a physical change in the environment that could result from
approval of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities
Master Plan Update are provided. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 (lead agency shall prepare responses
to comments on "environmental issues"). Comments that are outside of the scope of CEQA review but
include anecdotal evidence or opinion V\rill be forwarded for consideration to the decision-makers as part of
the project approval process. All comments will be considered by the decision-makers of the City when
making a decision on the project.
8-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
-17-
State of California - The Resources Aoencv
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
http://www.dfg.ca.gov
POST OFFICE BOX 47
YOUNTVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94599
(707) 944-5500
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Governor
A
September 19, 2006
......, ! 1(;1 4r-~ nr,'1 T~ T~q 1ir~)
R~~~_r.~.:!JJ.. ~ Jt,-j,1i\..'"
SEP 1 9,2006
Mr. Michael Lappen
City of South San Francisco Planning Division
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
. r ~ Tf, --'iN" ,,"""'i tl~ 1lJ.'Ip'!-'ifl
,PLAil..l~l\l1Ll.',u It.li'~~ .IlL..
Dear Mr. Lappen:
Subject: City of South San Francisco Genetech Research and Development OverJay
District Expansion/Corporate FacHities, South San Francisco, San Mateo
County, SCH# 2005072165
The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has reviewed the document for the subject
project. Please be advised this project may result in changes to fish and wildlife
resources as described in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
Section 753.5(d)(1 )(A)-(G). Therefore, a de minimis determination is not appropriate,
and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code Section
7:11.4(d)"'shoi.Jld be :paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing of the Notice
of Determination for this project.
Plea$e note that the above comment is only in regard to the need to pay the
environmental filing fee and is not a comment by DFG on the significance of project
impacts or any proposed mitigation measures.
1
2
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Dave Johnston, Environmental Scientist, at
(831) 466-0234 or Mr. Scott Wilson, Habitat Conservation Supervisor, at (707) 944-5584.
/l;~~
Robert W. Floerke '
Regional Manager
Central Coast Region
CC:,,: State: Clearinghouse
,.~ ,. .
.. r. ". ; l' ..',:J:" ,: ~..;
,..,'.-
" '!'f'
..~. .::::. "~~: :. ~
II', .' .,,;
. ~. . -....,
Conserving Ca[ifomia)s Wi[cf[ife Since 1870
~
-18-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter A
Letter ]rom Robert W. Floerke, Regional Manager, Central Coast Region, California Department of Fish and Game,
received September 19, 2006
A-7
The comment is acknowledged. The City will comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
Section 753.5(d)(1)(A)-(G), and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4(d) will be paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing the Notice of
Determination for the proposed project.
A-2
Comment noted and no further response is required.
8-4
Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate
- 19-
Master Plan Update
State of California - The Resources Aoencv
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
http://www.dfg.ca.gov
POST OFFICE BOX 47
YOUNTVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94599
(707) 944~5500
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Governor
A
September 19 t 2006
ffi.1Il\~'1 r1E~ " l"\TfflJ)
.At~L ifl~.'" .:kl. ~l_"""l.:u.,..
SEP 1 9,2006
Mr. Michael Lappen
City of South San Francisco Planning Division
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
'I .,....,..,.. .- ",""\ !.~'~"[Sf'\V\
,PLftaI'fI\\ JLN \Jr )Lu' .GlJ./.i. li."
Dear Mr. Lap'pen:
Subject: City of South San Francisco Genetech Research and Development Overlay
DIstrict Expansion/Corporate Facilities, South San Francisco, San Mateo
County, SCH# 2005072165
The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has reviewed the document for the subject
project. Please be advised this project may result in changes to fish and wildlife
resources as described in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
Section 753.5(d)(1 )(A)-(G). Therefore, a de minimis determination is not appropriate,
and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code Section
T11.4(dfshould be :paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing of the Notice
of Determination for this project.
Please note that the above comment is only in regard to the need to pay the
environmental filing fee and is not a comment by DFG on the significance of project
impacts or any proposed mitigation measures.
1
2
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Dave Johnston, Environmental Scientist, at
(831) 466-0234 or Mr. Scott Wilson, Habitat Conservation Supervisor, at (707) 944-5584.
llerelY, :- .
/ts:O. ~____
Robert W. Floerke '
Regional Manager
Central Coast Region
.. "
CC:',: state" CleaiinghoLise
. ~ . l ': " . .. ~ : .
..... '. ; .' ,/.. . ....
, .'
ow'.' " ~ ~.... .
. " .
-.
.' I .
.' .', .
" t('
"
..~ .' ':. ~ ~.::.
. t' "...
: . I". .' .'
. ;.. ~ .. .;
Conserving Ca[ifomiaJs Wi[cf[ife Since 1870
~
-20-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter A
Letter ]rom Robert vv. Floerke) Regional Manager) Central Coast Region) California Department if Fish and Game)
received September 19) 2006
A-l
The comment is acknowledged. The City will comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
Section 753.5(d)(l)(A)-(G), and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4(d) will be paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing tl1e Notice of
Determination for tl1e proposed project.
A-2
Comment noted and no further response is required.
8-4 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist - 21 :>ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
nATE OF CALIFORNIA
:lUBLlC UTILITIES COMMISSION
iDS vm NESS AVENUE
;AN FRANCISCO, CA 94102.3298
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor
B
September 18, 2006
Rl!;c'g~
, J[!:IV~h.
~.!t./tJ
SEPI9-"
~V06
PL;tlV!tTf'" ,
, 1 ~-lflv~~ ''''Ii h>"
U if);;;v,' ~~'I'N
.i/J_1,1;['" 1...
Michael Lappen
,City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
So. San Francisco, CA 94080
Dear:Mr. Lappen: ,
Re: SCB #2005072165; Genentech Researh & Development, etc.
As the state agency responsible for rail safety within California, we recommend that any
development projects planned adjacent to or near the rail conido! in the County be planned with 1
the safety of the rail corridor in mind. New developments may increase traffic volumes not only on
streets and at intersections, but also at at-grade highway-rail crossings. This includes considering
pedestrian circulation patterns/destinations with respect to railroad right-of-way.
, Safet)rJacfors'to, consider include, but are not limited to, the planning for grade separations for I
'major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade highway-rail crossings due to increase in 2
traffic volumes and appropriate fen~g to'limit the access of trespassers onto the railroad right-of-
way.
The above~mentioned safety improvements should be considered when approval is sought for the I
' new development. Working with Commission staff early in the conceptual design phase will help, 3
improve the safety to motorists and pedestrians in the County.
If you have any questions in this matter~ please call me at (415) 703-2795.
Very trul. y y. ours,~
~1'~ ' /1
71~~.
Kevin Boles
Utilities Engineer
Rail Crossings Engineering Section
Consumer Protectiori-,and,Safety.Div:isi()ll" .'"
. ",-' ',!. '::'or,
cc: 'Pat:Kerr, UP
-22-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter B
Letter from Kevin Boles, Utilities Enaineer, Rail CrossinBs EnBeneerina Section, Consumer Protection and Scifety
Division, California Public Utilities Commission, received September 19, 2006
B-1
This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information, and is not a direct
comment on the content or adequacy of the Draft Master ErR for the Genentech Research and Development
Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update. Therefore, no further response is
required.
B-2
As no active railway right-of-ways will be impacted or affected by the proposed project, these safety
Ineasures would not apply to the proposed project. The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to
the decision-makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project.
B-3
Please refer to response to B-2. The comment is aclmowledged and V\Till be forwarded to the decision-
makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project.
8-6
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist:.?: ~J~pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
~r,r....
.l~ ''if.-~' #.'"'v ' ,
-!P.~!!" 't..-li: "'a'~r f
Jff.. W" 'it"! "!f!r.,
SfP ""-r}1.i~
" 222008
Pi ,,& ~r
Atherton" Belmont.. Brisbane" Burlingame" Colma II Da(y City" Ea:>! Pa/oAllo .. Foster City" Half Moon Bay "'f"HW{..s1:lQ1'Ipi.1JrlJ/t'i}~fenlo Park
MiIlbrae lit Pacifico.. Portola Jlal//?,V III Redwood City" San Bruno II San Carlos · San Mateo III San Maleo County · South San Ffi:J'ljf:r~ lJIJR#
.~ l. JJ...
C/CAG
c
CITy/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
OF SAN MA TEO COUNTY
September 18, 2006
Michael Lappen, Senior Planner
Planning Division
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Dear Mike:
. Re: Scheduling of Your Request for C/CAG Airport land Use Committee
(ALUC) and C/CAG Board R~view of a Zoning Map Amendment to
Accommodate the Proposed Expansion of the Genentech Research
and Development Overlay District
As I noted in our telephone conversation on,September 14,2006, I anticipate that the
C/CAG ,Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC) may not meet in the next two months. 1 .
Therefore, as ] mentioned, I will take this item directly to the C/CAG Board for review/action,
in its role as the Airport Land Use Commission. The state-mandated 50-day review period
will start as of September 15, 2006 and expire on November 14, 2006.
Based on our discussion of the city's timeframe to process and review this proposed land I
use policy action, I will schedule this item for review/action fDr the November 9, 2006 C/CAG 2
Board meeting. This schedule should meet your timeline and will comply with the state-
mandated ALUC review period. '
If you have any questions, please contact me at 650/363-4417.
sinifpJ r~
David F. Carbone, Senior Planner/ALUC Staff
cc: Richard Napier, C/CAG Executive Director
Richard Newman, C/CAG Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC) Chairperson
letlomikelappenalucreviewofgenentechzoning .doc
555 COUNTY CENTER 5TH FLOOR, REDWOOD CiTY, CA 94063 PHONE: 650.363-4417 FAX: 650.363-4849
-24-
ent By: CALTRANS TAANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
Mr. MiL:hael Lappen
Oclobt.r 6. 2006
Pag~ :\
Oct.6.06 12:53PM;
Page 3/3
address below. Traffic-relE1ted mitigntion measures should be incorporated into the constru ion 111
plans during the encroachment permit process. See the website link below for more infonnari n.
http:1 Jwww.dot.ca..gov /hq/traffopsldevelopservJp~rrnHs/
Rudy Dantes, Pennhs Branch Chief
California. DOT, District 4
P.O. ~ox 23660
Oakland, CA 94~23-0660
Please feel free to call or email Patrici.a Maurice of my staff at (510) 622-1644 or
oatrici,8 muurice@doLca.gov with any questions regarding this letter.
-~
c: Ms. Terry Roberts. State Clearinghouse
"C,,/mrns irr.pr(}w:.; mob/lilY (l(:ffl$.' r.1l1ifl1miJJ"
-25-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter C
Letter from Dmrid F. Carbone, Seinor Planner / ALUC Stciff, City/County Association if Governments if San Mateo
County, received September 22, 2006
C-l
This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information, and establishes a time for
the C/ CA G Board to review and/ or take action as its role as the Airport Land Use Commission. This
comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft Master EIR for the Genentech Research and
Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update; therefore, no further
comment is required.
C-2
The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the decision-lnakers for their consideration prior to
taking action on the proposed project.
8-8 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist - 26 -pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
ent By: CALTRANS TRANSPOATATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
O~t.6.06 12:52PM;
Page 1
STA"I7~ liP CA I tBORNLA-n.rr~ThI~ss T'RANI>POn"A TIDN ANn Bml~INt: .l\GBNCY
,-,~!.lli.QtlJ..' ,
DEPARTMENT O.F TRANS PORTA TION
11'1 GRAND A VENliE
P. O. 'BOX 23660
OAKLAND. CA 94623"0660
PHONE (5 J 0) 286-5505
FAX (510) 286.5559
Try (800) 735"2929
o
lex .YOUr p(JWer.'
Be nerCy c.Dir.iMIf
October 6, 2006
1v1r. Michael Lappen
Cil)' of South San Francisco
Planning Division
400 Grand A v~nue
South San FranciscOr CA 94080
SMIOI423
SM-IOl-22.8 4
SCH#200507 165
Dear Mr. Lappen:
GENENTECH l\1ASTER PLAN UPDATE - DRAFT ENVIRONl\tIENTAL IMPACT
REPORT
Thank you for lnclw.l.ing the Califomia Depanment of Transportation (Department) in the QA I 1
process for the Genentech Master Plan Update. The following COmments are based on the raft
Environmental 1m-pact Report (DEIR). A~ lead Agency, the City of South San Prancisc is
responsible for all project mitjgation~ including any needed improvements to state highways. e
projecL t s fair share .contribution~ financing, scheduling, itnplementation responsibilities and ead
agency monitoring should be fully di.scussed for all proposed mitigati.on measures. The proj ct~s
specific traffic mitigation fee should be identified in the Traffic Impact Study anq the DElR. ny 2
required roadway improvements should be compJeted prior to iss.uance of the Cenifica of
Occupancy. Since an encroachment permit is required for work in the State Right of ay
(ROW). and the Department will no.t issue a permit until our concerns are adequately addres I
we strongly recommend that the lead agency work with both tl1e applicant and the DeparLffi t to
ensure that our concerns ar.e resolved during the CEQA process, and in any case prio to
submiual of a permit application. Further comments will be proVided during the encroach cot
pennit process; see the end of this Jetter for more information regarding encroachment permit .
Project Gr4phic& I 3
The DEIR should inc!ude a regional map showing the location of BART and CaltraJn station in
relation to the project site as well as study area roadwuys.
Travel Demand Forecasting
Given Genentcc))'s massive expansion as well as that of other biotech corporations in the pro ct 4
viCinity. the anticipated Year 2015 peak hour 0.5 percent growth rate to existing volu.mes or
Freeway segments seems conservative. It would be more logicaJ to assome a higher growth te
along with trips generated from Genentech's full buildout. This more accurately represent a
"Cal1raflJ ;mprtwes lI'l()oiliry Or.rll.rs l.tJli/umio"
-27-
ent By: CAlTRANS TRANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
Mr. Micblloll.appen
OclObef 6.2006
Page:!
Oct-a-DB 12;S3PM;
Page 2/3
reasonabl~ w(Jrsl-t:a~e 8cena:tlo and is. a superior analytical appr~ach. T.OJe demand, .c., 14
unconstrnmed volumes. should be app.hed to the roadway system In order to determine the
volume of traffic that Cl:Ul be accommodated by existing fuciHlies.
High way Operations
1. Transportation and Circulation issues should be addressed in the Summary of Environm
Effects and Project Requirementslh4itigatlon Mea.c;ures of the E~ecutive Summary.
2. Given the substantial cumulative impacts to the US 101 Northbound Ramps at Oyster P 1m I
B ()ulevard, the DElR should clearly indicate whether traffic from recent projects sue as 6
Lowcis and Home Depot has been included in the Year 2015 scenRrios.
5. Th~ <.lescription for Intersection No. 19 should be South Airport Boulevard/US 101 NB
and Off..Ramps~ to be consistent with other intersection descriptions. Page 4.7-1, S
InterE'iections, DEIR.
7
3. Intersections numbered 2 and 3 shown in .Figure 4.7..1, Study lnterseetlun and On..R
Locations, do not match the intersection descriptions on page 4.7..7. These shoul
reversed.
4. Intersection No.2, Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 Ramps should be changed to Dub
Avenue/US 101 Ramps. PHge 4.7-7, Study Intersections, DEIR.
6. The Department recommends that the City as lead agency enSlJfe that Mitigation Me
(MM) 4,7-1 is implemented prior to issuing the project's Certificate of Occupancy. Det
scheduling info.rma.tion should also be provided for this improvement. While MM 8
would reduce project impacts. to the Oyster Point Bouievard/Dubuque Avenue intersecti to
less than s.ignificance, requiring the project to contribute its fair share fees alone will not
alleviate congested conditions. at this intersection. Page 4.7-33. DEIR
7. Please fo:rward the Synchro files for review. I 9
Cultural Resources
Should project-related construction activities in State ROW result in an inadve enl
a.rchaeologjcal or burial discovery! all construction within 50 feet of the find shall cease, and the
DepartmenCs District 4 Cultural Resource Study Office sh~n be immediately conlacled at ( 10)
286-5618 or 622-5458- A staff archaeologist will evaluate the finds within one business duy ter
contact. This facilitates compliance with CEQA~ Public Resources Code Section 5024.5 for 1 0
state-owned historic resources) and Chapter 2 of the Departmen.t'$ Standard Environme tal
Reference, See the website .link below for more infonnation. Archaeological resources y
consist ot but are not limited to) dark! friable soils, charcoal, obsidian or chert flakes, grin 'ng
bowlst shell fragments, or deposits of bone, glass, metal, ceramics, or wood.
http://www.dot.ca.gQv/hq/env/index.htm
Encroachmellt Permit
Work that encroaches onto. the State ROW requires an encroachment permh that is issued b the 1 '
Department. To apply, a completed encroachment permit applioation, environm ta] 11
documentation. and five (5) sets of plans clearly indicating Stilte ROW must be submitted t the
"CaltrPlls ;mp'~JtJt.T nulblWy fJC10U CdlifDl'IIill"
-28-
ent By: CALTRANS TAANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
Mr. MiL:l1ael Luppen
De.ober 6.2006
Page. 3
Oct.B-OB 12:53PM;
Page 3/3
address below. Traffic-reInted mitigntion measures should be incorporated into the constru . on 111
plans during the encroachment permit process. See the web site Hnk below for more lnfonnati n.
h up:J /www.dot.ca.gov IhqJtraffopsJde velopserv Ip ermits/
Rudy Dantes, Pennits Branch Chief
California DOT, District 4
P.O. ~ox 23660
Oakland, CA 94~23k0660
Please feel free to call or email Patrici.a Maurice of my staff at (510) 622-1644 or
oatrici.a muurice@dol.ca.g:ov with any questions regarding this letter.
-~
c: Ms. Terry Roberts, State C!ewinghouse
"C"lmrns irr.pruw!$ "}(Iblli))' (1C/'().~.~ r.(Jlifrm~i/1 u
-29-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter D
Letter from Timotby C. Sable, District Brancb Cbief, IGR/ CEQJ., California Department if Transportation,
received October 6, 2006
Comments received in this letter mostly concern those topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for
Traffic and Circulation (except Comments D-10 and D-ll identified below). As the issues raised in these
comments have been . addressed in the recirculated chapter, the remainder of these comments require no
further response. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14,9 15088.5, subd. (f)(2).)CEQAGuidelines state that lead
agencies need only respond to "(i) comments received during the initial circulation period that relate to
chapters or pOliions of the document that were not revised and recirculated, and (ii) comments received
during the recirculation period that relate to the chapters or portions of the earIierEIR.that were revised and
recirculated." (Ia. (en1phasis added).) While all comments received on the DMEIR are part of the
adlninistrative record and will be considered in evaluatingtheprQPosed project, the. City has limited its
response to comments according to the CEQAGuidelines. Those . comments relating to the traffic and
circulation analysis that were received during the comment period for. the recirculatedPRDMElR-are
addressed in thisFMEIR.
D-l0
Comment acknowledged. In response to this comment the text of mitigation measure MM 4.10-1(c), on
page 4.10-10 of the Draft MEIR, and as shown in Chapter 8 (Text Changes), has been changed to reflect
Caltrans requirements regarding the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources during project related
construction within the State Right of Way.
MA14.1 0-1 (a) if an unidentified arcbaeoloaical resource is uncovered durina construction, a qualified arcbaeoloaist
approved by tbe project applicant sball conduct furtber arcbival and field study to identify tbe
presence if arch aeoloai cal resources in tbe area surroundina tbe discovery. Field stuc!Jr may include,
but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auaurina, and monitorin8 construction activities as well as
otber common methods used to identify tbe presence if arcbaeoloaical resources in a funy developed
urban area.
If an unidentified arcbaeological resource is uncovered during proJect related construction in a State
Rigbt of 11laT! all comtruction witbin 50 feet of tbe site sball cease and Caltrans District 4
Cultural Resources Stu~T! Office sball be immediate~T! contacted and a Caltrans staff archaeologist
sball evaluate tbe _finds witbin one business day after tbe Cultural Resources SwdT! Office is
contacted.
D-ll
In the event that project related construction would encroach on a State right of way, the City and the
applicant shall submit a completed encroachment permit application, including the appropriate
environmental documentation and plans. The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the
decision-makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project.
8-12
Genentech Research and Development Overlay DisL~.~~_~l)ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 8 Respon.se to Commen.ts
Response to Comment E: Public Hearing Oral Comments
Oral comments from Marc Teglia City if South San Francisco Planning Commissioner, submitted during Public
Hearing on the Draft EIR October 5, 2006.
B-1
Commissioner Teglia suggested that the MEIR should investigate the feasibility of constructing a new flyover
from the intersection of Oyster Point Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard to the US 101 SB Ramps. The
feasibility should be examined both as part of the Genentech MEIR and future East of 101 traffic studies. As
such the remainder of this COlnment concern topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic and
Circulation. As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter, these
comments require no further response.
Commissioner Teglia commented as to whether the MEIR evaluated Genentech's compliance with the 1999
General Plan Open Space policies. In Section 4.8 (Land Use), pages 4.8-19 through 4.8-20 under the
subheading Consistency Analysis, the MEIR states:
Park and open space areas are located within the MEIR Study Area. Existing facilities within the
project site include the Bay Trail and the Wind Harp Park. The Genentech open space network as
identified in the 2006 FMPU, consists of multiple open space designations including pubhc spaces
(Bay Trail), passive (non-developable bluffs), connective spaces (landscaped pedestrian connections
between major open spaces), and neighborhood-oriented spaces (plazas, courtyards).
The main public open space area is adjacent to the Central Campus that includes the Genentech
waterfront areas, the Bay Trail and the Wind Harp Sculpture and Park. Internal connections v'.1ill be
provided to the public open space areas, views will be preserved, and public access will be preserved
and enhanced. No facilities would be built on the existing Bay Trail or public open park areas.
Physical and visual access to the Bay Trail or public parks would not be hindered or altered by the
proposed project...
The proposed project would not impede or block access to the proposed network of park or trail
linkages proposed in the General Plan. In addition, Genentech recently purchased the abandoned UP
Rail right of way parcel near Allerton A venue which offers the opportunity to connect the Genentech
Campus with the Caltrain Station and Downtown South San Francisco. The proposed project is
therefore consistent with Policy 5.I-G-3.
As such, the MEIR has evaluated the proposed project's consistency vvith the Open Space policies of the
1999 General Plan and determined that the project is consistent Virith the General Plan's park and open
space guiding policies. In addition and as described in Response to Comment No. B-2, Genentech is
currently in the permitting process of a "rails to trails" for the abandoned UP rail right-of-way, which would
further the opportunities for open space accessibility within the project area. Comment noted, no further
response required.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri - 31~ -msion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-13
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
E-3
Commissioner Teglia noted that the MEIR should evaluate the projects consistency with the City policies for
the protection of views, specifically the views to the Wind Harp as identified in the East of 101 Area Plan.
As stated in Section 4.9 (Aesthetics), on pages 4.9-17:
The 2006 FMPU also specifically identifies the need to limit the higher elevations within the West
Campus neighborhood to not only comply with FAA regulations but also maintain a view corridor to
the Wind Harp sculpture. Policy DE-5 of the East of 101 Area Plan, and incorporated in the MEIR as
PR 4.9- 1, also directs development in the East of 101 Area to be designed to take advantage of views
of Point San Bruno Hill with its "Windchime." Project Requirement 4.9-1 would ensure that future
development within the West Campus would retain views of the Wind Harp...
PR 4.9-1
Future development within the vVest Campus shall be constructed so as not to obstruct existin8 views
if San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill and the associated "vVind Chimes" sculpture, from
areas west if the Genentech Campus, including US 101. Open space areas and new roadways shall
be desi8ned to prolride lTiews if these resources.
PR 4.9-1 incorporates the East of 101 Policy DE-5 regarding preservation of views of the Wind Harp Park
into the MEIR to ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not obstruct existing views of
both the San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill, as well as Wind Harp Park. As such, the MEIR has
evaluated the projects consistency with preserving views of the Wind Harp Park and ensures that such views
are preserved.
8-14 Genentech Research and Development Overlay DisL~_~ ~__pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment F: Public Hearing Oral Comments
Oral comments from John Prouty, City if South San Francisco Planning Commissioner, submitted during Public
Hearing on the Drcift EIR October 5, 2006.
F-l
Commissioner Prouty concurred with Commissioner Teglia regarding traffic impacts at Oyster Point and
Gateway Boulevard. Please refer to response to comment E-l for further information regarding the
construction of a flyover to reduce traffic impacts at the Oyster Point and Gateway Boulevard intersection.
As such the remainder of this comment concern topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic
and Circulation. As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter,
these comments require no further response.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri,~ ~_~_~_nsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-15
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment G: Public Hearing Oral Comments
Oral comments from Bill Zemke, Cit)' if Soutb San Francisco Plannina Commissioner, submitted durina Public
Hearina on tbe Draft EJR October 5, 2006.
G-l
Commissioner Zemke concuned with Commissioners T eglia and Prouty. Please refer to response to
comment E-l for further information regarding the traffic impacts at the Oyster Point and Gateway
Boulevard intersection. As such the remainder of this comment concern topics discussed in the recirculated
PRDMEIR for Traffic and Circulation. As the issues raised in these comlnents have been addressed in the
recirculated chapter, these comments require no further response.
8-16 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dish ~_~ ~.~Jansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment H: Public Hearing Oral Comments
Oral comments from Jackie vVilliams, resident oj the City oj South San Francisco, submitted durina Public Hearina
on the Drcift EIR October 5, 2006.
H-l
Mrs. Willian1s questioned 'whether the City was considering construction of a new fen-y terminal in the East
of 101 Area. COlnment noted. This comment is not a direct comment on the content or adequacy of the
Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Draft MEIR or any environmental issue raised by the proposed project. Therefore, no further response is
required.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri~_ ~~r-1nsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-17
ent By: CALTRANS TRANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
I
i
Jan.24.07 2:40PM;
Page 1/1
RN .0
\
I
DEPARTMENT OF TRA..NSPQRT A TIO~
111 GRAND AVENUE I
P. 0, BOX 23660' 1
OAKLAND, CA ,~94623-0660 i
PHONE (510) 28'6-5505 !
FAX (510) 286-5559 j
TTY (800) 735.~929 !
!
!
;
!
;
I
!
!
Mr. Mithael Lappen ' !
City of South San Francisco !
Planning Di vision i
400 Grand A venue :
South San Francisco, CA 940.80 j
: i
Dear rvrr. Lappen: I
GENENTECH MASTER PLAN JroATE - RECIRCULATION DRAFT MASTER
I , ,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REroRT
Thank.' iou for continuing to include jthe California Department of Transportation (Dcp ent) I
in the qEQA process for the Genenteph Master Plan Update. The following comments are ased 1
on the Recirculation Draft Master En~irol1ment.al hnpact Report (DMEIR). '
: i
, 1 .
The Department continues to have c4ncems regarding the anticipated Year 2015 peak ho 0.5
percent,:;growth rate to exis'ung VOlUtes for Freeway ~gments. We believe this is conse tive
conside[ing Genentech I s expansion well as that of other biotechnical corporations i the
project I ~ vicinity. It would be more logical to assume a higher growth rate along with trips 2
generat~d from Generi:tech' s full bui~dout. This would more accurate~y represent a reaso able
~orst-c*se scenario. Unc~s~ned I volumesj applied to the road:va~ sys~z:n. would tter
(l1sclose:'the tnle volume of ttafflC tha~ can be accommodated by the eXIsting fac1l1t1es.
I
, I
" 1
Please feel free t:o call or amail ~andra Finegan of my staff at (51 0) 622~ 1644 or
sandra ?negan@dOl.Ca.gOVwithanY;,\uestiOnSregardingthisletter.
~C=r ~~~ ;
~ABLE i
District ~Branch Chief j
IGRJCEQA I
!
. i
c: MS. Terry Roberts, State Cleari1ghOUs<:
"Callran.r ~ft)vc.. mw,iliry g;c,.o,t,~ Cul,'fvmi'l"
i
!
:
I
I
R-A
@
ll!x your power!
Be Il~rgy f!jfi.ieru!
J anuarj 241 2007
SMI01423
SM-10l-22. 4
SCH#20050 165
-36-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter R-A
Letter from Timotby C. Sable, District Brancb Cbiif, fGR/ CEQ6, California Department if Transportation,
received january 24, 2007
R-Al
This comment is acknowledged. This comlnent contains introductory information and acknowledges that
the Lead Agency included the comlnenter throughout the Recirculation of the DMEIR for the project. No
further response is required.
R-A2
Caltrans expressed concerns regarding the projected future traffic volumes along US 101. Overall, it was
felt that the 0.5 percent per year growth rate was too conservative, given the plans for Genentech and the
other biotechnology companies in the area. Caltrans's recOlnmendations 'were to assume a higher growth
rate and apply unconstrained volume.
Future Without Project traffic volumes were developed in a tVI/O step process, as described on page 34 of
the PRDMEIR. First, a background growth rate of O. 50lc> per year (5.1 olc> in total for the 10 years betvveen
Existing and 2015) was applied to the existing volmnes to account for the increase in through traffic along
the freeway. Second, the vehicle trips associated with all the approved projects in the East of 101 area of
South San Francisco were assigned to the freeway. These included the recently-approved Home Depot,
Lowe's, and Terrabay projects, plus anticipated future developments in office and bioteclmology space in
the area. Table 5-1 of the PRDMEIR presented the total future square footages assumed for the East of 101
Area, and Table 4.7-9 of the PRDMEIR presented the vehicle txip generation of these uses.
Future With Project traffic volumes were developed by adding the Project veltjcIe trips on top of the Future
Without Project volumes.
The following table presents the Existing, Future Without Project, and Future With Project traffic volumes
at the study segments along US 101. As the table shows, the 0.50/0 per year background growth rate plus
the traffic associated with the East of 101 land uses would result in an annual growth rate of betvv'een 0.8%
to 2.20Ic> per year and a total growth rate of between 8.30Ic> and 24.00/0. With the high existing mainline
traffic volumes, these growth rates equate to an increase of between 593 and 1460 vehicles per hour. The
addition of Genentech traffic for the 2015 With Project scenario, would add about 88 to 797 vehicles per
hour, increasing the annual growth rate to between 0.90/0 and 3.3 olc> per year, and the total growth rate to
between 9.60/0 and 38.80/0.
It should be noted that the background grovvth rate of 0.50/0 per year (5.1 olc> total) was obtained from other
approved studies in the area, and the traffic projections and assignments for each project in the East of 101
area and for the Genentech project were not constrained (the conditions on the freeway ViTere not taken into
account when determining on which roads vehicles would travel).
Genentech Research and Development Overlay DistrL~ ~?r__nsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-19
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
AA1Peak Hour PMPeak Hour
North 0(1-380 North o(OP North q(1-380 NorthQ(OP
EIR Analysis NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB
Existing 5366 6567 7129 8246 5484 6294 8374 6802
Background Growth 274 336 365 422 280 322 428 348
East of 101 Growth 1012 377 228 612 552 1138 688 394
Future Without Project 6652 7280 7722 9280 6316 7754 9490 7544
Total Growth 1286 713 593 1034 832 1460 1116 742
Total Growth % 24.0% 10.9% 8.3% 12.5% 15.2% 23.2% 13.3% 10.9%
Annual Growth % 2.2% 1.0% 0.8% 1.2% 1.4% 2.1% 1.3% 1.0%
Genentech 797 96 88 728 129 661 603 118
Future With Project 7449 7376 7810 10008 6445 8415 10093 7662
Total Growth from Existing 2083 809 681 1762 961 2121 1719 860
Total Growth % 38.8% 12.3% 9.6% 21.4% 17.5% 33.7% 20.5% 12.6%
Annual Growth % 3.3% 1.2% 0.9% 2.0% ' 1.6% 2.9% 1.9% 1.2%
8-20 Genentech Research and Development Overlay DisL-_~_ ~=pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Sent By: CALTRANS TRANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 286 5560;
Jan.25.07 8:32AM;
Page 1/1
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT A nON
ill GRAND AVENUE
P. O. BOX 23660
OAKLAND. CA 94623.0660
PHONE (510) 286-5505
FAX (510) 286-5559:
TTY (800) 735-2929:
R-B
~T NT1:i 01' r.^LlFORN1A I3USIN8S5 TR ^N~PO
January 251 2007
SMI01423
SM-10l-22.82
SCH#2005072 65
Mr. Mich~el Lappen
City of Sauth San Francisco
Planning Divis.ion
400 Grand A venue
South S~ Francisco, CA 94080
Dear Mr. Lappen:
GENENTECH MASTER PLAN UPDATE - RECIRCULATION DRAFT MASTER
ENVIRONMENTAL Il\1PACT REPORT - ADDITIONAL COMMENT
Thank you for continuing to include the Cahforn,ia Department of Tnmsportatic.m (Departrn nt) I
in the CEQA process for the Gencntech Master Plan Update. The following comment is base on ' 1
the Rec.irculation Draft Master E,nvironmentallmpnct Report (DJ\1EIR).
The Depirtment continues to recommend that the City of South San Francisco as lead. ag
ensure ttjat Mitigation Measure (MM) 4.7-1 is implemented prior to issuing the proj t's
Certifica{e of Occupancy. As an alternative, the City of South San Francisco should ioin e a 2
project with the collected funds from Genentech and other developments in the vicinit to
implemeilL the subject mitigation measures.
Please feel free to call or emaiJ Sandra Finegan of my staff at (510) 622-1644 or
sandra fj:ne~an@dot.ca.gov with any questions regarding this lener.
<<c.~
Yr:~;J. SABLE
DisLrict Branch Chief
IGRJCEQA
c: Ms. Terry Roberts, State Clearinghouse
"CaJuunJ" Improve.' rtmbi/ir)' acros.t Culifornia"
-39-
Chapter 8 Response to Comments
Response to Comment Letter R-B
Letter from Timothy C. SableJ District Branch Chiif', IGR/ CEQ!1J California Department if TransportationJ
received january 25J 2007
R-Bl
This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information and aclmowledges that
the Lead Agency included the commenter throughout the Recirculation of the DMEIR for the project. No
further response is required.
R-B2
As stated on page 51 of the PRDMEIR, and as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program of the FMEIR and presented below, implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.7-1 (a) shall be
undertaken prior to the City issuing a building permit. With regards to MM4.7-1(b), Genentech will pay its
"fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permits for
1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to the 2006 Master Plan Update.
As such, Genentech shall be responsible for funding its fair share of the implementation (including design,
approval, and construction), and shall do so prior to complete implementation of the FMPU.
8-22 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist - 40 -Jansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
CHAPTER 9
Text Changes
9.1 FORMAT OF TEXT CHANGES
Text changes are intended to clarify or correct information in the Draft MEIR in response to comments
received on the document or as initiated by Lead Agency (City) staff. Revisions are shown in Volume la,
Chapter 8 (Text Changes), as excerpts from the Draft MEIR text, with a line thlOUgh deleted text and a
double underline beneath inserted text. The text changes appear in order of their location in the Draft
MEIR.
9.2 TEXT CHANGES
9.2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 1-1, the first sentence of the last paragraph has been modified to state:
Additionally, Genentech currently owns approximately 16 acres of the Bay West Cove property, which in
its entirety encompasses approximately 47 acres.
Page 1-4 paragraph after bullets, the third sentence:
After expansion the Genentech R&D Overlay District will encompass approximately 160 acres-ffie
Ccncntcch R&D 0 verla)" District cncGm,passcs appYGxin13.tcly 160 3.a cs, which is an increase from the 72
acres adopted in the 1995 Master Plan.
Page 1-6, the following bullet point has been added for clarification:
II Reclassification and zoning map change of the parcels in the Planned Industrial zone into the
Genentech R&D Overlay District
II Zoning text changes to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 and 20.40
II Adoption of the TDM Plan
II All future developments will be subject to a separate permit approval and CEQA review as established
in SSFMC Chapter 20.39
II The General Plan will not reql1ire an amendment as part of approval of the Master Plan However if
the Master Plan is adopted and an alternate rails to trails routing is accepted the City would initiate a
General Plan amendment so as to modify Fi31re 4-3 of the General Plan Bicvcle Facilities
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distrk~ !_~:l1sion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-1
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Table 1-2 (Summary of Environmental Effects and Project Requirements/Mitigation Measures), pages viii
through xxii has been clarified to state:
Threshold
Impact 4.4-1 Construction activities
associated with the proposed project
would generate noise levels that
exceed the noise standards
established by the City of South San
Francisco Municipal Code. This is
considered a potentially significant
impact. Compliance with the project
requirement PR 4.4-1 and mitigation
measures MM 4.4-1 (a) through
MM 4.4-1 (c) would reduce this
impact, but noise levels could still be
substantial. However, the project's
construction noise impacts would be
temporary, would not occur d~ring
recognized sleep hours, and would
be consistent with the exemption for
construction noise that exists in
Section 8.32;050(d) of the Municipal
Code. Therefore, this impact would
be considered less than significant.
Level of
Significmlce
Prior to
Mitigation
LIS-Less Than
Significant
PS-Poterrtially
Significant
NOISE AND VIBRATION
PS PR 4.4.1 Consistent with the City's Municioal Code.
Section 8.32,050(d), all construction activity within the
City shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 A.M. to
8:00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on
Saturdays, and 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and
holidays. or at such other hours as may be authorized by
the oermit. if they meet at least one of the followina noise
limitations:
.. (1) No individual oiece of eauioment shall oroduce a
noise level exceedina ninety dB at a distance of
twenty-five feet. If the device is housed within a
structure or trailer on the orooerty. the measurement
shall be made outside the structure at a distance as
close to twenty-five feet from the eauioment as
oossible.
.. (2) The noise level at any ooint outside of the oroDerty
Diane of the oroiect shall not exceed ninety dB.
MM 4.4-1 (a) The project applicant shall require by
contract specifications that the following construction best
management practices (BMPs) be implemented by
contractors to reduce construction noise levels:
.. Two weeks prior to the commencement of
construction, notification must be provided to
surrounding land uses disclosing the construction
schedule, including the various types of activities that
would be occurring throughout the duration of the
construction period
.. Ensure that construction equipment is properly
muffled according to industry standards
.. Place noise-generating construction equipment and
locate construction staging areas away from sensitive
uses, where feasible
.. Schedule high noise-producing activities between the
hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. to minimize
disruption on sensitive uses
III Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent
feasible, which may include, but are not limited to,
noise barriers or noise blankets
MM 4.4.1 (b) The project applicant shall require by
contract specifications that construction staging areas
alonQ with the operation of earthmoving equipment within
Level of
Significance
AfierM11igation
LIS-Less Than
Significant
PS-Potentially
Sf 1f/icant
LTS
~_~ 3._-,:>ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
9-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Threshold
Impact 4.5-1 Implementation of the
proposed project would not expose
people and/or structures to potentially
substantial adverse effects resulting
from rupture of a known earthquake
fault, strong seismic groundshaking,
seismic-related ground failure (Le.,
liquefaction), or landsliding.
Implementation of project
requirements, PR 4.5-1 (a) through
PR 4.5-1 (d) would ensure the impact
would remain less than significant.
Impact 4.10.2 Implementation of the
proposed project could affect the
significance of a previously
unidentified archaeological resource
as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA
Section 15064.5, and PRC Section
21083.2. This impact would be
potentially significant. However,
implementation of identified mitigation
measures MM 4.10-1(a) and MM
4.10-1(b) would reduce this impact to
less-th an-sign ificant.
M'rti ationMeasure(s orPT(fectR uuemenis
the MEIR Study Area would be located as far away from
vibration and noise sensitive sites as possible. Contract
specifications shall be included in the construction
documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
MM 4.4.1 (c) The project applicant shall require by
contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used
during construction would be routed away from noise-
and vibration-sensitive uses, to the extent possible.
Contract specifications shall be included in the
construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the
City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
L TS PR 4.5.1 (a) Development within the preliminary boundary
of the Coyote Point hazard area, as depicted on Figure
150f the East of 101 Area Plan and referred to as Figure
4.5-6 in this MEIR, shall be reviewed by a geotechnical
engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual
development sites where feasible and determined
necessary by the engineer. No structure for human
occupancy shall occur within 50 feet of idontified active
faults identified as Earthauake Fault Zones on maps
prepared pursuant to the Alauist-Priolo Earthauake Fault
Zonina Act or the Seismic Hazards Mappina Act. unless a
geotechnical investigation and report determine that no
active branches of that fault underlie the surface.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
PS MM 4.10.1 (a) If an unidentified archaeological
resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified
archaeologist approved by the project applicant shall
conduct further archival and field study to identify the
presence of archaeological resources in the area
surrounding the discovery. Field study may include, but is
not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and
monitoring construction activities as well as other
common methods used to identify the presence of
archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area.
If an unidentified archaeoloaical resource is uncovered
durina proiect related construction in a State Riaht of
Way. all construction within 50 feet of the site shall
cease and Caltrans District 4 Cultural Resources Study
Office shall be immediatelv contacted and a Caltrans staff
archaeoloaist shall evaluate the finds within one business
day after the Cultural Resources Study Office is
contacted.
Level of
Significance
After M'rtigaiion
LTS-Less Than
Significant
PS-Potentially
Si 1i/icant
LTS
LTS
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri - 43. -msion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-3
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Threshold
Level of
Significance
AfterMliigation
LTS-Less T7UlJ1.
Signtficani
PS-Potentially
Si tficant
Impact 4.13-1 Implementation
of the proposed project would
not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or
interfere with groundwater
recharge. Implementation of
mitigation measures MM 4.13-
1 (a) through (c) would ensure
that the proposed project
would have a less-than-
significant groundwater
impact.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PS MM 4.13-1 (a):The project applicant shall include methods
of water conservation in the proposed project's buildings
and landscaping. These methods shall include, but not be
limited, to the following (This Mitiaation Measure would
not aoolv to orocess develooment or research
develooment laboratorv eauiDment. or to
biooharmaceutical manufacturina orocesses conducted
Dursuant to U.S. Food and Drua Administration's current
Good Manufacturina Practices (cGMPs),):
III Install water-conserving dishwashers and washing
machines, and water-efficient centralized cooling
systems in all new buildings (this method would
not 3pply to procoss developmont or res83rch
development laboratory equipment)
III Install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g.,
drip irrigation and Evapotranspiration-based
irrigation controllers)
III Gray water irrigation system (as detailed in
General Plan Policy PF-7, but other elements of
that policy do not apply here, such as wastewater
treatment facilities))
II Design landscaping with drought-resistant and
other low-water -use plants
III Install water-saving devices such as water-efficient
toilets, faucets, and showerheads
9.2.2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Page 3-6, the third sentence of the last paragraph has been modified to state:
The Proiect Area has been defined as a ? 20-acre MEIR Study Area within which Genentech proposes to
expand the Genentech R&D Overlay District to 160 acres The: pIoposed project ill ea e:nCGT.upa3se3
appIoximatclJ 160 8.a e3, which is an increase from the 72 acres approved in the 1995 Master Plan.
Page 3-8, the second sentence of the first paragraph has been modified to state:
Currently, it has approximately 6,6-5-& 6 700 employees in the South San Francisco Campus.
9-4 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dis _ 4.: 4 _ pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Page 3-12, Table 3-1, the footnote has been modified to state:
Land Area (acres)
Office
Laboratory
Manufacturing*
Amenity
Total Building Area**
Existing Gene111ech R&D Overlay
Distrid s
124
1,008,801
970,173
779,892
69,500
2,828,366
Proposed Genentech R&D Overlay
Distrid s
160
2,629,395
2,002,482
1,041,668
322,000
5,995,545
Net Increase
(~
36
1,620,594
1,032,309
261,776
252,000
3,167,179
'" Includes manufacturing, warehousini::': distribution, and fill finish,
"'''' Assumes all new Genentech land uses, non-Genentech existing uses not included
9.2.3
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Page 4.1-1, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been changed to state:
The NO P and cmamcnt lettcrs ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
9.2.4
AIR QUALITY
Page 4.3-1, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been changed to state:
The NOP and G:mJ.lacIlt letters ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
The last paragraph on Page 43.-21 has been modified to state:
The analysis of daily operational emissions was prepared utilizing the URBEMIS 2002 (Version 8.7)
computer model recommended by the BAAQMD data supplied from Genentech staffregardin~ operational
emissions and the project daily motor vehicle trip generation data for total daily trips contained in traffic
study (see Appendix E).
Genentech Research and Development Overlay DistriL~ ~_?r-=-nsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-5
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Table 4.3-5 on
4.3-22 has been modified to state:
EmissionsinPounds Per Day
Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOl PMJo
Stationary ~ 41.26 2G-:-OO 163.67 ~ 288.27 {hOO 8.22 MM 54,19
Mobile 212.54 256.92 2,110.75 2.09 316.10
Maximum Daily Emissions m.44 ..lli...B. 2:77.84 ~ 2,128.33 2399.02 YJ9-1J1.J1 mM~
BAAQMD Thresholds 80.00 80.00 NT NT 80.00
Significant Impact? Yes Yes NT NT Yes
SOURCE: Genentech 2006' ElP Associates 2006; based on year 20] 5 emission factors, which is the expected year of project buildout.
9.2.5
NOISE AND VIBRATION
Page 4.4-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been changed to state:
The NOP and C0l1.l11.lCl.lt lettcrs ftre ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
Page 4.4-15, PR 4.4-1 has been modified for clarification to state:
PR 4.4-1
Comi';tent with the Ci~v's Municipal Code Section 8.32.0S0(d} all construction activity witbin
the City sball be limited to between the hours of 8 :00 A.M. to 8 :00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M. to
8 :00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and holidays-:- or at such otber
hours as mc:y be authorized ~v the permit if comtruction meet,; leQ'it one of the follolifTing noise
limitations:
!! (J) No individual piece c:..f equipment sball DToduce a noise level exceeding ninetv dB at a
di,;tance c:..f twen~v-Ave (? 5) feet. If the device is housed within a structure or trailer on tbe
proper~v the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to twentv-
~Ave OS} feet from tbe equiDment as possible.
11 (2) The naile level at anTT point out'iide of the properr..v plane of tbe proiect shall not exceed
nine~v (90) dB.
9.2.6
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Page 4.5-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and cam,n1cnt lcttCl S ftre ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
9-6 Genentech Research and Development Overlay
~_~ ~._,;>ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Page 4.5-20, PR 4.5-1(a) has been modified to state:
PR 4.5-1 (a)
Development within the preliminary boundary if the Coyote Point hazard area, as depicted on
Figure 15cj' the East if 101 Area Plan and referred to as Figure 4.5-6 in this MEIR, shall be
reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual development
sites where feasible and determined necessary by the engineer. No structure for human occupancy
shall occur within 50 feet if identified active faults identified a') Earthquake Fault Zone') on maps
pre?ared pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act or the Seismic Hazard')
Mapping Act. unless a geotechnical investigation and report determine that no active branches if
that fault underlie the suiface.
9.2.7
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and COl1ilTiClit lettcrs are ~ included in Appendix A of this MEIR.
Page 4.6-29, the third sentence under Impact 4.6-7 has been modified to state:
In addition to FAA standards, the 2006 FMPU keeps a maximum building height limitation of 150 feet
above ground level on buildings vvithin the MEIR Study Area, ",-hich is in c0111pliancc vlith the E^.}L
standards. This heiE:ht limitation is both subiect to and consistent with Federal Aviation Rerylations Part
77 as well as the City's General Plan Implementing Policy 3 5-1-4 addressing buildinE: heiE:hts
9.2.8
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Due to the substantial changes:to Section 4.7 (Transportation and . Circulation), the City recirculated the
PRD1\1EIR, as such all text changes relating to Section 4.7 Transportation and Circulation have been
addressed in thePRDMEIR. The following, including page number, refer to the changes made to the
PRDMEIR,not the DMEIR.
Page 59 (PRDMEIR), the first sentence of the full paragraph has been modified to state:
As shown in Table 4.7-17, Genentech would be solely responsible for paying for
improvements at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Cate~~ay Boulevard and Gull
Drive/Forbes Boulevard and East Grand Avenue / Grandview Drive intersections.
9.2.9
LAND USE
Page 4.8-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and COlliIlicnt lettcrs are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distril ~ _~_~ ~nsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-7
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Page 4.8-16, the first sentence under Impact 4.8-2 has been modified to state:
/.Jthough thc n1ajority of thc CcncI~tcch Can1pus is lc.catcd vyithir~ thc Ccncntcch n,&D 0 vClla)" District, ~
portion of the Campus is located within the P-I zoning district, and within the area for which R&D Overlay
Zones are authorized.
Page 4.8-27, the second sentence under Building Heights has been modified to state:
The 2006 FMPU requires that new and existing buildings in the Genentech Campus have a maximurTI height
limit of 150 feet above ground. This height limit complies vvith and is subiect to Federal Aviation
Regulations Part 77 and the standards set forth within the Genentech R&D Overlay District.
9.2.10
AESTHETICS
Page 4.9-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and COlD:IDcnt letters are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
9.2.11
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Page 4.10-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and C01T..:111cnt lettcrs are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
Page 4.10-10, Mitigation Measure MM 4.10-1(a) has been modified to state:
MM 4.10-1 (a) if an unidentified archaeoloBical resource is uncovered durinB construction, a qualified archaeoloBist
approved by the project applicant shall conduct further archival and field study to identify the
presence if arch aeoloBi cal resources in the area surroundinB the discovery. Field study may include,
but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, aUBurinB' and monitorinB construction activities as well as
other common methods used to identify the presence if archaeoloBical resources in a fully developed
urban area.
If an unidentiAed archaeological resource is uncovered during project related construction in a State
Right of Wc:v. all construction within 50 feet of the site shall cease and Caltrans District 4
Cultural Resource) Studv Office shall be immediate~v contacted and a Caltrans staff archaeologist
shall evaluate the Ands within one business dav after the Cultural Resource) Studv OjAce is
contacted.
9-8 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist - 48 -)ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 9 Text Changes
9.2.12
POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING
Page 4.11-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and ccn1ll1ent letters ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
Page 4.11-6, the last sentence of the first paragraph has been deleted:
Although Cenente:d.l is presently the largest en1plo)Cl in the Cit), because: the anticipated en1plo)TI.lcnt
grovltL exceeds the existing fmecasts fDr the City, Cencntech's ltl.lticipated e1l1plcyn1ent grovlth is
considered sub3tantialltlld exceeds the: C enCl 3.1 Plan.
9.2.13
PUBLIC SERVICES
Page 4.12-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP aI.ld COIT.lll.lCI.lt letters ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
9.2.14
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Page 4.13-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state:
The NOP and corull1ent letteI S ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR.
Page 4.13-3, the following text has been added to the third paragraph for clarification:
Based on the 2002 Carollo East of Highway 101 Sewer System Master Plan for the City's wastewater
system, Pump Station 8, located in the Lower Campus, has an existing firm capacity of 990 gallons per
minute (gpIn) and currently does not meet the existing peak sewer discharge of 1,100 gpm (Dyett & Bhatia
2005). While t\vo pumps at this station were recently replaced accordinE to WOCP the wet well is still
inadequate for the new pumps Therefore Pump Station 8 still requires additional improvements In
addition, Pump Station 4 needs to be upgraded to improve reliability. This station upv-ade has been
previously identified as a system-wide requirement that the City is undertakinE to provide redundancy to
service both existinE uses and future growth The upgrade of Pump Station 4 is critical to serving the
proposed growth under the East of 101 Area Plan, and has been included in the Downtovvn/ Central
Redevelopment plan for funding. Necessary system improvements, including Pump Station 4, are identified
in the Sewer Master Plan (Carollo 2002), which also establishes a program for implementing the
improvements. The Sewer Master Plan estimates cost share of the improvements, with respect to how they
relate to existing users and future users. Costs from existing users are recovered through rates. Impact fees,
collected prior to the issuance of a building permit, fund the improvements as tl1ey relate to future users.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distr - 49.- ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-9
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Page 4.13-17, the last sentence of the second paragraph has been modified to state:
To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of by transformation and land disposal, the
State Legislature passed Assembly Bill 939, the California Inte8rated J,llaste Mana8ement Act of 1989 CAB 939),
effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties in California are required to divert
25 percent of all solid waste to recycling facilities from landfill or transformation facilities by January 1,
1995, and 50 percent by January 1,2000. The City of South San Francisco has not yet met this goal.
Between 2001 and 2004, the City has achieved a diversion of rate ranging between 40 and 48 percent. The
City has submitted an application for a time extension with the California Integrated Waste Managelnent
Board (CIWMB) until December 2005 to meet the 50 percent goal, but the CIWMB's review of the City's
application has been delayed. The CIWMB has not taken further action on the City's application at the time
of Dublication of this FMEIR
Page 4.13-26, Mitigation Measure MM 4.13-1(a) has been modified to state:
MM 4.13-1 (a) Tbe,project applicant sball include metbods of water conservation in tbe proposed project's buildin8s
and landscapin8' Tbese metbods sball include, but not be limited, to tbe jollovvin8 (Tbis MitiSJation
Measure would not applv to DIoces,; development or research development laboratorv equipment or
to bioDharmaceutical manufacturing processes conducted purmant to U. S. Food and Drug
Administration's current Good Manufacturing Practice) (cGMPsl. ):
11II Install water-consenTin8 disbwasbers and wasbin8 macbines, and water-1fi.cient centralized
coolin8 systems in all new buildings (tbis me:r}u,d VfiClU]d not appl; tt5 pI "ass de dJClpmef'lt CJ1
u.s{.al ch de.v dCipme:nt lC1bClI arCil) equipm {.nt)
11II Install water-conservin8 irri8ation systems (e.g., drip irri8ation ,and Evaportranspiration-
based irri8ation controllers)
11II Gray water irri8ation system (as detailed in General Plan Policy PF-7, but otber elements
of tbat policy do not apply here, sucb as wastewater treatment jacilities))
11II Desi8n landscaping witb drou8bt-resistant and otber low-water-use plants
11II Install water-savin8 devices sucb as water-1fi.cient toilets, jaucets, and sbowerbeads
9.2.15
OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
Pages 5-5 and 5-6, the last paragraph on page 5-5 through 5-6, and Table 5-1 (Background Growth-2015
Future Without Project Conditions) have been modified to state:
The East of 101 Planninf Area has under~one substantial development during the past decade Through that
period the City has developed and updated proiections of anticipated cumulative 5fowth and development
for purposes of overall planning and for environmental review and plannin~ approvals for individual
proi ects
A "Summary of Cumulative GroV\Tth Proiects for the East of 101 Planning Area" (Summarv) was prepared by
the Citv of South San Francisco Planning Division in 2006 That Summary and the text below explains the
9-10 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Disi- ~_? ~.~Jansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 9 Text Changes
manner in which the City has made such cumulative growth proiections and reviewed them periodically to
ensure that they remain reliable and valid.
The City has used two approaches both of which are authorized by the California Environmental Ouality
Act CEOA Guidelines section 15130(b)(1) states that an EIR must include either II (A) a list of past
present and probably future proiects producinf related or cumulative impacts or (B) A summary of
ained in a d ted n ral la r r la ed Ian in
document which has been adopted or certified which described or evaluated regional or area wide
conditions contributinf to the cumulative impact Any such planning document shall be referenced and
made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency " For larger scale planninf proposals
(such as General Plan Amendments and zonin~ area amendments) the City has relied principally on the
" f"" 1 Th C . h d tl "Ii f ." 1 fr l'
summary 0 prOleCTIOnS approac 1 e lty as use 1e st 0 prOlects approac 1 more equent y m
considering individual proposals to construct the growth resultin~ from growth proiections
In 2006 the City a~ain reviewed the cumulative grown proiections it uses for overall planninf in the East of
101 Area and proiects located in that Area as follows'.
11II The analysis began with the data contained in the 1999 City of South San Francisco General Plan and
related Environmental Impact Report fFor example see General Plan Table 3 5-2 East of 101
Existing and Projected Building Area and Employmentl
11II The East of 101 Area cumulative growth projections were updated and revised in )000 using both a
revised maior proiects list and buildout proiections These data were used for the purpose of
determining the anticipated traffic . and thus revisinf the traffic impact fees for the East of 101 area
The )000 Update methodology and results are described in a November 30 2000 City Planninf
Department staff report titled "Projected Land Uses" ("2000 Update")
11II In 2001 the City recoEPized tlle pace of development in tlle East of 101 area was exceeding the 1999
General Plan proiections Several new proiects representin~ nearly two m.illion square feet had been
approved since the adoption of the 1999 General Plan The new development was concentrated in the
East of 101 Gateway and Oyster Point planning sub areas and comprised tlle conversion of older
industrial properties to Office/R&D uses Specifically the maioritv of the Office/R&D proiects were
vvithin the Genentech campus and Bay West Cove project at Oyster Point
11II In April 2001 the City prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) titled "South
San Francisco General Plan Amendment and Transportation Demand Management Ordinance" (2001
GP A) The General Plan Amendment consists of policies to implement the results of the traffic and fee
study and policies to implement the TDM Ordinance The City incorporated the ll,pdated cumulative
~owth proiects in the SEIR Implementing these policies would enhance capacity ease congestion
and increase mobility in tlle East of 101 area
11II In 2005 as part of a General Plan Amendment and related Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report ("2001 GP A") the City prepared an update to the Transportation Improvement Plan The
)000 Update cumulative ~owth proiections for the East of 101 Area again were reviewed and
updated (For example see Traffic Impact Fee Studv Update City of South San Francisco May 6
~
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri - 51.-msion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-11
Chapter 9 Text Changes
III Finally in 2006 as a check of the continuinE reliability prior proiections the Plannin~ Department
tested the cumulative gro~Tth projections in the 2005 GP A a~ainst a maior proiects list updated to
reflect actual and proposed building activity in the East of 101 Area
Based on this final review the Planning Division determined that the growth proiections (set forth in Table
5-1 as well as the City's 2006 Maior Proiects List and the East of 101 Area-Proiected Cumulative Growth-
2015 Future documents attached to the Summary) based on the prior certified Environmental Impact
Reports and planning studies as tested against the most recent maior proiect list fairly present reasonable
proiections for cumulative growth in the East of 101 Area
}~ SUn.LIJ.lal) of the gro vvth resultiI.Lg fron1 all the appro ved and proposed de, eloplTIent projects in the greatCl
East of 101 Area (as pro ,ided by the Cit) of South San Francisco) is idCl.Ltified in Table 5 1 (Background
Cl 0 H"tL 2015 Future \Vithout Project Conditions). Table 5 1 is based on the Cit) ) s proposed project list
de v"eloped in Decen.Lber 2005, and n as updated in 1hrch 200e based on the Cit)'3 v"[rbal conln1ents. FigUl e
5 1 identifies the specific cUlTIulati"v"c de v"elopment projects that arc ll.Lcluded ll.L th.e surTInlary of Table. 5 1
and sho"HS the location of net gI Ovyth of devdopnlent in the East of 101 }Jea. It is irJ..Lportant to note that
Terra Bay, Hhile not included in the East of 101 J^...rea, is included in the cul.L1ulatL"e projects list bccause it
shares an on ran1.p Hith the 11IIn. Study }...rea and thus, pro vides a n.Lore accUl ate I epI esentation of
cun1ulati v"e traffic gro"vvtL fm future de v"elopn1eI.Lt. The TI affic n.eport, V/ ater Supply }...sse3sfiJ.Cllt, and 2006
East of Highvva) 101 Sevyu ~v1aster Plan J\ddendun1 prepared for the project all rely on this cun1ulative
gro vvth table forthcir respecti";e pi ojections and analysis of the proposed project.
O\~Clall, there is anticipated to be gIOntll of over 1.6n1illion sf b) year 2015, prin.Laril)" office al.Ld R&D
space. It should be noted that these ;alues do l.LOt include an; plam1ed or progI-amn1ed pr.:::rjccts v"ithil.L
Cenentech.
B8]' 'Nest Cove m,QOO ~
G8tO'Nay ~ ~
Oyster Point ~ ~
p 4M;7+9 4M;7+9
R ~ ~
South C8mpus ~ ~
Terra Bay 49,7% ~ ~ 99+-;#@
~ ~ +a,149 ~
Upper Campus outside Overlay ~ ~
~ ~ ~
6 ~ ~
G:-:md TotJ.' ~ ~ 3,572, 672 ~ ~ 4,64€,799
9-12
-
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist~ ~ _ 5 2 ~)ansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
Chapter 9 Text Changes
Ceml1W1'cial ·
SOURCE: l':orV8 EFlgifleeriF!g 2006, data ElompileEl as efDeElsmher 2005
'" Ref~r to LegsF!d OF! FigHrs 5 ] for ideFltifieation of j3arcels aFld specific j3rojects,
Bay West Cove 742.000
Gateway 121.000
Oyster Point
E 164.779
E 315.000
South Camous 789.000
Terra Bay 25.000 665.000
U 890.573 12.149
Uooer Camous outside Oyerlay -43.215
'i 283.867
Z 133.000
Grand Total ~ 460.398 3,818.440 -31.066
.Io1o.l
899.500
186.250
237.648
164.779
315.000
789.000
690.000
902.722
-43.215
283.867
133.000
fl 4,558.551
SOURCE' Korve Enf!ineerinf! 2006 data comni1ed as of December 2005
* Refer to Lef!end on FillUre 5-1 for identification of narcels and snecific nroiects
Page 5-30, the second paragraph has been modified to state:
CWSC has committed to reducing demand in all service areas (the service areas include the City east of 1-
280 where the MEIR Study Area is located as well as the cities of San Carlos and San Mateo') in 2030 by
2.36 mgd,1 which will allow CWSC to meet average, but not single dry year demands (10.8 percent
probability of a shortage). A 10.8 percent probability of mandated reduction of normal year demand is
considered a significant impact. As analyzed in the cumulative effects on groundwater, the proposed project
would represent 20 percent of the projected growth for the CWSC's three peninsula districts; as such the
proposed project impact on supply is cumulatively considerable.
I Personal Communication with Nicole Sandkulla, Monday, March 6,2006.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distr: - 53 .-msion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-13
-54-
CHAPTER 10 Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
10.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the adoption of feasible mitigation measures to
reduce the severity and magnitude of potentially significant environmental impacts associated with project
develoPlnent. The Final Master Environmental Impact Report (Final MEIR) for the Genentech Research and
Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update (the proposed project),
SCH No. 2005072165, dated February 9, 2007, recommends that the City of South San Francisco (the City)
adopt a range of mitigation measures that will mitigate to the extent feasible the environmental effects that
could result from the implementation of the proposed project.
Monitoring of the implementation of adopted mitigation measures is required by Public Resources Code
Section 21081. 6. This dOCUlnent identifies mitigation measures (MMs) and project requirements2 (PRs) of
the Final MEIR, and describes the process whereby the MMs and PRs would be monitored following
certification of the Final MEIR and adoption of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)'
by the City.
10.2 PURPOSE
The purpose of the proposed Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate
Facilities Master Plan Update Final MEIR MMRP is to ensure compliance -with all mitigation measures to
mitigate or avoid potentially significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project
that were identified in the Final MEIR. Implementation of this MMRP shall be accOlnplished by the City.
Project-specific Initigation measures will be implemented (1) as part of design development of t.lJe proposed
project, (2) during proposed project construction, or (3) as part of proposed project operations.
10.3 RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES
In general, monitoring V\rill consist of demonstrating that mitigation measures were implemented, and that
the responsible unit monitored the iInplementation of the measures. The responsible unit for determining
compliance -with all mitigation measures -will be the City. Monitoring V\rill consist of determining whether:
III The specific issues identified in the mitigation measures were considered in the design development
phase
III Construction contracts included the provisions specified in the mitigation measures
III The required actions specified in the mitigation measures occurred prior to or during construction
2 Project Requirements are applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations that are considered part of the Project Description.
Genentech Research and Development Overlay Distri - 5. -msion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 10-1
Chapter 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
III Ongoing administrative activities included the provisions identified in the mitigation measures
Any concerns between monitors and construction personnel shall be addressed by the City of South San
Francisco. The contractor shall prepare a construction schedule subject to review and approval by the City
of South San Francisco Building Department.
10.4 LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES
All project-specific mitigation measures and project requirements included in the Final MEIR for this
proposed project would be monitored as described above. These measures are listed in Table 10-1.
The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages is formatted to parallel the format of the Executive
Summary table contained in the Final MEIR. The matrix identifies the required mitigation measures, the
time frame for monitoring, and the responsible monitoring agencies.
10-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Disl- 56 -pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
...
...
~
;...
~
~
~
.~
~
&
~
~
~
tJJ
.:::
;...
~
.....
.;:
~
~
...
.~
.....
t:l
.~
.....
;.;
~
c::::,
~
~
~
6
c::
ctI
(.f)
.c
"5
o 0
~ .~
~ffi
oW:
ctI
>.
Q)
Q) 2:
:5 ::J
-o~ en
Q) co
en :=:
8..~
e ::J
0.. en
.~ ro
c:::J).c
c:: en
:~ 03
-o@-
~Ci5
'0.. ~
:!::: -0
=-'E- en
:5 Q)
'S;: 03 c:: ro
:> 0.. Q) .c
1Q ~:5 en
8'~ g ~
Ci=c::O
:o15CO~
-OCO:!:::Q)
Q) 4- -0
~OC::Q)
ro ro .Q :5
5- ~ ~ crJ-
co~~1Q
>'::J 0.. ><
..0 en ctI Q)
-0
c:: I-
co.....; J2
c:: .~ = co 2
~.8 ~ ~ 15 'en .Q
...... 0 c:::J)enc~t5
c:: 'C:: c:: c:: (]) 2
ECD 0.. ~ co E ~ en
>. = 0.. >. 0 c::
~G15c.2en 0
~ Q) Q) ~ ~'o, ~
co .c :5 Q) Q) -00 :5
E ....... 4- c:::J) Q) ._ 4-
co.8~co.c..oo
CD t:>ffi~-gE
ro~C::E-otj::03
g-..o ~ Q)i5~~
Q. 55 .~ ~ .=: 5-:5
CF.J
~
U
c:z::
;::J
o
CF.J
~
..:l
<
U
....
~
o
...:1
o
~
-g ~ .~ g J5 .8 ~ ~ ~
ro c:::J) 0 :m .~ ~
"g ~ .~ .~ ~ .~ g Q) ~
~ en {5'- en en CD =5 ~ '<
co 5, cb :!::: -E ~ 2 ~ .E
~~~-o -00 ""
:~ .c 0 .g; :;;! ~ 0 ~
-0 c:::J) c:: 5- c:: c:: c:: I- ~
cbg:!:::Q):.gco;EB
~:S oj ~ ~:5'~ g J5
.c ..... :0 ro 1-.9d ~ .8 ro
~ 2:"'en en J2 I- Q) ._en .c
co co ~ >. >. -;; ro en
E::Jo..(])Q)CD
.........0 2:2:oro~$
~ Lf ~ 55 55 c:: CD'S;: s
roQ)xo 1Q-g{535
en :5 (]) c:: ctI_ 8' g .92 I-
~ -0 ~ -0 -g 12 .- '0.. 5)
t:>'~ 0 .c..oro Q) 2:
Q) co .8 "~ CD CD ...c: 03 :::::l
:5 0.. 0.. = ~ .c (.f)
.8 ~ 0) c:::J) ~~ CD 3= ......
c ~ ~ :5 :.g $: ~ ffi .~
~ .92 ..... 35 ~ 16 ~ ro ~
"~~ 03 c:: Q) ~ C.f) Q) :0
~:g~~:5~m:5Q)
-g ~6c:::J)~ Cl""ro15:5
~ .Q -o.=: 0> co Q) en >.
....... I- >. ~ .92 ..0
c:: ~ .Q :::::l CO..o . ro
o .l:::; 03 -0 0 '"0 0-0
"7 en 0.. '"0 ...... CD . S c::
..... 6 c:::J) ~ ..92 "t5 .:::: g
-.:i t:>:5 8.. ~ .g -9 ..0
:a::5350COC::Q)CD
:a: .~ c:: 0. ~ g ~:5
-oro
(]) en
~ ~~~
2 0..a5~
en I:i::: ""
c:: =~ co e
o _ >..c
o =ffi~
:5:.;:::;0
~.~ 2~
-.:i-oen
Q)..o
ro556
'u -0 E
~ S E
en 0 0
co t:> t:>
co:5-a:5
.~ ~
c
CD
"':'"0
Q) .-
>
Q)
3= CD
.~ ~:S
en ,....
;E co
:S
CI:l
..... CI:l
I CD
.....-
-:i.8
:2:
:2:
-
t:>
C\l
0..
~
-0
Q)
t:>
::J
:Ecjo~~
r-~ ~Cl)
. E c:: CD ..0
$: .- .Q E-o
g rn S
co........cc::o-:::::
53-~~~~~
~~~g~t::
o .2'> E .- E .S2J
en en._ E._ CI:l
2
co
-0
>.
CD
2:
:::::l
en
Q)
-g:5
c:: 0)
.- c::
E'~
-*g
-oJ2
en-o(])O
2~=C::
:0 8.. ro .~
~en=CD
CDo-oQ5
..0 0.. CD =
(]) c::
.8 ..0 'E -g
~roQ5CO
Q) -fij ~ -o~
ro '-' CD
c:::J)enro
~.~ ~ g
.=: {5 en >
'"0 cb'o,.~
(])~~en
~ en~:.a ~
8 .~ ~ (])
~~:a=
c:: = - en
.~ 6 3= 1? C5..
..0 co CD E
c:: c:: 2
.Q c (]) ro
t5 ::J = 0)
2 0 ~ .=:
en ..92en
C::~-Q)
oQ)-oC::
t:>(])CD'"O
3= c:::J) c::
-00
o (]) t:>
zt;:=~
(]) 4-
> 0
~~
~ffi
::J~
o >
>.(])
en
Q)
c::
Q)
.2:
t5
ctI
c::
co
ro15
.c .......
........ Q)
~
c
(])oen
> LO co
Q).....~
Q)C::ro
=;EI-
.5 .~ .e
c::
ctI
(.f)
.c
"5
o 0
(.f) t:>
4- en
o "u
cffi
oW:
co co >. 4-
~15~~
..0 Q) ::J t:>
:::::l t:> en c::
enC::(])2
=ffi ~ = .~
-fij . ~ :!::: ~
Q5.8~~
0..1-
o 0 03 35
Ci5 . c:: 0.. c::
> 0.. c:::J)"-
~ 5).==: E
Q)c:;g2
.c ::J ::J Q)
!-en..o-o
-57-
J!f~~
ffio.92
E 3= c::
Q) - 'm
en .!:: ::D' E
Q) ....... 5-:;::-- ~
. u ffi c:: ~ r:i?
Q)t:>g .....-0
55- ~ co -:i ~
.......a,c 0:::>
C::.- Q) "t5 :>
~enEQ)D..........
1:) 0.. ..92' 0' -0 ~
Q) 0..1-C::0..
'0' g; ctI E 0.. co E 1::
0.. :e .- --'- co
~ -0 ~.~ ~
'"0 (]) Q) ..... .c ";:::
Q) en Q5 a5 16 r:i? ....... .0,
~........-o>~-r-:~Ci5
0.. t:> 'en ~ C """ :::l
e ~ 6 0 ~._(]) 0:: ~ m
o..COt:>:r:'-'D...CD:S
:i
o
Ci3
.c
e
.....
rh
.....
-.:i
0::
0-
-0
c::
co
~
.....
rh
.....
oo::i
0::
0-
Q)
Q)
(.f)
en (])
Jg:5
'S;: 15
:g
ctI
.....; CD
t:>.c
en ~ ........
~.s '0
..2:--.~
~
c
co
en
..0
::J
en
c::
.Q
C::ro
Oc
:g (])E :g
2 -'
~~8
8.s
:5
:z .~
oo::i-o
Q)
ro
u 'u
ra 0
c..en
~~
>.0)
........ c::
Q) o~
=eoQ)=
:515
.8 eo
c::15
co Q)
o..g
ceo
CD ::J
E ~
CD'-
00......;
~ ::'E
co .@ Q5
Eo..o..
en-:=:
Q) E
. U ..0
Q) ::J
0.. en
en _
c:: eo
co.c
_ en
0..1-
Q) Q)
> 0..
:.;:::; 0
. en (j)
c:: >
Q) Q)
en-o
c::
ctI
(.f)
.c
"5
o 0
(.f) t:>
15 '[5
cffi
oW:
15
Q)
t:>
.g t5ffi
'S;: Q)::J
o 0)'0' ~
a'.=: 0.'-
-3=Q).8
roO.c1-
...c:.c........0.....;
~~~.~.E
~g 3=$ 03
.2.i9~ffiO"
g; ffi ffi E ~
Q) E:.= ~ ~.-_
-0 :::::l 0...-
Q) t:> E ::J ::J
~ -8 8 ~~
:i
o
Ci3
.c
e
.....
rh
.....
oo::i
0::
D...
-0
c::
eo
~
.....
rh
.....
-.:i
0::
0-
CD
Q)
(.f)
..;::;35 CD'O 03
=enc
. s;: l.+- (])
:go.8
eo
:5
:! .~
-.:i-o
(])
_ro
U '(3
ra 0
c..en
~ ~
-0
Q) c::
~ 0
0.. . en
o 0
0.03
....... (])
t:>.c
co......
0..
.s
15
f'f")
I
'='
....
Q)
.....
~
"'0
c..
~
....
~
c:
Q)
.....
en
~
~
en
.~
:=
'c::i
~
~
Q)
.....
~
:...
o
c..
:...
o
U
-
=
o
.~
=
~
c..
~
~
.....
Cj
'i:
.....
en
~
.,.,
~
Q)
;>
o
'";::
Q)
S
""
0'
"Q)
;>
Q)
Q
-g
~
...
"E
~
Q)
en
Q)
~
...
~
~
=
Q)
=
Q)
o
-
-
~
;..,
0Jj
~
Q:;
~
.-
't-o
~
&
~
~
~
~
.e
~
.1:::
:::::
~
~
-
~
.....
'a
.~
~
<:::::l
....,
;..,
~
.....
~
..::::
U
-0 t5
g..92
;:
c:
cu
CJ)
.c:
"5
o 0
CJ) ~
0.0
.2:-ffi
oW:
o
0)
u
~ 't5ffi
> .~~
oO)oen
n...s: n..'-
_;:0).8
~~:50
~ ~:E.~ =E
8.J5;:$ 0:5
.Q1925as~
g; as ffi E c:
0) E:= ~ _.=-0_-
-0 ::::l 0...-
0) u E ::::l ::::l
~ .g 8 ~~
~
o
Q)
.c
e
.....
M
.....
~
0:::
C-
-0
c:
cu
~
.....
M
.....
~
0:::
C-
O)
0)
CJ)
-0
"S
o
;:
~ ~ -g 0 ~ a3 ~ z-.~
~ 0) 0 ~.o - E
o 0) ::0 ~ ;: ;: n.. -0 0)
'- eno c:.....
c:~19Q):.c:J:-gcuJ2
.Q 2 ~ -g I- t.;::: ::::l
10 .c:_ '- 0..' :;::;c: -_cu ~
....... oE~cj ;>
O)c: en . - :=:: cu .QZ ..... 't5
J2 0) en 0...::::: M cu
~ g "g 0 i::'.~ ~ :: "~o..
0... u 0.. - Q.) -......
E't5~ ~ ~c::og: Cfi
.~ ~ :g c ~ c: ;S
U?2a30~~J5cn~
;; 0.. E u '"Cl 0) 19 c::
-g g; 2:'0 ~ .U5 a3 ~ ~
~ ~ E ~ g; cu ~ .~ ;
a. g- 0) .2> ~ 0... 0- g t5
.s n..:5 E c: 15 .~ ~ ;: ..92
't5
cu
0..
.~ ~
~.~ ~
......c:~
M........~
.....0)U5
~ ::;
0::: en co
o..a3:S
c:
cu
CJ)
.c:
"5
o 0
CJ) ~
o '(3
.2:-ffi
oW:
~ ro
"Eo
..0 Q)
::::l C.,)
en c:
ro ~
.c: en
en.~
0) 0)
:5 c:
32
co .8 '5
.c:C:..o
en ~ cu
.~ Q5 -EO
~g-0)25
~a:;Ec:
_>O)CU
1O~ g>~
:5 ~ ffi .~
.......E.9
-,:::;cuo
0) ........- .
1:; . En..:=::
E ..0 .2:- E
~~o8.
>,0)
g;..o
::;
en
0)
:5
==
Ci3.9=E
0.......
o 0 Q5 ~
~ . is.. 0.. c:
Q) >, g"E
~~:EQ5
.c: ::::l '5 CD
I-en..o-o
cu 0::: {5 g' 0 15 ~
~ ill cu '2 0 = ""'
:.c:~W2~CU$
co Q.) ~ 0.. ~ -55 'E
-55 ~ 0 0 O:5:=::E ~
c:::.c:~coi5..,-
~=s:.......1:;,g0)g>
'-' ;:> -0 E u 0..._
:= en c: 0) _.~;:g
8:~cu'-C"?.c:::::l
cu ..l:::; c:: >,..... I- ..0
't5o~~Jg.-:..~
Q) .- 0).- U 0
'0 ~ 0.......... I- ::2: Q)
o..Q)o..~'-u....o
C: cu 0.. Q) CJ)
Q) ....... E 0.. CJ) '"Cl
:5 ~ ~ .- :=:: -- g;
c: c: '0 Z- E Q) 0
.Q .Q n.. 't5 8: 15 0..
't5 g 0) .~ _ c> g-
2..l:::;:5-o~coQ)
en ~ 0 ..00) 0 0....0
c: 0 ....... E '0
o C.,) 0.. = Q)'- en
.:: ~ cuE'~ ~ 5 ::::l
o 0.. ....... 0)::2: E
t:: 't5 cu ,g .s: 0 -0
-ffi.g~;;2~ffi
Q) 5';:; ~ CL "0 .2:-
:5C.,)2.......Q)~u
.9 0.. as ~ I~ .Q)-
.9__-0-01-......
o'~ ffi.;;; CU ffi:5
;t -e ro g; .~ CJ) .8
C";'lro~-o::::l:5-o
..... -0 <( 2 g g :@
~ SQ >, u '- CJ) .- -ci
~-o2= EQ)
:=.....::::loroQ)"O~
:= 25 U5 n.. -55:5 ~ .~
~
ro
t..)
t;:::
't:
.~
s:::
co
:s
Q) Q) en ...: -0 en s:::
:5:5:.c:g;~;S:s
:s1-0):;::;
o .S: <ri ;: as - CJ:l
;:>uo-oNCJ:l
c: 't5 ffi J: . - ...:. ..92
.Q iE .~ cj CD ~ B
1OC:'"Ecu:5::2:
i~~!o::2:~
Q) ::::l:;::; c: c: Q)--o
0...8~~J5::;~
E't5Q5~19~Q)
Q) en c: c: Q) ..0
O? '0 Q) .2> 0) E -0
;; 0..c:L ~ ~ g
-o~O)o...B;:co
.....gs'-"OE:;::;
g 0 I- -0 .- cu U ~
a. g- ~ "S :5 ~ ~'t:
,g n...Q ~ .~ E .~ .~
-58-
U
::2:
u..
CJ)
CJ)
.s:
.c:
1::
..Q
CD
en
en
cu
-0
Q)
c:
'E
Q5
CD
-0
0)
..0
co
.c:
en
en
0)
g;g
o
cg
Q)cv:i
E.....
0) c:
~ .Q
0...'t5
0) 0)
O:::CJ)
en
;:
.Q
::e
en
cu
-0
Q)
U
cu
0...
~
0)
..0
-0 0)
0) 0)
u '-
cu.......
- .c:
o..u
0) cu
'- Q)
x-o-o
o Q) c:
..oc:cu
gj.~
~~O)
C"?enCtl
oCCl1;2
1:-0-0
g;.9
oE:L:: =E8.
~ ~.g' 0:5 ~
. U5 Q) 0) 0.. en
x ,g;:5 '.;g-g
15.c: en ~~
~ {5 ~.~ ~ cu.~
en c:~:gasg
~~..QE[:e~E~
E Q) gs '- 0 ;:'2 a:;
~ Q),g; ~ ~ -g .E ~
O):EO)~~1:;x~
ro Q) g-:.o ;: E 15 'E
10..0 ~~ ~ ~{5 0:5
:5 co -g --_.s: ~.s: CD
~-55~0:5en-x~
g; c: ~ 1]) ~ -g 'cr ro
Q) .en ;:0 :: 't5 .2:--0
EEJ:020~~
25::::l . ~
.m .~ ;:0'0 0.. ~ ~
....... c: 0) >,-- '-
& .E ~ 5} ~ ii' ~
~ s:
0) '-
..o..Q
co~
-55,g;
-0
Q)
't5
2
2
0..
>,
c:
<(
~
CCl 0:5
"- .c:
00
't5co
~
:.0 CD
Q) Q)
:5E
>,.9
..0
-0
Q)
>
'm
;:
Q)
..0
c:
ro
C.,)
Q)
,g;
c:
.Q
.2:- ~
Q5 <ri en
o..u..o
2 c: ~
o..~
Q):.o .s:
:50
c: c:
o .Q
en~
.x Q5
-oQ)en
Q) en ~
't5Q)0..
Q) -~ Q)
o-g;
0.. 0 Q)
CClQ5:5
0..00
c:: ~ $c:
Q) c:
~ c:: ~
~"~ "~
g.~ 0-
O:::en~
E
Q)
-
~
"C
c..
~
....
e:a
E:
:..
Q)
-
tI)
~
~
tI)
.~
:=
'c;
~
r..
Q)
-
~
o
P-
o
U
"';:::;
o
.~
~
c..
~
~
o
N
-
.~
.:::
tI)
Q
>.
~
1:
Q)
;;..
o
-
=
Q)
5
c..
o
Q)
;;..
Q)
Q
"C
=
~
-0
0)
10
c:
0)
.(i5
0)
-0
en
cu
-=
c,)
:..
~
Q)
tI)
Q)
~
en-
0)
g;
rJ
Q)
-
=
~
Q3
e"
c::
0)
E
0)
u
CU
D..
~
"-
:::!:..
"::l"
I
o
....
...
~
~
c
ct
~
.::::
--
~
&
c::::
~
~
~
'i::
c
--
.:::
~
...
~
......
--
/:::
.~
.....
~
~
~
......
l...
':U
.....
~
..::::
U
'O~-5.Ew,
c.Qc75r:::o
~ ~ . 8.~
>..I->..:::J"--
co CD :::::: r::: .
o..EU ;;:1:
.c;CDCD~O
I-..c:..c:-oO
CD............ 0
8->"0150
1-..0...... N
0.."C .8::;::;:.
~ .~ -g ~ ro
:;EE2-3:
o CD 0) ..--
......CDr:::CQ)
b~~..Cl=..--
~~.......r::: C/) = CO t-
~.'~ CO ~ ~~
L..o..CDC/)~-o
t:::l.CD~ ""I-
~=~-e-;Q,
!:::O:5CO:5cn
~ E '0 ~ r:::'~
:;Ef3CD2~C
== as.2 Cf) .$ ~
.~ J5 ~ CD 'Cfj -0
f3......~ ~ffi
l,;:::.=r::::::J""
~ 8: ~ "g ~ ffi
COCDO..Cl~
C/) ~ ..Cl ~
ro 0.. ~ }g :::J
g ~ '0 C/) ~~
u~ -E~~
ffi ~ ~ ~ "~ c
C/). ......> }~ ~:g ro
;S ;:> v,! 0.. 0..-3:
rn
2
<e
N
~
Z
o
E=
<e
~
z
;;:J
z
.....
~
z
<e
~
o
o
~
~
-0
~
'3
CJ"
~
"~
r:::
,52
rn
g
"E
o
z
u
r:::
ro
u
o
o
c;::
:5
"~
u
.$
CO C/)
"[5 -0
o Co
C/) N
en ro
~..r:::
1:)8
~=
E~
,- r:::
o :::J
Z ,~
r::: l/)
I
"52 0
1:) -
2
en
r::: r:::
0
CO (.)
Cf) "C
..c: r:::
"5 CO
0 0 0
Cf) (.) 1:)
'O"~ ~
>..r::: c
...... ro
GU: 0
(.)
en ro
:::J '0
u
ro CD
(.)
"E r:::
ro
..0 :::J
:::J C/)
C/) .~
ro.8
-55 0
Ci5 -~ ~
Cl..r:::I-
~~ ~
>0..0)
~o .~
.J:::;u
CDr:::=
~8E
>c
Eo-<
:5
<e
;;:J
D
~
<
>....c: r:::..2:">
..c::::::gro
u ;;: (.) :::J
~..2:">2CJ"
a5 ~en CD
Eog15
E (.) (.)
8 ro "~ .8
~ -55 r:::
~ en~ ~
I--r.2..c:
:::J 0 (.) C/)
~ 1:) .~ C/)
CD ro CD
E~ro ~
~~-55ffi
oa3-5E
(.) .~ CD I-
en2co
:::J Cl.. CD
uCDr:::$
.$~(ga5
"~" E
0.;;:u5~
O..Q CD "-
n. 15 "0, 5-
g-u ~ ~
......CDI-en
a5 ~ en r:::
E"5 '~
CDOe.Q
o..enc:E
E ro 0
-0 (.) CD
n32en:5
:;::-O:::Jen
M.<(uU Q)
<( ,~
'<:tCOCD~1:)
:ECD~Ctfg
:E:5:58CD
rn
r:::
-g 'm
roc
r::: 'm
.52 E
u.8
2 C/)
en..:.:::
r::: (.)
8~
0) ..c:
C/) (.)
o :::J
.QC/)
IDro
=E~
'3
UCJ"
ffi ~
-00
ffi 0)-
C/)::::::
en
"- CD
fi5:5
g>E
=s.g
CO
..c:
..:.:::
(.)
~
.~
..c
CD
u
r:::
=cog
ID~
3 ~
Uu
..
u
Co
o
..0
0)
0)
J:::
'0
05
~
o
1:
en
co
..92
C/)
co
CD
ro
r:::
.52
1:)
2
en
r:::
o
(.)
0)
,~
1:)
ro
.~
C/)
CD
(.)
~
:::J
C/)
'0
C/)
u
CD
-e
:::J
en
:.a
o
u':::-
CD 'm
~u
0..0)
X (.)
CDE
roen
ID co
rn..92
$rn
r:::
o
C/)
ID
~
:0
co
en
en
r:::
'0,
ro
en
u
r:::
ro
C/)
co
CD
ro
en
r:::
32
ro
0..
u
CD
>
CO
0..
en
ID
0..
CD
CD
;;:
C/)
ID
co
$:
:5
~
I-
:.a
u
r:::
co
u
:::J
E
'0
0..
:::J
C:
co
CD
C3
..2:">
"m
u
CD
~~
CD 2
roD..
E
o
J:::
C/)
05
~
en
"C
0)
>
co
0..
.8
r:::
o
u
.~
Co
(.)
en
u
co
2
u
CD
>
co
Cl..
r:::
t :::J
.$:s.g
ro C/) en
;;:..92 ~
..: fr CD
~ g fit
0...... (.)
(.)~ ~ fE
.$ CD CD jg
'Cfj .Q gs
-......~ g ~ :~
WCD-I
..
.8
C/)
ID
u
r:::
:0
'0
C/)
(.)
"x
Sf
r:::
o
r:::
>..
0..
0..
co
o c.i
.:::-05
"m "C~
Ur:::
CD co
(.) en
]
..
'Cfj
c
CD
>
CD
n.
.8
C/)
CD
..r::: ~
Cl..en
E co
L!? CD
..-- E
.8e
c
o
(.)
r:::
o
"Cfj
o
ID
ID
..r:::
-0
.. ..
::t=
o
r:::
2
C/)
..:.:::
(.)
jg
o
C/)
~
CD
J5 _......~
"Cfj
en ::t=
8. 0
C/) ..c:
co ~
~;;:
(.) 0
'3
CJ
C/)
co
C/)
co
CD
ro
-0
CD
..Cl
~roc
en I- CD
:.aEE
.~ ~"@-
"Q -55 g
co ro"C
05 $: ffi
o)IDC/)
CD CD..:.:::
> ..c: (.)
c ;;:~
~ro
(j)enro
a: 5 '0
"0
C/)
D
'x
.8
C:
o
..s.
>.. C/)
0.. co
Cl..CD
co ro
og>ro
>,"0,
=ffi2
u C/)
C/)-o
CD r:::
.E ~
...... co
CD CD
CD ro
:5 en
ID~
co I-
;;: ~
..2:">u
Cl..0)
Cl..>
co co
- 0..
0) r:::
> :::J
~ro
..
.. ..
..2:">
'ffi
-0
0..
0)
CD
;;:
UJ
C/)~ CD
..:.::: ::::::
(.) C/)
2 CD
...... ..c:
en......
r:::0)
...... r:::
"~ "S;
x ro
CD..92
o ~
C/) ro
~~
..Cl co
-g 2
55"~
J5
ro :::J
enCl..
5.8
.. II
.Q~i~~E ~:m
1:)u......roco 0)=
2 a5EEi::"';;:c:
enCD-oCDCD~o~
~~81~<~~~~=
couCD:5:i5:i52coo
CD ;;: r::: en .8 ro ro co .E_o..
E CO-o 0.. 0.. CD c:
..92 -"3 ..92 ...... """..Cl r- 0
0..1:)0)00..00 Cti=
r- Q.) "~ (.) 0 CD -0 t..:l 2
5 '0 ffi ..c: ~ -t5 g g ~ a5
M 0. en.~ en tfg ~;;: S, E
M _ ~ .~ CD 0 C/) 'CiS ..92
..,; u 8 ~ >.. E :.c ~ Cl..
CD = C/) 0..:5 ro I- ~ .E
-- C/) ro CD x - ' .~
~ 0 fU~ 0) ~~ g>i::
o..8-(.)=~..c:"""=~:5
.5 0.. ~ ~ :5 3 0 fi5 8.."~
CD CD
:55
C3
'0 "~
-59-
-0 CD
r::: ..Cl
co
_u
~"3
..-- 0
M;;:~
-.:i ~
2~~
2 ~.~
C/)'- t::
g;C/)~
@;S CJ")
CD CJ")
E - CD
;3:-;;
r::: ..-- ......
"52Mu
co . CD
en o:::t (.)
:E2-El
E ~ ~
Cl.l
.....
~
"'0
Q..
;J
c:
~
~
Q)
.....
"-I
~
~
"-I
Cl.l
~
'Cj
~
r-.
Cl.l
.....
~
l-c
o
E-
o
u
-
c:
o
'~
~
Q..
Ii<
~
.....
.~
.:::
Tn
Q
;;...,
~
Q)
...
o
.....
c:
Cl.l
-
-
c.
o
Qj
...
Cl.l
Q
"S
~
-
p
;
Cl.l
"-I
Cl.l
~
-
t:i
Q.)
.....
c:
~
Qj
Co-'
...
:::
~
l..
C.o
~
~
~
.::::
1"l
~
&
~
~
~
~
.::::
~
.....
-:::
~
...
~
....
.....
~
.~
.....
~
<:
~
.....
....
.;::
~
..::
U
en
:::l
g Qj
~ ~ ~
ro ro 0
c:enU
:B e.. ,Q
2 en 0:5
en~~
5 =:"5
c.:> c: c:
'0 ~'E
=:0
>.C'?
:s;ro
i5~
ro 0
~L.-
:.0 g
ro.J::
Cnw
uo..
c: en
ro Qj
5E
:';::;\.0
g;N
rou
~ gs
Qj c.:>
U x
c: Qj
-ro ~en
en ~ ~
.E:(/)en
en
Q)
-0
'en
-0
ro
=:
-0
c:
'~
Q)
:S
10
en
~
ro
Q)
J5
U
c:
.~
.. II
c:
.Q
t5
2
en
c: c:
ro 0
(/)~
..c: c:
"5 ro ....
00.9
(/) c.:> (.)
'O'B ~
z-,ffic
C3Li:8
en ro
~'O
ro Qj
(.)
'E ffi
..0 :::l
:::l en
en.!:Q
-ro.9
-550
Qj'~ ~
~ffi0:5
~o..~
.gs '0 .~
.l::;-o
Qjc:=
..c: 0 :::l
I-c.:>..o
U -ro].Ei'o
ffi -55 ro en Ci5
en c:: ....... c:
en 2 .~.ffi 5
~ 'en .gs 0.. en
ro C:roEo~
Cn 0 ........
i5'Oc.:>-ro
r:: Q) 2 0)"" .9 c:
.Q .~~_ en 0
ro- c:..ou:';::;
>Q) oE5:.o
r55 c.:>~5}T6
~>.<(O)~en
.9 ffi c5E c:~
t5 ro ro Cl.. r5 'S;
~E~-g ~
:::l.2: 0 ro ~
~~ 00)~0
~c:~~oen
ro 0 - C::ro15
Ji i5 c 0) c: 'S;
...... 2 8:s:.oi5
~~en5gro
_o~1Oc.:>en-=
2- ~ ro c.:> 2'5 e
~:$ 18~c~c
enCU cu:::loe8
o '- 5>0 c.:> Cl.........
0.. ~ 'en ~ (j) ...!., ~
c ~ Qj'o.. ~ ~ -0
Qj 0 enuu L.-
X i5 :0_ 5 c: ens
Qj ~ (.) .Q c: c
:S w ;:; ro 1:5:.0 Q)
~ ~ oo:t ~ ~ ~.~
:E05~5-
II :E Cl.. c.:> en Q)
c:
o
i5
2
(j)
c: c:
ro 0
(/)~
..c: c:
"5ro....
c558.9
'O'B ~
z-,ffic
C3Li:8
ro .....;
'E
'E .9 0:5
-gL.-Cl..
en .Q en
es...~
-roc:;g
-55ro:::l
L.- 0....0
~'O2
..Q.l::;o
~ 5 ~
.gs~ffi
~'5 ~
I- c:.!:Q
~
rJ:J
o
Z
=ffi '0 en- 0:5 ~
- en fO':5 0
~~uO(j)
-O~..c:cu
5S..c:.......c.:>2
C!Q)~~1O
~:5c:
oogs~1o"*
.~ ~ ~ 0 E
t505O-enc:
Qj ..0 0 fO'.Q
(/)0l?:2t5
cD; 00 '0 2
uO).9..c:(j)
0=== '-0 c:
<.)E~C:8
~~<C:_
'u ..0 0 >. ===
'c l? ro E
:::l-rom-g L.-
~-55cn:::l~
_en z-, fO' (/) Qj
~U~5~en
........O)Qj .~c:
Q) ..c: ~ ~ .n .Q
..c:......;> 'U
...... .~ c: 0- f8 ~
:S ..c: 0 0 'C E
.~ === ,0 0 ,-
......=:~tO:5Q)
ffi E 0- .9 ~ '5
(j):f;O ,Q) c:
"en (.) <? ~.n Q
c:rooo .>c:
o 0 <( CU'-
<.) .9 ....... 0 E ~
.....g~oo..~~
oo:t.l::;<C"-enQ)
oo:t~g-o~:S
g:8o.:iffi~'O
ent5.......
150)~
:~ .2'.......
t5 Cl.. en
rouCi5
c: ~ 5)
.Q 8..-
t500)
2 es...!:Q
(j) 0
c: 0) c:
8:S
u
~
]2
::c
ro
en
0)
en
u
ro
-0
ffi
en
2 0)
:Sroen
......~ 0:5 '0
oo:t c:C:
oo:t-oO)O)
0) en:S
CiS -0
'u -0 0)
o '"5 0)
en 0 (.)
~ =: ~
....
(.)
l'13
C.
B
.!:Q Q)
Q) >
'~c~
.gsEc
Ci5Q)Q)~
~:S~.......
Q)-cu.9
en 0) Q)
'0 Ln E ~
C:~~C3
~05"""_en
c.:> ..S2 >. cu
:::lQ)13~
"8 ~ Cl.. c:
.... I 0 ro
0.. z-, es..}Q
-roC:Q)u
-55~:5CU
.......:::c:1o
c: 0 0
Q) ,,, L.- Qj
Eo2~
.9- ffi '(6 t5
5-(j)~ 2
Qj ,- 0 en
_u Qj
oro~:5
~1o.3 Qj
.92 CO g -0
0.. u .l::; 'en
- >.en"5
~Q5roO
UC:C:Qj
:~ 'c ;S T6
-g ~.~ E
'0 :g a3 15
zQjen
_c.:>:::l
..-~~
..
c:51:5g~
ro Qj .- :::l
Cl.. '0 10 0
,s es..g:5
'E
o ro
(.)
en -0
'u Qj
c: w
rou
Li: . en
c:
c: 0
ro c.:>
(/) , !:Q
:5 en
g:.c
(/)1-
-a.5
Ou
o
z-, <.) Q)
u-ro..2:'>g
Qj 0.. IQ .~
..c: :Q c 0..
......c:QjE
.Ei'~ "8.8
Q) u
:5ffi~~
..- :::l
"-~a3
~-.iL.-
<o:::t~J2
o::"",=:::l
O-.:::::~
c
cu
c..:>
t.;:::
'c .J::
.~~
-60-
c
0)
E
~
'3
0-
~
a.5
::c
'en
en
o
Cl..
en
ro
c
Qj
E
0..
'~ 10
Qj (i)
Qj >
:S2
E ~
.g 'g ~
Ln Q) en
~F=~
~ Q5 _'0
rn ..S2 ~ es..
UQj
en ~.!:Q
0) I 0
:5 <o:::t c:
en-.i
~~"5
E~.n
...... Qj
c.:> .n
ro
Cl..
.s
(j)
~
u
'"5
o
c.:>
c:
.Q
t5
2
en
c: c:
ro 0
(/)~
..c: c::
"5 ro
000
~&5t5
o'u ~
z-,ffic
uLi:8
ro .....;
....... 'E
'E .9 0:5
-g....Cl..
en .Q Ol
L.- c:
-ro Cl..:.o
..c:C:=
en ro :::l
L.-o....o
~o2
..Q.l::;o
~ 5 ~
.gs~ffi
~'5 ~
I- C:,!:Q
Q)
:S
'0
Q)
c:
ro
0..
z-,
L.-
Q)
0..
o
es..
Q)
:S
en 0)
c:..o
.Q
row
c..:>0-
~~
c..:>co
~-
en crJ en
t5~Ci5
ro:.;::; >
.l::;f62
c: .... 0)
8 Cl..,!:Q
>........ 0
.nffi~
~ffig
"3 Ol c.:>
o-ro2
~ffi(j)
E 5
c..:>
Qj
c..:>
:::l
-0
~
.9
'0
.gso:i
]3-0
:::lo
022.-
E>.
0.......
o..~
~ 'c
(\ju
0)
Q)
c..:>
x
0)
o
c:
-ro
-55 en
0)
..0
c
ro
c..:> c:
=0
Cl.. :.;::;
Cl..(.)
ro ;:J en
t5~~
.92- 5 ~
ec..:>c
Cl..OlO
Qj c: c..:>
..c:'- >.
I-~.n
_=u
~S18
..... c:
I Qj Qj
-.::t::SE
..q 0)
:E1Oo..
:E :S ,s
..
en 0)
1:)..0
'~J2
L.- :::l
0..0
=:
0l0)
c:.n
"~ J2
-0 :::l
o
~ =:
c..:>u
c.:> c:
o co
~$
....... (.)
ro
..... EO
Qj._ c:
en >
(i)Q)0)
> =: en
2~'g
en
:5 Q)
~:S
u
""3 ar:s
~"* '~
c:
-.~ .Q >. u ......
C t5 ro ,~ gs
~ ~ 8- 5>}Q
..oC::E8~
~82~8
en
:::l
E
c:
.Qc:
~.Q Q)
~t5.n
o2~"8
c:U5o,-
r:: c: =: '~
.Q 8 10 ~
t5Q):50
2:5eni5
~g'Qj2
o 'en 'S; U5
c.:> 0:';::; c:
'O~f68
c:.o'OJi
Q)enen.......
~B5~'O
c..:>~>.c:
gs~;;g
E.ffig~
8 g"~ ~
c..:>"- > Q)
Qj-gQ)..c:
:5~..c:::
e~~
.9 ~ ,~ ~
.2 en u en
es...9~ e
~ ~ .~ :S
gs ~ ~ .~
=:ou
oes..Q)~
=:Q)u8
1-..0 en 0
..
..Q .~ ~ 15
'Uu
. c '"5
~ 0
2=:-::::
Q) t5 CO
ro :5 ~~
:5 _ .S .~
o en Ci5
,- I::
,~ ~:5 ~
g~~~
C!~~
.~ ~ w ~
t5oo..c:Qj
2,-1-0:5
(j) ,Q a.5 ~
c:~"8 c:
8 (/) <.) 8
c: en
oU5
:.;::; "x
EQ)
Qj
X
Qj
.9
en
c:
:.0
o
c..:>
c.:>
CO
u
Qj
s=
:::l
E
>.
~
Cl..
o
es..
.!:Q
c
Q)
E
Cl..
'3
0-
Qj
c:
.Q
t5
2
U5
c:
o
c..:>
Q)
ro
c..:>
..Q
u
c:
CO
C
Qj
E
Cl..
'3
0-
Q)
c:
.Q
t5
2
U5
c:
o
(.)
Ol
,~
10
0:5
c:
Qj
en
cb
en
'0
c:
Qj
c..:>
CO
0::
,-
.Q
t5
:::l
~-E
5-fg
c..:> c:
102
..c:en
~E
~ en
en :::l
c:u
LU.~
..
Q)
......
c:'I:
"'0
Q..
:::J
...
;
s:
B
tfl
c:'I:
~
tfl
~
'CJ
c:'I:
r..
Q)
......
=
~
o
E:-
O
u
-
=
o
'Vi
=
=
Q..
~
~
......
.~
.::
tfl
Q
;..-.
~
~
>
o
-
=
Q)
E
Q..
o
Qj
>
Q)
o
~
~
-
-p
;
Q)
tfl
Q)
~
-5
Q)
"';::
Q)
=
Q)
c.;i
..
'-:::>
I
o
..-.
-
-
i3
;...
bJj
~
.~
;...
c::;;
;::...
~
~
~
i3
~
.;:
c::;;
-
.:::
~
~
~
.....
-
I:::!
.~
-
~
~
~
......
;...
~
~
..::::
U
~
<C
o
o
00
'0
en
:s
o
..c::
(1) ~
::s en
C ~
ffi1;
1;'(j)
(1) C
..0 (1)
en en
~ 5
:2: C
t5 0
(\j~
en ::::l
,!: U5
~:.a
-0 (1)
o N
0.. 'E
>- ~:~
(\j .- E
:s: ~ 0
(\j r-.......
~ E> ~
(1) ..c:: 0.:
rn..5!2o
en::::lO
C1$LO
"OJ ..c:: -0
(\j c..:> C
c:nCJ)(\j
C
,52
t5
2
en
C C
(\j 0
CJ)~
..c:: C
"5 (\j
000
CJ)~t5
0"(3 ~
z-ffi"E
c3u:8
(\j ....::
....... 'E
'E .9 ID
-g,-o..
en.52 en
0.. ,!:
~c;g
en ctl ::::l
0....0
~o~
.Q..l::;o
g; 5 8
~~ffi
(1) "~ ::::l
..c::oen
I- c,~
>-
(\j
E
..c::
c..:>
:c
:s:
(1)- ~
:0.::.::.
'(j) C
(\j ctl
~:o
"Effi
(1)'0
>< C
~ 0
::sen
.8 .@
en ro
(1)..0
:s (1)
en en
ctl'o
~ C
c.8
,52 -0
~2
a3~
=ffio
(1) C
en (1)
'0 ro
c"5
"E..Cl
~ as
(1)-0
0....2
.E .~
~ "~ ~ co :S
o E; o.l= -55 >-
~ E >, en ..0
n € ~ "~ 1$
(1)ctlctlro:s:
Cl..(1)'-c..:>(1)
~'O~~"~
~ C ctl g-..Cl(1)
"E.52 U
0~2t5
c..:>(1)r5~~
>,0..0"E en
..ClO-O..c::
(1)(1)j!50c..:>
"5 ::s U :c
g ::s g :s:
"~ :s:
~ g~
en.Q<(
"Ectl>,
"~ ~-g
8:~U)
ctl 0:::
c..:> enw
.~,~~
o ctl Q)
0.. en ::5
II
(1) C
~g
c..:>
:0-2
-.......
..,.- en
. C
"'d"0
-<t c..:>
:2Ero
:2E::S
a5
:0
'(j) .$
~ a3
o..E
~ ~
en 0
(1)U
~ 5
(1).......
> c..:>
:e 2
en ......
C en
(1) C
en 8
ffi (1)
c '0 ::s
;S C .!:
"~ -g -0
c(\j(1)
Q)c-g
E.213
.9- ro .!:
5-:9 (1)
Q)>..Cl
c
,52
t5
2
en
c c
(\j 0
CJ)~
,.... c
"5(\j
c5580
..... .~ t5
o c..:> ~
z-ffi"E
uu:8
(\j ....::
'E
'E .8 ID
-g,-o..
en "2 en
co 0.. ~
..c::C=
en (\j ::::l
,-0....0
~o~
.Q.J::;0
g; 5 8
~~ffi
(1) .~ ~
~ ~.~
....::
"E
ID
0..
en
c
:.a
CI:l
Q
CI:l
'0
(1)
c..:>
c
(\j
;::l
en
.~
.8
L...
"2
0..
z-
u
~ ~t5co
g:s:~..c::
(\jctl"Een
~a38-6
as"5a5i
g- e:o en-
(1) "(j) ......
t5..Cl~a3....::
~ U 0.. E 'E
"E::.;......::::l'-
o 0 c c..:> (1)
c..:> :s: (1) 0 0..
>-c><u en
..0 0 (1) c .!:
(1)15(1)g-g
.!::: ::::l ..c:: c..:> '-
::::l ..l::; ...... ::::l en
g~.8-t5~
'-8en50
co en (1) c..:> (1)
-55.~ ~ ~ ~
...... ::::l (1)...... ::::l
ffi U 1;.!: ~
~ 1$ .~ a3 :9
5:~~-go
~ ~ .~ ~ "~
,~~ ro (1) Z-
'- .5..ClU
0.. a3 'S; -;;:; (1)
~uu..c::s
I- _g5 c en >-
ctlen..Cl
~ ~ ch ,~ 1$
..,.->enro:s:
ood- ~'o c..:> (1)
-<t ..c:: c ~ 'S;
E '-' ~
:iE ro 0 ~ (1)
:iE::5o.l=en..Cl
c
"2
t5
2
c:n
c c
ctl 0
CJ)~
..c:: c
"5 (\j
00'-
CJ)~~
0"(3 ~
z-ffi"E
uu:8
OJ
c
:E
'5
..0
ctl
a
(1)
c..:>
c
ctl
::::l
en
,~
.8
o
&
......
"E
ID
0..
co
..c::
_ en
~-6
~(1)
"'d" .......
.c
"'d" (1)
:2Ea3
:2E(!)
ent5
~(1)
:2: '0'
t50..
ctl
en (1)
c >
o "(j)
~ en
(1) Q)
o..~
.~ ~ ~ :
~ e~:
- Cl.. '- ~ c::
'"@ (1) O'(j) 0
8::S"*-~~
ID 0 "S;
c en
~(1)
:s
ot5
c 2
~en
~ 0
::s
:z .~
-<t-O
(1)
_ro
g'u
0..0
E ~
_ ctl
-61-
c
o
15
2
en
c c
ctl 0
CJ)~
..c:: c
"5ctl
000
CJ)~t5
o "u ~
z- ffi '
uu:8
en
c
:E
"5
..0
ctl
a
(1)
c..:>
c
ctl
::::l
en
"~
.8.......
o 'E
ct~
~~~j!5
.~ en :2: @
Q)"Et5
enctlctlJ2
._S::! c::::l
cCl..Oo
o o..:z:; :s:
~ctl~"E
.5t5.J::;(1)
'S; (1) en E
"0' 5 Cl..
10 '- c..:> "5
::s Cl.. CJ
(1) ro (1)
-f=.::S(1)
- 1;
~'(j)
::::l C
en (1)
c en
(1) c
.8 ,2
ro
~.5
-0 'S;
(1) C
..c::(1)
c..:>..c::
en :s:
"~ ~
t5E
2:Z:;
Q) (1) c:n en
::5::5cc
..... en 0 .~
-(\jc..:>-o
_..c:: (\j '-
..0...... ::::l
~a3~g
-<t~~J2a5
:2E "5 0.. 5 ~
:2E g"~ :s: ,!:
en
(1)
c
.~ -g
2t5
~~
ctl
"E
ctl Q)
,S::! ..0
0..0
Cl........
ctl
co
t5:Z:;
(1) c
'0'2
'- 0
Cl..o..
..:
(1)
>
(1)
:s:
o
:c
~e~
;::l N 0..
en ~ E
~ ~.-
E~;g
c~
o (1)
~ ~
,2' -0
Q;;E-g~"E
w.....(\j-or5
~,.... ::.;L+=
c ~'~
.2 _ enll'(j)
(1) ro _co -.... ctlc
::5"E C3
(1)~(1)::5
E"<d:c
t5C(1)..q-(1)~
~;So..~c..5!2
10 "~ .E ~ t8 .8
(1)2:'"Ero
::s (1) (1) (1)
en E '-
ID Cl.. c:::(
-6 '5
(\jCJ>,
(1)u
::::l
U)
>-
ctl (1)
E;:
'(j)
c
(1)
en
en
~
'S;
15 c
ctl 0
~
.5
'S;
~ c
o ,2
..Clt5
U 2
Cc:n
e 5
en c..:>
c
(\j
CJ)
,....
~
o 0
CJ) c..:>
..... "~
o c..:>
z-ffi
uu:
c
.Q
(\j 10
....... .S::!
'E (1) ::s 0..
-g ::s .~ ~
en.8c.......
co >-.2'E
..c:: -g .~ ID
:c:no ~
g- ~ g'O
~ '~ .~ co
(1)13Q)~
U 2 "!: E
(1) 0 en..Cl
~ ~LD ~
en
~
o
rJJ
~
Z
<
>-
~
o
~
o
r.1
o
-Eg25a3~~
>,- c c..:> (\j
o CL ~ 'E 0 E
~~EIDco5
..c::~enQ)..c::en
...... cuen(1)
'0 0 i3-g [)'5
"'-CctlCN
>,..... (1) (\j .......
ro O.J::; (1) g-s
-gc:n......:Oc..:>(\j
5 L11 ~"~ g ~
..Cl(1)lJ..~ffi-ffi
2:-::S a3 ~ E ~
~'O~~~€
'E ~ 'OJ :s: .E L11
~~a32(1)en
Cl.. ,Q, co"(j) :s ~
(1)lJ.. c..:>-:=t5 (1)
::s C 'c Ci3 2!E
co-6Ec:n~
;5-020..032
.~ ~ g ~ z ~
...... 'is.. OJ iD a3 s
a3~cou~~
~ ~ E ~ 'OJ g;
o ua315
CD ro -0 ,-
>~~~~~
(1) ctl (1) C ....... 0
o -0 'S; ,- >-.......
roro~5..Cl.E2
:;::- ~ (1) U f6 0
&b..c::..Cl~enl..C)
-<t }::_ - ~ .!:
~ 0 co '5- as :E
o..CL-55~C:S:
(1)ffi~g~g:
::5 o"~:z:; co ,!:
0.."E::.; ::::l'::'::'
'O~2~E~
o&'-i{5
co$(1)5
...... c..:> C 0
U (1):s:cy'
s~1i3o
o:s C c..:>
:s: t5 (1)'::'::' 'E
t5 2 ~ CO .~
(1) en >'0 en
..,.- "e- 0 ~
&b 0..:0 ~ g
-<t-offi~-E.~
(1) "E2en
~..5!2.ffi
g-g-.2 Eos
o..~~o.l=~
C
.Q
10
"E
(1)
E
(1)
0..
.E
-
u
ro
0..
.E
l:-
I
C
-
Q.l
.....
e':l
"0
Q.
~
,-
~
E:
l-
Q.l
.....
CI'l
e':l
~
CI'l
.~
::::
'C
e':l
~
Q.l
.....
e':l
;;
Q.
l-
o
U
-
5
.~
e':l
Q.
;.<
~
.....
.~
..:::
CI'l
Q
;>.
$
~
;.-
o
";:
Q)
,-
,-
Q.
o
Q)
;.-
Q.l
Q
"0
==
e':l
~
e':l
Q.l
CI'l
Q.l
~
,-
c:;
Q.l
-=
~
Q)
c;l
, -'0 tIJ
as ~ $ ""3 tIJ
,.-: .- C 0 ~
-~ ~ 3: C
CD {g ~ :O'ffi
~ ffi '3 - E
:E - g~ ~
.....1..{)
......~'O
as 0:::""3
o '0' 0- ~
Ci...c::
"- en 0
o ::J ro
coo..
,9:S ,~
~:S--CD
o c~..c::
~Qj~-+-
gELb~
Ci3~-.;:t::J
::J Eo.. 0::: ~
g_O- CD
CD '0
:EffiaS
o C 0
ug~
<(ro::J
en en
~~ CD
'c CD :E
~,~ :m
Ci3
CO '0
o C
'c ::J
..c:: ......
0""3
CD$
0......
CD ro
en:E
rob
en en
en CD
CD..c::
'"Co
::J ffi
...
i3
;...
~
~
Q:
~
....
1:::
~
&
~
~
i3
~
....
~
-
.:::
~
~
co
c:en:E
ro '0 CD
~ ro '~E
..... N
R~ Ci3
'0 Q5
CD 0'0
ro 'E ......
0.. en 0
~'O3 0..
0.. (j) ~
.s
~
.~
-
:.;;
~
c::,
......
b
~
6
C
ro
(j)
..c::
"5
o 0
(j) ~
o "[;
.2:;-ffi
uW::
C
.9
ro co
...... .5:2
'E CD ::5 0..
.g :E .~ g-
en.8c......
co >-.9 'E
~~~ !
g.~ ~b
~ ~ .~ co
CDo~E
'0 2 ,_ E
CD 0 en..o
..c::CDC::J
f- enW en
.~ ro Ci3 -- ~ 13
co >- '0 0 ::: .9
c..o5aioo
.~ -g .2:;- g. ~ $
c2en 0..2
"5 .2' ro _ ro
o en en ~ 0 ::J
Ci3~b:;;:;co g
:ECDobE;-g
'03 ...a ~ .9 E C
:E-~';CD~~
,~ en ~ :E .~ ~
..c:: co ';" co ::J CD
,_ 0 '0 CJ ~
.~ Ci3 Ci. B ~ a3
co 0.. ro CD ..c::
j E ~o..o..(.)
l..{);;:::ro15~15
-CD CD
a5 en i:U .8 :E ~
:E .~ ..c:: '~b en
g:Q'O c.....
Ci3 - ::J ro 0) .9 ~
co 0.. 0 ..Q .8 co ,~
~ ~-f75 co ~ ::; ~
en '0 c::.g'O)
~2ffigro5~
0.. ro ~ ~ %! (.) ,:;:::
..Q~"""'-'''''''' C
en CDrol:;:;'O..c::
o C _ ,... ~ (.)
3: 0 'g> Ci5 0 2
~ _CD~5)g.g
eg~:g-;; Ci.~
:h ~~~,~~~
~ as 'E -g ai.2:;-
0:: =8 ~ .[3 ~ ~'*
0.. en en en CD en en
~
co
c.:>
~
.~
Ci5
t:::
co
:S
C
o
U
2
en
C C
ro 0
(j)~
..c:: C
"5 ro
000
(j)~u
0'(3 ~
.2:;-ffic
uw::8
C
.9
ro co
...... .5:2
'E CD :E 0..
.g :E .~ g-
en .8 C
co >- ,9 'E
..c:: -g ,~ Ci3
:enO ~
g. ~ ~b
~ ~ .~ co
O)oCDE
'0 2.~ E
CD 0 en...a
..c::CDC::J
f- en UJ en
C
,9
u
2
~L+=
8 0
en......
,~ a
.....-
::J 0
'0 CD
'0 (.)
CD ro
ut
ro ::J
0.. en
E CD
8~.8
CD . CD
...a ~::J
.;= '0
co-o,c
-f75::Jo
en ..Q 'en
CD en 0
g. ~ Ci3
en~E
:::~.g
013'0
B'O~
ro 0 '-'
tOCD
::J:f:o
en Ci5 Ci.
~~CD
f-CD...a
_..c::
~-; ~
:h~co
-.::t-g
o::.....co
o...8-f75
en >- E
~..o 0
~tg~
C
2
::t=
o
C
::J
00:::
as
0..
o
en
u5~
cc-
.Q ~ E
:SEe
. is.. ';..
'(3 ~ ro
~o ~
>-'0
...a CD
o~
CD,!:::
0..'0
o 0)
en...a
CD
:E
C
.9
u
2
en
C C
ro 0
(j)~
..c:: C
"5 ro
000
(j)~u
o '(3 ~
.2:;-ffic
uw::8
C
,9
ro co
'E CD ::5 ~
.g :E '~ g-
en.8 c...... C
CO >-.9 'E ,Q
~~~ ~ ~
- W en
g. r5 en-- C
Ci5 'c 'E':: 8
>..c::CD19
CD (.) CD:=:: .8
"0 2 .~ E
CD 0 en..o
..c::CDC::J
f- en UJ en
CO
..c::
C en
o CD
Ci3g.
>en
8 CD
CD:E
>13
$en
O)t
enro
CD 0..
> .....
ro~
~o
'(3 0
-5-g
e >
E~
Q.
CD
~
CD
..0
"0
S
o
..c::
en
en
C
:0
~
en
"0
C
ro
bb~
en c 'en
en CD en
CD E 0
~o..o..
CD ..Q c:
,~ CD CD
~x
o CD
en
as CD
COCO
en CD
0,
ro CD
.a:E
CD 3:
...a..Q
co:8
-f75"O
"3
CD 0
e-f75
en en
c:m
CD en
~ 0)
CD "0
0.. 'en
0=
M..c::
en
ro
CD
ro
CD
'0
g]
:.c
0..~.8
~,!:::
......CD
(j):E
~,~
:h-g
-.i'ffi
g:~
-62-
C
ro
(j)
..c::
"5
o 0
(j) ~
o '(3
~ffi
uu::
o
&
en r-- en
5 Lb ,9
~-=ico
.2' ~ .2'
~.~~
> LL >
C C
,- C ,-
coO..c::
o C 0
'c 3: ~
..c:: 0
as -f75 ~
0='3
CD L+= CJ
~b ~
.genro
ro..c::
"00) en
~ro'O
C .~ ffi
CD
:E
en
::;
~~
8 E
cn:~
.~ E
~ro
~.8
en
:mr:::-
~en..-
CDcCD
en 0 ::;
~encn
'V5 u:
~2 c
enu~
>-0)0-
5"e- ro
CD 0.. ~
..c:: >-<(-0
f-:!..-CD
roas~-g
N'O'_ CD
LhCi.o~
-.iroenCi3
o::c~..c::
0..0_3:
o
C
~:Q
c..::J
E 0
_ 3:
C
,Q
u
2
en
C C
ro 0
(j)~
..c:: C
"5ro
000
(j)~u
o '(3 ~
.2:;-ffic
uw::8
QJ
......
~
"'0
c..
o
:::
~
E:
B
en
~
~
en
.~
:=
'C:;
~
~
QJ
......
~
5
c..
100
o
U
-
:::
o
'(ii
:::
~
c..
Ii<
~
C
o
U
2
en
C
o
o
en
C
'C
::J
'0
'0
C
ro
.8
o
&
......
.~
.:::
en
is
.......
~
Q:l
;;.
o
u
0)
"e-
o..
~-
::J
U
2 u5
en .9
"0 co
0) "0
en C
o ::J
0..0
0-
Ci.2
ro
ro"i5.
o
Ci3Ci.
'0 0..
C ro
:::Ju
en 2
Cen
'ffi C
E 8
~"O
C
~ ~
O)'~
Ci3 CD
..c::"O
$:
.....
C
QJ
E
c..
o
Q)
~
QJ
C
~
~
-
~
100
~
QJ
en
QJ
~
-
~
QJ
.....
C
QJ
-
Q:l
C-'
CO
..c::
- en
een
N......
. C
I..{) ro
.0
-.::t :=
0::0..
o..g.
aS$CDt:::
~a5~:S
~ E C
(5 CD CD
o .!::: '0 tIJ
g. "3 ~
~ ~
UDen
CD-c
'2' N 'ffi
0.. Lb E
b-=i~
5-g
-~~ g
_c...... ro 0.. "
~g a5N""Et::
~ g E Lb ,- .~
ro-CD' .;:::
~ gs 0.. -.;:t en "t::
~ g E g: ;s .~
-go
::J
e
en
00
I
o
....
...
~
l...
~
~
.~
1::
~
&
~
~
~
~
.i::
~
.....
-:::
~
~
...
~
....
.....
I:::i
.~
.....
~
~
r;::;,
......
l...
~
~
..:::
U
c::
.Q
1:5
2
en
c:: c::
co 0
U)~
..c:: c::
"5 co
000
~,~ ~
.?:-ffie
ut.t8
.8
co
I.+-
o
(])
c: (.)
(]) c::
E ~
co(])en
-55 ~.!!2
c::.8-'
coE 0 '~
'C (])
'"0 Cl.. Cl..
ffi~~
€o:E
~~E
co c::
...... co
'E "5.
..0
:::I
en
03
Cl..
o
Ci3
>
(])
'"0
(])
.c::
I-
CJ)
...:l
~
~
~
f-i
~
o ~g.~as
=0 .- ...... '-
c:: :s en as g;
co '"0 co .:::: 8
'0 0 -55 co en
en i:::.o
.!!2 ~ (])
as.ooill~
co ~ 1:5 Ci........
.~ 2 ~ ~ ~
co '(jj c: .c:: (])
i:: C: 8 ~ '-EC::
00 ......
'::'0 5 a303
~a305
2~2(!)'"O
'(j) 0 en (]) .8
Ec::co
c:: ~ O'C '"0
o (.)Cl..(])
:s(])(])21:5
(.) :S :S Cl.. :::I
g en crJ g--g
,!: Jg ,." R
.8:s-"''-'
'"0 '"0 : 2: :S (])
2'"Ot5E..o
(.)(])co'-=
~.s ~~ co
x c:: ,- ,- ..c::
(]):::I-gz-.en
"08 Ci?2e
C::a30~~
~ ,!!2 :g ~ ~
S'-coE~
2 c:: ,- en
oc- co ,Q '"0 co
tb~coffi
--=:t~~~2
::E 15 U 0 'Cf
::ECi?~$:5
CJ)
;::>
o
~
~
N
~
~
o
z
-(
CJ"J
~
-(
N
~
~ 15 .8 0 $: ~ 2 .Q
~ en =0 ~ Co'Cf co
en~~ffi~~tg:.o
03 en E '0 :: ~ '"0 ~
-g .[,~ ~ ~ ~ ffi &
$: c:: ~"* (]) c:: c:: c
5 0 c:: E (]) g ,Q
= 15 co 'E 15 '- co co
(.):.0 en co _ co > >
2 0)..92 ...... '::;: "5 ~ r5
~~~8~..o~~
:: CI:l .~ a :S ~~ ~ "50
o..:.:::-o..i::-g-5 (])..c::
.~ ,~ fB- ~ co ,!: ~ ~
::g CI:l (]) :S '"0
Cl...c:: :S en co "5 g; e
(]) (.)'~ CI:l (]) 0 (])
..c:::::l ffi .c:: (.) 2 E
~ en -5: E ffi {5 'Cf co
- 35 E'"O E 0 c::g;
~8.8ffiE~0
'C E '"0
e.8.8 ~'O c::
co'"O'"O-C::5co
~ ~ 2 '"0 0 ,-
~ 'E ~ ~ ~ ~
'(jj 0:5.0 '- 0 (])
co Ci5 :::l ~ Ci.. ~
'"0 en 0 (]) '-
~ C]) '"0 Ci..:S
o '- c::
Cl..CI:lCl:l~'"O
enen'"O:;::::;~
co co C]) ".. en
'~ '~ ro ~ .!!2- ,!: -g
...... ...... Cl....... .0 :2 :=::
EE~~~E~
~20'"O~
CI:l '(jj '- c:: .~
~as~-
Eo~&c:
cD '"0 0 :2: r5
'"0 c:: E 1:5 t;:::
-5 CI:l (]) co 'c
.S c:: ..0 5'~
'"0 ,Q co
"51:5.c::15.8
~~~~en
2(])"5~~
CI:l as 0
~eTI:O$:
3~en:Cc::
e co 5'!: ,Q
en~1:5"01:5
-o......:::Ic::2
"* 2 -t5 '~ "@ en
.S '(jj 5 c:: 0 c::
E C: (.) .Q (.) g
.rgo (])1:5 0:.0
o g - ~ E g
:g(.).8 ~:8~
co'O'"O~O:::l:::l
(])o(.)Cl..O
,Q ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ (]) ~
~ 8.~ - '"0 ...... :S _~
co en " ~.
(.) '-'z-...e:::l(])
x:.o '- 'C '"0 en en.c::
0) J2coc::c::O:=::
'0 0 en en co (]) ~ $:
U)g (]) ~........o 0)-0
- c: ,:::: (.) c:: ...... C])
0)115 (])(])'"O"O115
~ c:: c:: .s ~ c:: 'g
"".s......coco=en
g; co g g; ~'~ ~
c::
g..-
co~
e-.::t~
~ 2 'co
..922~
Cl.. '-
.s
~1:5
en co
co c..
O),S
0:5 E en
coc::;E;
$: .Q
'"Oco~
5g~
o .- c::
Ci?EO)
~
ct
t.)
~
.~
V,)
(]) cob c:: 0'O~ S
:S ,Q ..... ."
2 1:5 0:S
'0 ~ ~ 2 '0 $: V,)
c::t;~~en .92
.Q"O 0 0
coc::~~as
e (]) c:: co
(]) :2 co c::
~ g '0 ~ 'E
o..$: ~~
.s~~%8
oo::::t 'O"'C E
to Ci.. 0).8
--=:t'"Oc:TI
.....O)co2en
u~~C::03
fa c.. ,- 0) ~
c.o~a3o
~ Ci..' (jj (!) $:
-63-
c::
o
U
2
en
c:: c::
co 0
U)~
r- c::
:::I co
000
U)U1:5
'o'~ ~
.?:-ffic:
ut.t8
en.8
co c::
'E~
..0
:::I
en
co
a
0)
c: U
(]) c::
E ~
COO) en
-55 ~.!!2
c::.8-'
co '- .~
E,~ 0)
'"0 c.. c..
ffi~~
€o:E
~~E
03
c..
o
Ci3
>
0)
'"0
0)
.c::
I-
a>
>
o
.c
fa
oc-
tb
--=:t
::E
::E
0)
0)
U)
0) .!: 2 '"0
:5 '(j) ffi
1:5
0)"-
(.0 '0" 0
to Ci.. c::
--=:t'"Og
S5 ~
o..l::;
0.. en
2 5
Cl..U
.....
U
fa
0..
~
crJ
co
.~
co
E
0\
I
C
-
Q.l
.....
C':l
"0
Q.
;:J
c:
C':l
E:
l.
Q.l
.....
en
C':l
:E
en
Q.l
~
'r::)
C':l
~
.B
C':l
l.
o
Q.
l.
o
U
'";:;;
(5
.;;
c:
C':l
Q.
K
~
.....
t.l
'C
.....
en
Q
~
C':l
1:
Q.l
;;.
o
1B~
(.) 0)
t;:::E
'c c::
en2
'U5 .::;:
c::
co (])
..- en
c.b 'f6
...-i E
2 ~
21:5
(]) CO
:s Cl..
~ ,S
0) en
~;E;
"';::
~
E
Q.
o
Q)
;;.
Q.l
Q
"0
c:
C':l
(]) 0
CO
0)
t5
,...
c;
l.
C':l
Q.l
en
Q.l
~
,~
::c
:::10115
Cl.. 15 :S
~~O)
~ ~~
c:: O)::;::;~
'~ '"0
..Q"5V,)
o o V,)
lJ..$:~
1::
ct
U
t.;:::
't::
.~
,...
~
Q)
"';::
E
~
c.:>
-0
Co
en N
:::I co
:5.c::
....
~
;...
C.tj
I:::l
ct
~
.....
--
~
e-
r::::
"!;:::
::::
!:::!
~
"i:;
I:::l
--
';::
~
~
....
...
.S
~
.~
--
;,;;
~
~
......
~
~
e
c
C'O
Cf)
..c::.
"5
o 0
Cf) U
'0'5
effi
5LL
C'O>-.en
--,::::::C
.- U :.0
EQ)=
-@:.SE
(/) 0 C'O
~~'O
U3~~
Q:; c
0.. C co
o Q) :::l
Ci3E~
> Q)'-
Q) en 0
uC'O-+-'
Q) ffi ,Q
~Eo..
ro >-. >-. U
cffi~~
'co <( 8...b
~uj~2
E ~ -+-' ,~
;: co 0.. (/)
ro-g Q) ~~
-55 0 J2 0.. '> ..c
-+-,~f;co15u
ffi ~ Q) 0.. Q:; co -E
U === ..c c
= (/) ro 15 ,2 ~
~~ -55 0 ~ ~
U c..c ~ en
Q)oa$enc
'0' ~ e 6 g
0.. ,2 ~ ~ -
Q)t5Q)Q)-:
:.S~Gg,~
~:.o Q)~ co ,2
...9:2..c::. 1;t5
..0 ......:c ~ C])
'~ B ~ .~ :6
.E2.!: > --- ..c
~j.~.i~
Q)ascuQ3
Q)t5lQ >
:.S 2 C]) ~ ~ C])
o en c:n ,QJ i :3
I- -g'~ (/) .2 gs
ro3COc€roC3
N Q) >-. 5,.8
'Ce 'Ci) c.n
~00u2
enC])f:E-+-'
~C'OEC'06
~~:.;::;.bu
Q) ,!:: >-. >-. c
:.S ~76 ~g
'O,S'~~~
E"'Q:;~
c15o..E>
.2 c C]) C])
ro I- u
c32oQ)
Q):::l i5..
E 0 0
Q) ;: -o--g
0..
E
t5
Q)
en'26
tb c...:;::; :5-
co '~
...rue
ffi ~ ~
8.....9:2 ~
o 0.. Q)
o...E ~
.....
C,)
ra
Co
.s
....;
"E
Q:;
0..
c .--.. c.n
ge~
co';J-
en to (/)
:e -.i . ffi
E u E
c ~
~ 0 co t5
a;c~21
~ ,2 ';J E
C]) -+-' ~ ,-
ffi~~~~
E~
oC])~
0..
E
C]) C])
:.S~
~ e
'5 0..
Ci"
~ro
..c
c.n
C])
c.n
c
o .
o..c
c.n co
C]) -
I- 0..
c
rn
Cf)
..c
"5
o 0
Cf)&5
o '(3
.?:-ffi
OU:
rn.?:-g>
===5:.0
~Q)="5
:::l..c..o
c.n :8 ro
~co
U3~~
Q:; C
0.. C ro
o Q) :::l
Q3E~
> Q) ,-
C]) en 0 -+-'
urn-+-'
c I- .~
C]) rn .2 C])
~Eo..o..
- uj
e2
C]) :::l
E e
arg;
c.n1;5
>,C
~~
u rn
rnen
e .!:
ro
rn u
:.0
o .!:
c en -g u
~~roffi
;: ~ ~ c.n
c.n 0._ ~
C])13C5 :::l
13 >, 0.. (/)
~~g-8
> u .~
>,rnu
u e ffi
c I-
~OLL
Ci3 Q) c
E S c5'5 01-
C]) ''''
~:5
I- I- :::l C])
..E rn 0 c
oCf)lQ
E~
2-+-'
:5
.~
>,
rn
;:
u
ro
e
c.n
c.n
C])
u
u
rn .!:
~S
:::l c.n
Ci" C])
C]) I-
U
co
-+-'
3
(/)
c
o
u u
3
~o~
:::l;:Ci5
c.n
c
C])
o
I-
C])
(j)
0..
E
o
u
C])
en
C'O
c
en
'Ci)
Q)
ro
'~
o
0..
0..
rn
:e-
N
to
oo:i-
2
2
C])
c.n
o
C3
(/)
:.0 uj
Q)
2c.8"5
.~ ~ 2 e
0= cQ3
0.. 8: ~ .~
cC'Ot..:::
g ~ 21,g;_
u '--' C])
2eoro
en 0.. c
cQ)~2
g:5U::ro
~
:::l
(/) (/)
Q) c
:s C])
(/)U
m3
E ~
"E
rn
u
=
'c
en
'en
c
:5
o
~
'(3
a
L.t
Cii
IZl
~
o
IZl
"-'
o
b
U
~
~
r..:..
oo:i-
2
:E
'-
J2
- (/)
.8~f5
0..... Ci3 2
o..C
'~.~ ~
~32c.9c::
'5 ~,2
o..o(/)-+-'
'<"""ro:.;::;E
00~:S
enC])=6
rn u ;: u
wffi13~
>, :::l ,- C'O
~ .~ ~ -55
e
~
r..:..
oo:i-
2
:E
(/) ,~ e C])
ro '-~ ro ~ ..0
,~ 85 g> SE 00.. to ~
C ,- 0 c.n
"5 '0, 32 a ~ ~ (/)
..0 c'5 e
~w..og.gs.8C])
g.?:-'Oo_;:cE
5~g~rn~
~C]) >-. C 0 _ 55 0..
ro..orn~-o:3 .
-55 as 55 I- (j) 0.. ffi
I- c.~..E.E2 ~ 0:
~ 'E .9 2 ~ f; Ci3
->, 2 0 .~ ~ 0.. en
&: .gs '~ 8. g ~ ~
en (j)
c .E2 uj
32 ;:
'5 ~ Q) .2
..0 Q) co :5 ro
u :.S 5- ro 'E
g; 'O~:.S~
o Q) Q) > -:= ;=:
;::; -= "............
.......:;:: I- ~ C]) en
0.. c ~ 3 E c
ro 0 (/) E 0..:.0
13asQ):::l.2=
m~roug;E
.~o ..0 6 g C]) '-
_ .- 0 u rn
Q)-:-~ci;:B
u 'E g- Q ~ t
~ Q:; '- .......~_ rn
..... CI.. 0.....- 0 0..
>,
ro
o
0..
E
2
z
o
E:
-<
~
;:J
U
~
G
~
z
<
z
o
-
Eo-<
<
Eo-<
cz::
o
Q,.
rJ:1
Z
~
E-<
C;
...-
o
en
ro
!:!:!-
0..
E
rn
Cf
c
o
CO cD
z~
o
...-
E
u:)~
=i~
::0 . c:
roU
> c
C]) :::l
32
o en
co C])
;:
c
'0 ro
0.. c
o
:.;::;
:a
-0
ro
c
co
2
ro
C])
Ci
Ci3
en
>,
o
~
~
r..:..
oo:i-
2
:E
6 ~ ES
C])E=
c C'O C'O
lQO:::u
c
co
..
Q) Q) 0 C])
:.S:31;>
en 'U5
Ct.;:::Q):::l
Q)cu13
~ g'> ><
.r::;C])oC])EC;
15 0::: 0.. 1 .a ~
Q)-P.9 -wen
:::l ffi -0 ...9:2 =i Jg Q)'
i:ic>uCC]) -
E Q) C]) ro co :5 Q) =[5 ~
co';;:3>C]) :5C'O
0:::.......0Q)c2 -..c::.
,..!.. Q)coslQ co.8 en
.....:::l 0 C Q):::l
o 0- e co -6,'E 13 ~ e
CO 15'0 ...... :::l = co 0:.S
Z :::lo.. c 0 C]) o....u
o O2&:5 o)~] 3
...- -g ~ I- ,~ ,~ rn ;: B
o g 0 "* ~ .gs ~ 'c =5
~ € ~ 0' ~ .~ ~ 'E 55
::"000) .-<" C])
:> c c...... c;S.......~:5
0) c2..c::. rno Q) 2: E
g 0 a$ ~ c.n- t 5- Q) 0
CO Q) (/) e ~ co :::l (/)..:=
C c Ci3 0.. ffi 0.. -@ (/)
'5 lQ ~ g- -;; .g: 0 ~ ~
~ ~ ~ -g .2 uj -g ~~
en:2E:::l~~:::l ~
-C'Oo...92lQBcu
0' :g 0::: ~ 0) ..c::. "2 3
C'O ...- t > E "5 U 0
e c ~ g '~ .a 55 ffi ~
~ C'O en Q) C3 r- 0) Q:; "5
oo:i- :g =i:.S ~ ,g':.S ~ 55
2<(
~ 81
81
C]) LL C
:5 Cf) '0
ogo..
c,!:
o
1;5
c
0)
E~
...920
0..;:
.Eu16
0)
...-'(5'
r..:..o..
oo:i- c.n
.....1$6
ugs:e
~ 0.. -0
_E e 6
0.. U
-+-'
3 Ci3
c.n-+-'co
~ ~Z
o
en
c
'E
=
ro
c
en
"Ci)
en
:::l
:0-
<(
c
o
en:';::;
c C'O
.'~ c
~u~
<cQ)
"200..
rn 15 E
> Q)'-
Q) (/)
~03
co~
"::':::Q)(/)
C'O..c::.u
Q) -+-' C
0....... 0
~ C'O as
C]) 0.: ~ (/)
10 C'O 0
a;Q)Q3co
0..:5 u u
o en.Q)
'E -g ~
en .g .~ @
::g Q3 0. u
~~:2g
;: :E2 ~ ;:
c..o c c
,2 ~'~.2
"t5 at 0 t5
~ u ~
03 ~ :3 Q:;
~3~~
16 c.n- LL ~ -g g' ~ (/) c ~
0) 'Ci) Cf) -.i rn 'Ci) ro;S rn 0.:
16 ~O Q) C :::l .b 16 C])
Ci3 c.....l:C ,2 ~ :5
o..rnCrnU~062
o X'ffil- 0) E,- rn en
::g fE E ,!: ~ ~ .gs ~ Ci3 'E
:::l <{ 0) C ...... Q)C'O :.;::; CI..:::l
~ g: ~ ES ,!: E ~ 'E 0 u
cro~-55~c~ W
,2 Ci3 ;: c.n ,2 c:::: :.S en Cf)
~ -0 C <( '0 ~ ~ '~ 0
..... C '.n'~ ....J
ti3 ~ ~ g '~ ~ e C])
~~~~~1$t~~lg
~g~ ~ro8.Cf) ro ~ ~~
ffi ffi;S 'ffi ~ ~ ~ :.S ~ 5 8.
0.. ...: u C 0.. C
~ g ffi'o ~.:
O:::..c::. 8.. 0... 0::: ""'
c"::':::Ol-c
o g5 0.."* 0
o..Q)>'
~:.SOco
o.:'O~z
Q)
C;=
...-
eno
~...-
:::l
c.n
men
E=i
c::O
g~
rn 0)
~~g
<(Eco
-64-
(l,l
.....
=
"'0
c..
~
~
;a
E:
~
.....
CIl
=
~
CIl
.~
:=
.~
=
~
(l,l
.....
=
~
o
c..
~
o
U
-
c::
o
'{;;
c::
=
c..
;.<
~
.....
.~
.....
CIl
o
>>
-?S
~
;;..
o
~
CiS
E
c..
o
Qj
;;..
(l,l
Q
"E
;a
~
;a
(l,l
CIl
(l,l
~
-
u
(l,l
.....
~
~
CiS
I:-'
o
.......
I
o
.......
...
.~
.....
I::::
.~
.....
~
~
......
:...
~
~
~
Cj
...
~
b.o
~
Q:;
~
.:::
t::
~
&
c:::
'S
~
~
'i::
~
-'=
~
~
o
~
'u
a
~
05
en
-=
:;
o
en
t.-
o
a
i:J
0) 0) Ci5
~ ,2= ~ JS .!: ~ ~
c::- 03 10 ~ ,,... ~ ~ ~ O)..Q
,Q 0) 0) 'S 0- (5 ..c: ..Cl co :S 'CO
"5c::~E-oen'O jg::l.....
..Cl '~s 8 g; N en 0) ...... g ~ 'E
'C w ..Cl _ ~ 0 CO) 0 0) 0 0) ..... 03
c -....,......~..c: 0) >c 0.
o:?;og 3:O)s E 0....... Co~ 0) 0)
t.:> 0 ~ 0- c:: 5 ~ co 5 ..c: 'S E c::
- Q) >- c:: 0 I.<- en 0.. ..c: en E 0.:.0
ro ..Cl co 0 0 '- U '0 0) ::l ..Q :=
..c: '0 ::l ~...... ~ c:: co ~ 10 u 0)> ~
en en 0) co 0) ro ~
'- ~ ,~ 0 ~ '0 0.. '- ..Cl 5 g Q) Co
~ 'E .9 ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ......- :e 0_ ~ 'S
->- 2 0 '~ ~ a. ~ ~ 'E 8- g ~ ~
co 0) 'C 0) c::r 0. ""' ""' 03 e 0_ I.<- co
0.. '0 0. 0. en co ::2: E 0. 0....- 0 0.
o
~
'u
~
l.l..
a
IZl
:;
o
en
t....,
o
a
i:J
'-
:E
_ en
.9Ei3
'-032
o 0. a3
'~ 0) c::
0) ~,cg ,
~-'-'c::
0...- E ~g
,_ ::l
...-CO........Cl
oo~:S
c::
~ ~ .~ 8
wffii3O)
~ ~ :E Co
o...~ 3: {55
-0 0)
c::
Co 0
> '0
0) c::
'S co
0 en
co
C 0)
c::
'0 19
0.. E
03 ::l
Ci) 0 ~
-E >- i:j)
0 ...- ..92
0 c::
co '0 o 'E
>
0) c: Ci) z=:
'S ::l co
0 co
0 ..Cl ~ 0) c:
co Ci) }20)
0)
>- 0) ,2= e~
co 3:
3: c: 0 0. en
2 ::l
0 'S .9 :.c
co 0) co
c.9 c: (.9 0) '0
:e 19 :0 > c:
co ..c: Co ~ co
> 0) > 0) c:::
0) ::l 0) c: 0
'S 0 'S 19 ~
0 :S 0 cD
co co '0 U
0) t.;:::
C 'CO C '0 Co :.a
c: c:
'0 g '0 ::l ..c: 0
0.. 0.. 0 en E
:.a ..Cl ...!.,
03 I- :S ..c: 'CO
'0 2 0) c:
Ci) co en 0 :.E: 0)
>- c: >- Z ..c: 'U5
0 co 0 0) 0)
N 0) M c: ::l .!:
...:.. co ...:.. 0) 0
'0 :S Ci)
-<:t 0) -<:t ~ 'x
:E 0 :E UJ
:E .. :E II III
O)WC
:S CJ) '0
'Ogo..
c:: .!:
.Q
10
C
0)
E~
..92 0
~3:
.E:t)1O
N'~
"':"0..
-<:t'Oen
...... 0) 5
t.:>gs:e
~0.'O
_E E 5
0. U
'S 03
enCi)
~ >-
o
'0 '-- ...: '0 0) >-
~E5E5~'::~
__0) ..c: ..c: 0 ...... 0)
...::.::...::.:: g-co1O
~mmo..t)c.9
0.0.0)21=e
~ ~ :S,~ ~
<co.: 0)..92
0) 'O..c: ::l
jg.!:; ......ciS
......-5
>- 0) 0)= as
~ ,!: .!: .s :5
2::;:5a3~C
co '0 '0 E 0) '0
&2 c::1.J... 0) Eo..
'0 . Q CJ) Ci.. c: '0
~ t) 0 .~ 0 Co
O)~-I ~O)>
..., 0)...... ..92
'S 03 '0 ~:e gz., g
ciS1;ffi<EOD:l
~~~U)O{5~~.g:'O
::l 50 en
~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ '- ~.~
0)0) co~~.e55~
c: .0 -0;:::- 0) o:i CO) m co
'~::Q ~ 10 ~ c:: ~ E.-::. '0
'OE5~Ci500)=en~C::
c: 3: 'c 0. >- c.9 ~ ;S ~ co
,Q en 0) 0 co '0 ~
1:5 :5 'U5 '0 03 {5 0. I.<- ~ c::
0)0 _'Oo~o 0
~ ..c: c:: E5 0) '~ c: ~ 15
...::.::C03:~o. O~Q)
5 co :s '- = co en
0) c: g; ::5 ..:::- 19 I- CD
0. ~ co .8 ~ a3.!: 1;
~~O)c:: enEc::
0.: ..92 en co 2? ..92 3:
'0 Ci5 :S 'C 0. 0 en
ffi .9 1; .~ .e; 15 .~ {55 ;S
'00::5
~.c .~
o u
o.c:......
EJ)~
0.0)......
:S ~
0) co
,~ -t5
::l 5
en E
~ 0)
::l'O
en
co 0
0) en
E'CO
.~ 0)-
......Co
.~z
~g
-65-
C:CJ)
00
13-1
55 0)
03=@
1;-0.
en ~
;S ~
10 c::
c: co
.Q .9
~'O
0) 0)
o.u
o ::l
_'0
c: 0)
o '-
=0)
~..Cl
~1:ci
O)UJ
:SU)
1.<-0
0-1
.!:
c::
,Q 'S
co en
c ~
~::Q
..92 E5 0)
0.3: >
Et)co~
MO) -
...:..'[ (9
-<:t'O~:O
0) 0 Co
t>gs:e~
~0.'O'S
_EE50
o.uD:l
cO)
'0 c::
0.. .~
'0
c:
o
2~
en en
0'2
.!:
0)1.<-
c: 0
'C c::
::l 0
'0 .-
1.J...J9
c::
CJ) Q)
o E
-I Q)
'OCi..
c: E
co-
'0 I
'Sffi
O:s
3: en
0) en
:5..92
en
m co
E
c:.9
o
= u
:3 g ,~ ~
E ..c: E .~
~~'Oen
0) 0) 55:E
0.0.0......
0.
E ~
o.::l
0)'0
::5 ~
~~
<co.:
~~
-
-
I
o
-
QJ
.....
~
"0
Q..
;:::I
-
;
~
:..
QJ
.....
tI'.I
~
~
tI'.I
QJ
~
'rJ
~
r...
QJ
.....
~
0
Q..
:..
0
U
-
c
0
'r;;
c
~
Q..
~
~
.....
.~
.::::
.!!:
Q
~
$
Qj
...
0
.....
-
Q)
c
C.
0
Qj
...
QJ
Q
"0
C
~
-
"E
~
QJ
03 tI'.I
QJ
> ~
..92 -
c e;)
co QJ
U -;:
t.;::: ~
'c
0) Q)
'U5 C-'
....
~
;..
CJ)
~
~
.~
......
;..
~
&
~
~
~
~
'i:::
~
.~
~
~
....
~
.....
......
~
.~
~
~
~
......
;..
~
~
~
u
c
ro
CJ)
..r::
"5
o 0
CJ) fA
o '0
Z'ffi
C3U:
0) C ,2 .e
C ,::: ~ o.:=:
0) 0)10........ E
E c"S ffi2!5 ~6 '-
0):0 E EO Cl..t5 ~
f5S~Cl..N02:::l0)
I-"Oo.Q........O).Pc
Cl..4- 0 0) C Q. ~ :0
.~ ~ 0_ ~ ro ~ 8 S
ogg:::~oo=
~ ~~.:: ::; c:: c 0
'(j) ~ I- 83 Cl.. ro .Q ~
0) .- J2 4- ~ 0::: "5 c
-00 O)>.......cro
.!: -: E ro E 2 'C ~
~.~ '; 5- ?5: ~ C ,~
co Cl.. Cl.. en ro ~ 8 .9
c
.a
i:
,g>
::2
0)
:::l
o iD-
J;cro
.5.2{i5
-0..2:::-,-
0) c a:;
Co 0 E
-55~ ~
-oi: E
c 0>
::J .C
2 ro
en 0)
0)..0
3!:.9
0)-0
c ~
........ :::l
"S .~ J?
o x c
oo:t 0) 0
r.:. u
oo::i ~ ~
:Ei=
:E
0) LL en
:5CJ)J5
00
O-lLL
c .!: ~
,Q "S' oC
10 en
C f!::
Q)32
E :::l :::l
200
~3!:
E........
u........
oo:t ,~ ro
r.:.o..
oo::i-oen-o
_Q)6Co
u~:e~
[ 0.. -0 "S
_EE50
o..uCO
Q) 0)
..0 :5
ro
..r::
en
0)
c
~
III
C:
ro
:5
en
en
~2
O>C:::l
.!: 0 en ro
::; 76 as
-ocE..9
c 0)
.Q E c 1:5
1:5 ~ ,Q ro
~ E 16 Cl..
03 - g.~
~ ...;'E
:::l
o
..r=
:5
'~
0)
en
ro
..r::
Cl..
Cl..
.5.2
03
>
o
c
ro
0)
>
ro
..r::
:5
'~
0)
en
ro
..r::
Cl..
0..
ro
~
>
o
c
ro
0)
>
ro
..r::
ro
..r::
en
C
0)
E
0)
>
o
-oE
C-o
5 c
..c g
en..o
0) ..r=
3!:"5
0) 0
..r:: en
I-
c
0)
E
0)
> 05
o en
E ro
..r::
c Cl..
~ r-
-.a
-5,~
'C 2
-0-0
C C
:::l :::l
2.8
..r:: ........
........ en
:::l ro
o 0)
en 0)
~:5
I-
c
J?
::c
0>
'C
III
III
~Cl)-o
cL:5~
:S153!:
-0
Cl)
t.;:::
..::.::=
ro c
Cl) Cl)
Cl..32
Ci5
J)2
Q) ~ c::
Co>!Q
:::lED-
g ?5:2
Q) ro en
,::: ........ ro
1Offi~
"SE2!5
~~~
ug;..9
g~c
o~ 3!: ro
gO)~
oo:t~.:: ::;
..... 0 Cl..
Ci3
>
en2
;S r-
rn
0) u
u t.;:::
:::l 'c
-00)
~'(j)
c
ro
CJ)
..r=
"5
o 0
CJ) fA
o '0
.2:"'ffi
uU:
I-
~
en
..9 'E -5
.2 ~~
o..O>~
Cl) .!: Q)
.2320c::
'5 c.Q
C; ..0 .~ "5
~ro""""..o
1515~:S
c
~ ~'~ 8
wffi-5f!::
~~:c~
D- .~ 3!: en
c;
..-
15
en
ro
~
Cl)
:::l
C
0)
>
<C
-0
C
ro
(5
::0
ro
>
0)
"S
o
co
t
o
2-
<(
Lt')
~
oo::i
:a:
:a:
ro ro
.9..9
Q)
0) c
c ro
.5.2~
c~
::;::2
........ 0)
::c5
,g>J;
-0
'"2 Q)
ro Co
>..r::
Q) en
"S-o
d5 5
t2
o ..r::
2-"5
<(&5
-0-0
c c
:::l ro
o Q)
..cc
:S~
:::l........
O..r::
en 0)
'C
0> I
c..r::
=0)
en :::l Q)
'x e c
Cl):5~
0) -0 E
.g. f!:: .a
........ ro
%-55~
0:::
III
c
o
~
u
t.;:::
:0
o
E
ro
c
0>
'(j)
0>
C
~
'x
w
..
~~~rot)ffi-g
<i o.9~ en
3!: ,~ gs
Q)o"O -0
:5 0) c.~ C -0
0)6::;....:~gro
c=~~ !-EO)
'5 .9:l 0) 0) Ci3 c:: ..r:: 15
-0 ffi E 3!: > ,Q> t
..@~en2
Ec ........
~g 1"5 ffi
E ro ~.g .!:
- g E 'c ro
'E .- ,Q> ~
en en I-
;Sc
ro
~:S-o
:::len"S
-Oeno
~ 2 3!:
O)w-o
:5CJ)ffi
01-
15-lr:2
c"E
.- ro
........ >
~2
~ g
co
c::
.Q
16
c
Cl)
E~
..5Q 0
Cl..3!:
E........
- u
Lt') 0)
~ 'e1O
...r~en
_0)6Q)
(.)~:e:::l
~ 0.. -0 ffi
_EE5>
o..u<{
........
I- C
o 0
,~t5
<{O)
en
03
E
:3
0-0
..r:: 0)
t.;:::
16~
0) 0)
Cl..32
-66-
CI)
......
I:':l
'"0
c..
;::I
...
ca
Q:
l-
~
rn
I:':l
~
rn
CI)
~
.~
ca
~
CI)
......
ca
l-
o
c..
l-
o
U
-
=
o
'm
=
ca
c..
;.<
~
......
'C
......
rn
C
>.
~
Q;j
>
o
......
=
CI)
5
c..
o
~
>
CI)
Q
'"0
;
-=
t:
ca
CI)
rn
Cl)
~
...
"Cj
Cl)
......
...
~
Q;j
e"
0>
c::
:0
'C
03
>
o
1:5
0)
'0'
0.
0)
:5
'-
J2
-0
0)
Q..
o
-0
ro
en
c::
o
76
03
-0
'(j)
c::
o
o
N
.....
I
o
.....
.~ ~
-oE
c:: 0)
ro16
aSU5
::0
ro
-0 Cl)
'0 :5
>
ro
5.s:
...
.s
.....
~
.~
.....
~
~
~
......
;...
':l.l
~
~
u
...
....
~
;...
C.tj
~
~
.~
.....
;...
~
&
~
~
~
~
.i:::
~
.....
.;::
~
~
c:
ctl
U)
..r::
:5
o 0
U) &5
o '0
aa5
OLL:
m
(0'
r-.:..
oci
::2:
::2:
.....
]?
en
.8Ei3
0..... CD 2
Cl..C:
'lS. 0) ~
O).!:: 0)
$!::Q<.9c:
~E~g
~ctl=E
1515 mE
c:
~ ~'3: 8
LUa5-5O)
EO' ~:.c Cu
0... .!:Q :s: -53
'"0
Cu
>
0)
"S
o
co
en
0)
..a
o
LL
:0
ctl
o
a::
'"0
t::
co
0)
c:
~
..r::
0)
:::l
e
:E
ro
t::
o
=
~
"0
co
0)
c:
o
'"0
"0
co
.8
0)
:::l
t::
0)
>
<(
"0
t::
ctl
(5 "0
-g ~ 5
g ro .8
..oc:..r::
"t) g :5
~ ~ ~
"0
t:: ctl
~ 0)
~ 5
CD
"t)
ctl
~
o
..a
Cu
:c
Q5
:::l
c:
0)
>
<(
'"0
c:
C'O
(5
as en
c: 0)
~~
c: LL
.a
"t)
ctl
W
ro~
tf~
r- l+-
oci 0
"t)
::2: ctl
::2:~1I
0) LL "0
:E(I)a5
153(5
.!::
~~a
..o<c:
o 0) .9
LL..r::co
=g:"E
&.~j
CD "0 Cl..
--c:.E
K5.9
~~
en
o CD
..o:S
Cu
:c"O
Q5Cu
:::l 5)
85""5
> 0
<(co
c:
.9 =g
COen"t)
"E ~ ctl
O):QLU
E :::l
~ 0
Cl..:s:
.E1:)"ffi
t.O'~
r-.:..Q.
oci en
a5 5
o~:e
[ Cl.. "0
_E e 5
Cl.. t.:l
r:::n Q)
K5 .~ ~ 15 .!:: $! ~
..... E 32 O)O).Q
c: ~ r:::n ~ Cl.. to ro '5 Cu :E ro
g .~ ~ E 0 0 -53 ..a ~::l
E r:::n == ::l ~ ~ en a5 g ~ 'E
'C: c: :::l t.:l ~ _9 "E >0 '" a 0) -- ~
"EW..oo ,-,-0).....""" 0)>"Ec..
o.2:'ao:s:"E E Cl..:E ~~ 0).........
t.:l -- o~ 0) ctl >.. Cl.. c: ".. E '..n
-0) ~ 8 g :: ~ &. ctl 0 -53 "S Cl...!::
~..o a5LO 0:3 ,-5~ 0) g.Q;g
"t5 "0 :::l "t"""~ Q) Cl.. ffi m ~ co t.:l g; E
1- ~ .~ L- ~ ~ 0: '- 15 B 8 CD 1-
,- .- .E '" >...... ,-.E .- 0 "0 ~
~E.8 ...... 0) -'156:S:B
>.. 0) 0 .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'E g- f?S ~:e
&. ~ 'lS. ~ g g. ~ E ~ 5. ~- a ~
:e-
w
r-.:..
..::f
::E
::E
c:::c
.a,g
"0
c:
ctl 0)
0) c:
c:~
~>..
..r::C
r:::n0
:::l c:
e :3
..r::......
--:e
0) 0)
c: 'C
o co
"0.8
"0 0)
ctl c: 0)
.8 ~ t::
:e 0
"0 0) "0
Cu'C "0
>.l: ctl
~ g' .8
o 0
co:5
:em
.~ .9
0) 0)
t:: c:
0..92
0)- c:
c: .....
~.a
..r:: --
O)..c:
g.g
'- I
..r::..c:
__ 0)
:::l
o
:S
"0
~
co
..c:
CJ)
>..
ctlO)
s~
o'~ ~
..oO)~
Cu 0)
:1:::5
"0
~
ctl
..r::
en
r:::n
.!:: "0
"t) t::
'x g
0) ..0
0) :E
:E 0
c:
t::
0)
"0
~
0)
c:0)
0) c:
"0 ctl
~-5
II
II
::Q~
~~
en
0) CJ)
:3..92
en
m co
E
c:.8
o
.....:= t.:l
g.~~
..r::E.~
~ ~
m a5 CJ) ..92
Cl.. ~ ;S "E
~13O)B
0.:"00t.C
"0 ';;:; -6 '8,
ffi ::5 ~ . 00
..r::
r:::n
:::l
0) e
g:E
jgco
0.8
"00)
c: t::
colS!
~ t::
..92.a
:s: 0
.QE
"E ro
~ .8
0) "0
""5 0)
o c:
CO ~
~ '3:
..0 0)
o ..0
LL
:0 ro
ctl ..r::
o en
a:: c:
'- .9
0) 1:)
"t) 0)
ctl en
~ CD
o :s
..a en
,~ ~ ;S
~Q5.8
ro ~
"t) 0)
5 :~ ~
~ 1:) CO
ro ~ (5
"t) c: "t)
,!:: 8 ctl
CD W
E
ro
c:
r:::n
'00
:s:
0)
Z
ro
t::
r:::n
V5
..
c:
~
~"Q)
:::l 'C:
r:::n
t.C "0
c: c:
o :::l
t.:l 0
0)..0
'-..r::
0):5
..0 0
en
.8"0
0) c:
c: ctl
~
en
0)
t:: c:
~lS!
:e E
,~.a
- I
-g,~
g -c:
:5"0
c:
ctl
:e-
<.0
r-.:..
oci
::2:
::2:
..r::
t.:l
ctl
o
Q.a3
Cl..'-..r::
coctlr:::n
"O..r::::l
t:: en e
:::l r:::n..r::
.8 ,!:: ......
"t)]?0)
ctl X CO ci.
O)O)Cu~
0) 0) Cl.. 0)
~:E35~
II
-67-
r-
eo
(I)
..r::
:5
o 0
(1)&5
0'0
.2:'ffi
ULL:
.....
]?
en
.8Ei3
'- 0)
.@ ~"E
r:::n0)
~.!:: a3
$!::Q<.9c:
~E~g
~co=E
15'0 mE
__,." c:
CJ) u':;: 0
CO t:: ;> t.:l
LUco-5O)
EO' ~ :.c Cu
0... .!:Q :s: -53
c;
~
a
"t)
co
~
"t)~
co 0)
W '00
r- :s:
r-.:.. 0)
..::fz
::E
:E
O)LL"O
:E(I)ffi
'03(5
,!::
t::
0--
~~
"E ~
~:Q
..92 g
_E :s:
1:) co
r-'~
r-.:..5.
..::f"Oen
......0)5
t.:l~:e
~ Cl.. "0
_E e 5
Cl.. t.:l
l"fj
.....
I
o
.....
QJ
.....
~
"0
c..
;::J
-
;;
Q:
l..
~
tI)
~
:E
tI)
.S:
:=
'u
~
~
QJ
.....
E
o
c..
l..
o
U
"";::;
(5
'r;;
c
~
c..
;.<
~
.....
.~
..::
tI)
S
;;.-.
~
Q:l
...
o
III
III
-:::
Q:l
S
Q.
o
Qj
...
QJ
o
-g
C':l
"E
~
QJ
tI)
QJ
ex::
t:: "0 CJ)
_9 ~ ~ ;S
~ocO)~
~~~g..92
co "O"E
E ~ ~ B
0)"Ot.C
~ :E ""5 -~
0.: ~-oo
-ga~~
ctl :::l :E
C:' CJ) ch
.8 :2,~ ~ ~
~O)coEco
~:E"Et::0
~ O)~~u
85 -2 "*- g ~
> :::l E-- E
<( "0 _ E ._
"t)
ctl 0)
W:::l
c:
0)
>
<(
-
U
QJ
.....
C
~
Q)
c;;
...
...
~
L..
0Jj
C
~
~
....
1::
c
&
~
~
~
~
.~
c
.....
.;::
~
c:
(\j
Cf)
..c:
"5
o 0
Cf) V5
o '(3
.?;-ffi
uU:
c;-
CO
r..:.
-.:i
~
~
a
...-
'0
c;-
CO
r-:.
-.i-
:E
:E
.....
~
_ en
.9=Ei3
0..... as 2
Cl..C::
':3. 0) ~
Q.) .f:: Q.)
J!232c.9c:
...- '3 c.Q
0..0 en"""
...-co:;:::;15
'O'O~E
en 8';: 5
co c: (.)
ill co..c: Q.)
>.::S(.)eo
(\jen:..c..c:
D-. ,fQ :s:: en
ro
c:
0)
'Ci)
:s::
Q.)
z
..
..
Q.)LL-oc:cr.>-o
:5 Cf) ffi .Q :s &
'OSt5~E~
.f:: as ~
:g
.~
~
.~
.....
~
~
~
......
L..
~
~
~
u
oCO
C:O'~
r-:.o..
-.i--oen
Q.) 5
~:e
Cl..-O
e 5
Cl.. (.)
......
(.)
ra
c..
.5
c
co
(.)
Q.) -0 t;:::
~ :5 g .~
cL :s::'Ci)
-o4-ene:
~ffio~~
~ ~ .Q K5 ~
ffi<(coE~
t5~cc::(\j
w.....Q.)g.9
::s 0) E (\j 0
C:C:~O)CO
Q.) ..... Cl..:;:::; Cl..
> ::s E ,- E
<( -0 _ E._
~Ci)
~ G3 ~
~
~
co
Q.)
Cl..
en
;s
Ci3
Q.) >
~~
-0
~
~
co
r..:.
-.:i
:E
~
ro
c:
0)
C75
III
c:
(\j
Cf)
..c:
"5
o 0
Cf) V5
o '(3
.?;-ffi
UU:
......
0.8
':3. :=:
c: E
o Q.)
:;:::; Cl..
20)
c: c:
E~
~15
E'O
,- Q.)
2~
...... (\j
.8~
>. ,fQ
&.9
(\j.9
.8Q.)
,f:: ::0
"0 (\j
Q.) Q.)
:s..o
O)c::
t;::: Q.)
C:..c:
0.....
(.)"0
~"S
Q.) 0
..0 :s::
Q.)
c:
~
ro
a.; ..c:
,::: en
o Q.) E Q.)
:s::~~..o
Q.) E~ro
~ E!'C ~
c: ...!..-o
(\j..c:c::"O
t5 .~ 5 c: Q.)
W -..0 (\j:5
::s is,:5 _ Q.)
a3 ::s ::s c: en
~~~.a~
-0 ..... Q.)
c:"O..c:::C"O
(\j Q.) f- 0)-
t5 eo oj 'C 5
Ci)~C: :s::
co"O~
ill c:
::s
o
..0
en
Q.)
:s::
Q.)
..c:
f-
~
co
r-:.
-.i-
:iE
:iE
..c:
0)"0 ~
J!2~~~
Q.)eD-..8
eo Cl....... Q.)
5- f5- fA ~
~.....(\jE
.::: a3::2: Q.)
co [2S ..0
~.Q~~
::s ~ .8 en
(.)Q.).....en
O"Oc:C
g ~ ~ E
o~c:~>.
L04-::s(\j
r-- 0 Cl.. D-.
35~.c
~~~
f- e
~Cl..
'3 Cl..
..c: t::r co
g~-g
en ::s
.9 0
en ..0
(\j..c:Ci)
(.) co
~ Q.)
8:~
(\j .....
.8
-gQ.)
5~
..0
..c:
"5
o
rJ)
"0
Q.)
Cl..
'C
en
Q.)
~
>.4-
e
o co
E Q.)
~E
::c 8
O)Q.)
'C ..0
a3~0) cr.>
K5'OJ!2Q.)~
..0_ ~ ~:5 ro
:=: (\j co .....
E ~ 5- ~ 'E
~2 ~ ~ ~
~~:E;E~
:Q ~ ~ Cl..:O
'3 0 E.Q S
..0 Cl..::s ~ ..0
"0 e (.) Q.) .....
Q.) Cl.. 0"0 co
e~g-~~
Cl.......0 c::;:::;
c.. c:: I.C) 4- eo
coor--OCl..
c:
Q.)
~
0)
Q.)
::0
~
'co
>
(\j
Q.)
o
E
0)
.f::
co
Q.)
t5
en
c:
.Q
1U---
..... Q.)
::s E
g':;:::;
,... c:
o Q.)
(.) Q.)
Q.) .....
..... 0)
-68-
c:
(\j
Cf)
..c:
"5
o 0
Cf) V5
o '(3
..2:-ffi
uU:
.....
~
_ en
=Ei3
as2
Cl..C:
O)~
.f:: Q.)
32c.9c:
.~ ~,Q
~-;;~]
'0 4-0 ~ 'C
c
8';: 8
ffi i3 Q.)
::s eo
en:..c..c:
,fQ :s:: rJ)
.9
o
':3.
Q.)
J!2
en
(\j
ill
>.
(\j
D-.
4-
o
~.9
~ Q.)
c::
c:~
.a
~ E
.a
~~
ro~
c:
o co
:;:::;
:0.9
"0 Q.)
(\j c:
~~
o
"0
"0
co
.9
.....
en
co
l:!:!-
Q.)
::s
c:
Q.)
>
<(
o
Q.)
co
~
c:
co
Cf)
::0
eo
>
Q.)
"S
o
CO
t
o
e-
<(
W
::s
c:
Q.)
>
<(
Q.)
(.)
::s
-0
o
0:
0>
r..:.
-.i-
:E"'-
:E~
-0
Q.)
eo
..c:
en
"015cr.>
eo :2 ~
> 0) (\j
Q.)::S-
"SeE
S:5E!
tend::
o ,f:: ~
Cl.. Ci) Q.)
:a: .~ ~
-g~'O
gQ.):8
~ ,g-.9
Q.) en CO
:s::~.....
c: - Q.)
Q.)-o~
"Oc::(\j
~coE
II
~LL
=Cf)
'OS
c: ,f::
O"S
~en
c~
E32
~ 5
Cl..:s::
E.....
- (.)
0> Q.)
r-:. '2' CO
-.i-~en
......Q.)5
(.)~:e
~ Cl.. -0
_E 2 5
Cl.. (.)
..c:
"5
o
Cf)
W
::s
c: 0
Q.) Q.)
> .....
<(~
Q.)
(.) c:
::s CO
-oCf)
0::0
0: eo
>
Q.)
"S
o
CO
~ :3
a3E
>
<(
0)
c::
'~
-0
c:
,Q
o
..... Q.)
o en
Cl.......
.....2
<( .f::
.8.915
ac:e-
...- .Q <(
o
"oQ.)-O
c: en c:
5 as 5
..o:g..o
..c: Ci)
"5Q.)(\j
~ :5 Q.)
c:
~coo
..... rJ)
~g-12
'C Ci) ~
..0 0
.8.9(.)
(.)0)
Q.) tE c:
~ jg '~
~-o:s::
eo-o
Q.) > c:
~-@co
o 0 0)
o:mc:
.~
..... Q.)
e-E
<( Q.)
:5
"0
c:
::s
o
..0
:5
o-g Q.)~
c:gco>
';::-..0 c: Q.)
:0 Ci) :~ g
~~Ci3co
III
en
;S
Ci3
Q.) >
g..9:?
"Oc
~ r5
t;:::
'c
0)
'Ci)
c:
~ CO
~~
c: co ~
.Q Q.) ~
CO E
C CO
Q.)C:.9
~~o
i5.g21
E'E ,5
-0
Q.)
~
c
~ Q.)
co "0
Q.) ,-
Cl..
~~"O
cL-"S
Q.) ~
:5'0
(lj
-
t':
"0
c..
::;J
::::
~
Q..
Qj
-
rn
t':
~
rn
.2:
::
.~
t':
r...
(lj
-
;:<:l
(5
E-
O
u
-
::::
o
.~
c:a
c..
~
r..:J
-
.c
-
rn
is
>.
~
~
>
o
-
::::
(lj
S
c..
o
"Qj
>
(lj
Q
~
c:a
...
u
;..
t':
(lj
rn
(lj
~
c:
,Q
~
ro
en
.f::
ro
c:
0)
'Ci)
:s::
Q.)
z
...
u
(lj
-
::::
(lj
~
\.)
III
oo::r
....
,
I:)
....
...
....
~
CJ:i
~
~
~
....
1'-'
~
&
i:l:::
~
~
~
.:::;
....
~
.:;::
~
~
....
~
....
.....
l:::l
.~
.....
:.;
~
~
.....
....
~
~
~
\j
c::
co
(.I)
..c::
:5
o 0
(.I)~
0"[5
.offi
GLt
.....
~
_ CJ'J
.8Eis
0..... 0:; 2
0.C::
o~,~ ~
~ -c c.9 '
=s c,2
o"OCJ'J......
"<"""co=E
O'O~:S
...... CD c::
~ u'~ 8
LLl ffi 13 (])
~ ~ :c ro
0.. o~ $: -55
CD
c::
~
en
co
!:!:!.
c:: co
~ -C
:c ~ ffi
.g'~ ~
ro..c:: c::
c::t:::f)~
o :::l
=o..c::
:0:5 g
16 co 0
(]) .8 :5
5~~
:g ~ g
~~ ~
-c..c::
ro CJ'J 0
> l:l:;:: Z
(])CD-C
s:2 -C
o t:::f) co
:::~.8
o.c CD
0........ :::l
.!::: t:::f) c::
<(.!: CD
-c en ~
sox
oCD05
..o(])..c::
en =5 .B
~~~-~
c:: . c c::
~en~c::
~~~3
III
CDLL
=5(.1)
oS
C::o!:
0.......
~s
c CJ'J
Q.) ~
'tj~s
- 0
E$:
-t5
o CD
"('- '0'10
r.:..o.
-.:i--cCJ'J"E
....,CD5co
u~:e55
~o.-cs
_Ee50
o.uco
:i:
t:::f)
oc
CD
=5
(])
t:::f)
c::
Ctl
..c::
u
-C
c:: (])
co c::
CD~
c:: c::
~3
~~
oc
..c:: l-
t:::f) CD
'c ..c::
CDO
c:: c::
o co
-c.8
-c CD
co c::
.8~
>-:c
COt:::f)
$: oc
21:
co t:::f)
c.9~
-g:5
:::l-c
o CD
:@ro
"5..c::
o CJ'J
CJ'J t:::f)
c:: c::
CD en
-c Ox
~ CD
II
II
....:
:::l
o-c
..c::CD
~
76C
CD CD
0.32
05
>
CJ'J~
;Sc
Ctl
CD u
U t+=
:::l 'c
-Ct:::f)
~oen
c::
co
U)
..c::
"5
o 0
U)~
o '0
-,=,ffi
GLt
t:::f) a5
CJ'J CDC CDc:: ~ u5
Ctl ,::: Q.)E ..0 :2 $:
c::- ~ co - ,- Q.) CD .Q
""' t:::f)= o.c..o CO:::l ro=5ro
,2 ~ oC:: E 0 0 -55 ..0 Q.):::l
:5 'o,;g :::l ~ ~ CJ'J ~ =5 g ~ E
=@JJE'::~.8cE:;CDOQ.)"""'O:;
c -'-' CD..... Q.)>co.
o-'=''O~ ~c E 0.=5 ~~ CD '""""
U 0 ~ CD co >- 0. c:: wE......'
_(]) G ~ g .:: ~ ~ co 0 -55 s o.'!:
CtiElffio O:s .13-c CD ~.Q;:g
..c:: -c :::l ~ ~......Q.) 0. S co 35 10 0 CD :::l
CJ'JCDCJ'J wCDCOC::O>..o
l- c:: o~ .E ~ ~ 0:: .E ..0 .2 25 ~ 19
~ Og .8 := ~ E:; 0:; CD .....;- 15 6 $: E5
~ lB 0 E co '- 1i5 -0 -E 0..0 00 ~ t
Ctl (]) . c CD 5- ~ co Ctl 0:;..... _ "'- Ctl
0.. -c 0. 0. en Ctl ~ E 0. 0."<""" 0 0.
c:::
o
~
ro
U5
oS:
ro
c:::
t::TJ
Oen
$:
(])
z
i::i.
E
Ctl
0:::
tt::
o
CD
:::l
c::
CD
>
<(
-c
c::
Ctl
(5
:a
Cti
>
CD
S
o
co
-c -c
CD Q.)
Cti ro
..c:: ..c::
en en
Ctl C'O
-0
-c c::
c:: C'O
CO-c
CD-c-g~
=5S~c::
>- 0 ;s.
..o..oE-
........en:::l~
Ci5Ctl.......~
c::LU
oE CD -a, o~
0:; =5 oc ~
~'Og;]
'" ...- 0 en Q.)
Ctl ~..::! c::
_:::l0C'O
c::g~~
02 5 t:::f)':;
"5uc::O
=@~~o.
c -;'~ .8 cD
8 0. CD c::
CD~ffi~~
ro I E
..c::~EE.2
"'CD.g.2:c
'ffi =5 ~ t:::f)
'+- ..c::Jg:E:;
(]).gs~..c::..c::
-cCtiegg
os; $: 0. 0 0
e.9~:5:5
0..
0:; ~
CD c::
o!: g;
~<(
LU-c
-,=,ffi
0(5
......
o
e-
<(
M
~
r.:..
.ocf
::2E
::2E
III
..
CDLL-CCDOCD-o
=5U?ffi=5.c=5S~
0.....t:::f)0 OCD
'0 ---l S2 c:: s;.. $: -
c::: c::: "E '5 (.I) 0
~~gz-ot:::f)
'v '" CD 0. c:: c::
C ~ g ~:!SJ g
~:!2coo:::~J9
~~ttt::2-a3
_;;2:-:> 00 E 5
~ ;;> 0. ..... CD ,-
1:5 ,!::: 0 :::l 0.. 10
MCD<( EEg
;:: "[ ro 0 ~ - OE ~
-.:i--c~:::J~~-c
..... ffi 0 CD o..~ CD
g8.=5~ g2.,~~
C-oc::CD~rom-6
.E 0. 8 ~ o:i ffi 32 ~
E g; ffi
.g '~ en
..c::oCD
u x c::
~CD~
0. -g E
~ co .2 a.i
..c::.......c::
~ g]2 ~
> e CD c::
CD..c:: >~~
S ....... 'en -
OCD:::l:E
co 02: 0 0')
...... '" X 'C
O:::lCD:?:
~~1 ~
-c E~=5
S .2 'S; -0
E ~ ~~
~:?:0-v5
o t:::f).......
U? :::l c:: C'O
CD~g-g
..c::......eco
:::"-C:::lCD
~ ~g~
~jg C::..c::
t+="'80')
5~CD:::l
u CD c:: e
~~~:5
';:SEg;
,g-,~ .2 .~
enCD:Co
Q, ffi .g' ~
0:::
II
CD co
:s
~.9
CD
E
t5
co
0.""':
E g;
0- ~
c
co
U
t+=
'c
0')
"en
c::
co
=5
-69-
en
c::
'E
=
ro
c::
0')
'en
en
:::l
:.0
<(
..
c::
co
U?
..c::
:5
o 0
(.I) u
o ,~
-,=,ffi
GLt
t:::f) a:5
~ g; ~ 15 ,!: JE ~
c::- 0:;- 0') ~ E ro :; ~ CD .Q
.2 CD c:: :::l C- to ..c:: ~ Ctl =5 ro
:5 ,S: :0 E .Q g '" -0 ~ 5- 10
..0 0'):= :::l g; N CJ'J g; "'..c:: E
~ CB is ~ ~ .9 ~ 0 CD '0 g; :: ';
0.000 $:c E 0.=5 ~~ a3 0.
uG CDo CD co ~~C::..c::S E ~
-,." u o~ c:: :::l W 0 '" E 0.0 :.,...._-
""' >- c:: 0 "'- '" 0.. ..c:: '-'
Cti ..0 Ctl 0 O:s 0 ~ CD :::l - ,-
..c::-o :::l"('-~""" o.C:: CO 0010 u CD:::l
CJ'JCD'" CD CtlCDCtlC::O>..o
l- .S: o~ .E JE ~ 0:: 0..0 .2 25 ~ ro
~ E.9:= ~ > o:;"-.....;-15o-~B
->- 2 0 E ~. ~ ~ ~ 'E g- g ~ t
~ ~ Ots.. ~ g g. ~ E ~ 0. ~ 0 ~
I
>-
i:i:
co
U)
..-
o
..-
u:>
::i
~
co
>
CD
S
o
r::o
>-
Ctl
$:
CD
ro
c.9
=0
Cti
>
CD
S
o
co
c
"0
0..
0:;
en
>- C-
o E
..q co
~o:::
'tt::
~o
en
:::l
:.0
<(
::2E~
::2E 0 ..
CDLLlCU:>
=5 U)'o .
00..2
'O.-J "E
.S: gz
....... CD
SCDS
'" ....... 0
~ g2., co
o
c::
,2
ro
c
CD
E:!2
~ ~
E$:
-t5ro
-.::t CD
~00'
r.:..o.
.ocf-c'"
.....CD5
(.)~:e
~ 0. -C
_E e 5
0. U
ensJ
c:: r-;
OE ~
=~
ro~
5,c
0CJ5 ~
CD
0..
.E
III
~ ~'O S C:
-;:!SJ c:: 0 :S
c:: ::;::; oQ $:
'5 2- 19 ~ ~
-0 c:: -' ~
o.~CD~
E ~ ~ CD co
~ ..c:: 0.. ~ .9
tt::76.E0
>-0 CD .~u
CO 0. rn ,!;2) ~
~ 0:; 'en := E
....... > ~ 2:- E ,- 05
coocL~-o",>
S2 >-. co t+=.92_ :.c::.......- ~
"Ei:i:-c
_~ ffi ffi ~ 13 CD
t.:l :-Q g
~o ~~:S~
c
co
U
t+=
'c
t:::f)
'en
If)
-
I
01
-
ClJ
......
CI:l
"'0
c..
P
c
CI:l
~
;...
Q.)
......
tI)
CI:l
~
tI)
~
'0
CI:l
r..
ClJ
......
E:
o
P-
o
U
-
c
o
'Vi
~
c..
~
~
......
u
'j;;;
......
tI)
Q
.....
CI:l
i:
ClJ
~
o
-:::
Ii)
E
g-
"Ii)
~
ClJ
o
"'0
....
;
....
1J
;;a
Q,l
tI)
ClJ
~
....
~
ClJ
-:::
~
Ii)
e"
....
....
~
~
~
~
....
~
~
;...
~
i:l:::
"S
~
~
.::
....
~
-;::
~
III
c::
CO
(.I)
..c::
:5
o 0
(.I) ~
o '0
cffi
GLt
t:::f) a5
'" CD C CD c:: JE en
CO ,::: CD ..D :2 CD $:
c:: a3 t:::f).:ffi [to ro '3 Cti ~ ~
is ~.!: E 0 0 -55 ~ ~ 5-.......
~ 'o,;:g :::l ~ ~ '" (]) = '" jg 'E
- 0CDOC> 'OCD......~
cCBEo-c....... 92 e..c::CD CD >c 0.
0.0'00 $:...... C: 0........ ~~ CD,..,..,
u G CD o~ CD ffi >- 0. c:: .c sEe'
-CD >- u g .:: ~ ~ co 0 '" E 0.:0
ro ..0 ffi o~ 0 :s c:: i3 ~ CD :::l .Q :=
..c::-o:::l~a:5O'co~"'1O(.)g;E
~ ~ ,~ ,P .E2 ~ 0:: ,~o E 5 g Q) Cti
co ~..... ~......._~o_-c_
;: '~ .9 ...... ~ E:; 0:; CD ,- 0 0 $: E5
iU' 2 0 '~ ~ 0. ~ 16 E 0. 0 CD t
0.. ~ 'ts.. 0. g ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ -E ~
:c
t:::f)
'C
CD
>
'en ..c::
u
co
o
0.
0.
co
-c
Cti
>
CD
cos
'O~
e
"<"""
~
-:i
~
..... 5 c ~
'm:;::': '0
"'-:00..
CD-C
-c Ctl
'E; CD
0:=5
0:;
en
>-
o
LO
~
r.:..
-.:i-
::2E
::2E
0:;
en
>-
o
c
CD
E
CD
0..
.E
..
O:;u)C
~;2 ~
CDO~~
~ CD a3 0
~~~z
,!: 15.. CD ffi rn
CD :::l..c:: 'en
:!2 B g~~
~.goc::
:::loECO
LO~>-=eEl~
~ '[2' ~ gz 0. g
r-=. c..::: ~ E >-
-.:i- ro:::lCOU?
-g 00;: t:::f)
"'CDCOc::c::
8-:5~0~
~ 10 r5: ~ 2..
CD 0
=5EE
~
'0-
....
~
.....
.....
l:::l
.~
.....
~
~
......
;...
~
~
6
.....
(.)
ctI
c..
.E
c::
Ctl
U?
..c::
:5
o 0
U? u
'0 ,~
.offi
GLt
.....
~
'"
.9Eis
""'0 0:; 2
0.C::
'ts.. t:::f) ~
(]),!: CD
JE:!2c.9c::
,,<"",,'3c,2
0..0"'.......
...--Ctl:;::.:i5
O'O~:.s
en CD.- 5
Ctl u ~ 0
LUffii3CD
~ :::l ..c::'- ro
CtlrJ'J ..c::
0.. ,~ $: en
-.::-CD
CD..c::
CD......
,5, c::
c:: 0
LU Q)
.o~
G
c:: cD
CD ..... :::l
=5.2m
>-....... >
..o~~
~.....~
.~ g; ~
0:; '~ .9
Q5 a:5 0 ..c::
~ '"C ~ ~
g; '" e
<( ~ ffi 8:
'"C c:: CO
ffi .2 0 "'E
o :5 co
..DC::55
:a 'C ,2 S
Cti C t5 0
>cv? 82co
~ "<""" en.......
~~ CDC::O
CO -:i ro 8 e-
~ -55 <(
~ ..... ~-g
~ :::l
o
..0
..c::
:5
o
U)
o
e-
<(
CJ:)
0c-
r.:..
-.:i-
::2E
::2E
c
CD
E
CD
0..
.E
en
CD-o
-octi
'E; $:
0:.9
..
..
~~ro~
.~ c::
'O-~g;
CD"'"":<(
c::rJ'JN
,2 CO S-c
~ CD c::
"" b c:: e
~ ,!: ~ S2
E:!2 O:;"'E
~~o.co
Cl..E ~ CD 55
c::-=;
-t500
CJ:)CD CO
~ '[2' ffi
r.:..
-ci- 0.:5 0
.....~(])e-
(')~O<(
~o.E
.E ~~~
i?5 ~ ~'O ~ C:
O)1i~c:o:s
'0'...... ,2 ~ ch
0. 2.. 2 CD '"
CD c:::s~
,!: >- CD '"
05-o"'ECtlCtl
",C'O=5CDCD
E ~ ~o.. E .9
C'O~.E 5
.~ . ~ ~
CD 0') (]) ...- t:::f)
0:; ,!: :0 .~ :e E
~ ~ 2 2:- E ,- ~ !;::
o-ar~-g",~r-=.
UCtlt+=;S...........:
- CD a3 :;::.: c:: '"
E~ c:: e m CD ~ 1:)
e~:::lg~~~~
~ ~ ro c7) =5 ~ ,~ ~
-70-
c::
Ctl
(.I)
..c::
:5
o 0
(.I)~
0'0
cffi
GLt
t:::f) a5
~ g;~ 15:5 .E2 ~
c:: 0:; 0') ~ E ro -; ~ CD.Q
o CD 0. to ~ co =5 ro
:;::.: ,!: :5 E 0 0 -55 ~ :::l ....... 'E-
p.......~ 0'):= :::l~~ "'~ gjg
c::CBiS~~.8~E:;CDOg;::o:;
o.c=-'OO $:C E 0.=5 ~~ m 0.
00 CDO_(]) CO >-@-C::..c::s E ~
-~ ~ ~ g -E ~ ~ i3 i ~ ~ ~ ~
..c:: -c :::l ..,...: Q) 0. ffi CO '" 10 u g; E
'" CD '" ..... - CD CO oC:: ~ CD .....
..... c:: ,~ .E JE -g 0.. .E ..0 ,- 0 '"C Ctl
~ 'E .9 ....... ~ E:; 03 .....;- 15 0- $: B
->- 2 0 'g ~ 0. ~ ~ 'E g- g ~ t
~ ~ 'ts.. ~ g @- ~ E ~ 0. ~ '0 ~
Q5
:::l
c::
CD
>
<(
CD
:::l
0-
:::l
..D
:::l
o
=0
cti
>
CD
S
o
CO
c::
.2
10
t:::f)
:;::.:
~
",0
~:::J
CD
=5
0:;
en
>-
o
r-
~
r.:..
-.:i-
::2E
::2E
c
CD
E
CD
0..
.E
..
..
CD
=5
~ ~~~ ~,~~.~]~
-cNo..e$-5.~~(I)~
~ ffi"<""" o:;~ ~~ ~~.g~
~-g~CD~ 5 0 ~ ~
CDo:iCOO~,,",-' Q)-ct+=
o CD 2 10 .c =5 s 'c
E ~ ~ CD ~ 0 t:::f)
~ ~ 0. -0 U) "'- $: 'en
~:5. CD =5 CD 0 CD ffi
E ~ 5-~ t5 t:::f) :s :5
10 :::l CD ,~.~ c:: ~ ch
g>", .gc::.....:=OCD~
- :s~o~ o.~~ E-
~~~~E-g-132~
c ~55e~~~Ctl0
~ 76 0. S CD ro 1:5-; 0...!;2) ~
~ ~ ~ S ~ .!:2 ~ .E E ,~
'0
c::
,2
co
C
CD
E :!2_
~ ....J
0.0
.E $:
t5u
.92.. EE
o Ctl
..... .....
0.......
~ ffi
en CO
8-~
o u
..... c::
0.,_
Q,)
.....
eo:
"0
c.
~
;
E:
;..
Q,)
.....
rn
eo:
~
rn
.S::!
:::
'r;
eo:
~
Q,)
.....
~
o
E-
o
u
-
c
o
'r;;
c
eo:
c.
;.<
~
.....
~
'i:
.....
rn
~
;;.-.
~
Q)
...
o
.....
c
Q,)
S
c.
o
"Q)
...
Q,)
Cl
"0
C
eo:
~
;:;
Q,)
rn
Q,)
~
.c
~
Q,)
-;:
~
Q)
o
1,,0
,....(
I
o
-
-
...
~
I...
CJ:i
~
ct
,~
.....
~
&
i:l:::
~
~
~
'i:::
,~
~
....
,9
.....
l:::l
,~
.....
:.;
~
~
.....
I...
~
~
~
u
,....
o
~:!2
C :::l
Q.) 0
"ti E $: CD
~ =5
0.......
.Eas5
0'2' U
~ o.~
r- .....
-.:i--o......
CD CD
CJ'J c::
8..~
e ~
0. ..0
c::
C'O
U)
..c::
:5
o 0
U) ~
o 'u
.effi
GLt
.....
~
- '"
.8Eis
0..... 03 2
0.C::
'~.~ ~
~32c.9c::
,,<"",,'Sc,2
o .0 ,~ :5
"<"""co1O:9
"+-'+-cnJ::::i
o 0 c::
en ~'~ 0
1TI C::..c:: U
>- ~.52 ~
co",..c::jg
0.. ,~ $: '"
o
N
r.:..
-.:i- CD
~ c::
~.5
Q.)CD::t=
=5~0
o~-g
,!: ~
..0
=5
o
2
c::
Ctl
U?
..c::
:5
o 0
U) U
'O'~
.c=-ffi
GLt
'"
Ctl
Q.)
c:: 0:;- 0'):5
.2 (]) c:: co
:5 ,!: :.0 S
..0 t:::f):= E
'C CD is ?-
C '-'
o .eo 0
uG CDg
"CD >- g o~
Cti..oCOLO
..c::'"C:::lr-
~ ~.~ 0
~ 'E .9 ::
=>- 0:; 0 'E
co ...... 03
0.. ~ 'ts.. 0.
-CCD'O
5=5......
as 10 ~
'" CD '"
Ctl ~ Ctl
'O'!: ~
co E
E E
~Ctl
'-'0,
"<"""0
Q..
>..
'"C
Ctl
~
ro
.9 .~
o:;~ci..
(]) co E
CD c:: - co
> 'g> E ~
~ UJ e ~.
.~ ~tl:!::::l
:5uom
U >
CD <(
X -C
LU c::
ID C'O
~ (5
CD
>
<(
-C
c::
co
cD
en
co
UJ
.9
0.
E
co
~
o
-C
c::
:::l
o
..0
=5
o
2
c::
o
'en
'S;
o
0.00
::i
CD
=5 CD
",=5
-0
ro
$:
.9
E
Ctl
0,
o
CD 0.
:s c::
'" CD
~ E
E g;
.~ 0
..c::o.
t::.,~
c::
.2
t5
c:: CD
,2 2
:5 0
..0 U
'c CD
C c::
o Ctl
(,)~~ro
~ECtl~
'''' Ctl I- Ctl
i75~tt::u
~ooo
~'"Co=
cog~~
~:@=5J3
'S; t :::l
o 0 0 (])
0:2U?=5
en
..... CD-o
N-CCti
r.:.. '~ $:
-.:i- 0:.8
::2E
::2E
III
t (])
o c::
0. co
.!::: ---l
<(
o ~ c:: ~ e CD CD ::t=
......coo:::lCO =5~0
g- ~ 2 ~ =5 "'-0 ~ -C
c:: CD en '-' c::
'" ~ (]) E '" c::,!: ~
~ <i E ~ ,0_ ..0
.S:2 CD c:: co ..c::
..c::CDo..O 1O-ct
g;:5.E~~ 13g~
f'- ,!;2) ~ E $:
O~cD:=Q. CD CD
co_ 'C ~ E EO"....... =5
..- :::l ~ ,- l= (,) c::
E -C U ~ .~ -= CD 0
.g ~.!: ~ =5 Ci3 N '[tE
c::C3~~~~r-:. J~
,2 ~ ~ 32 -6 c: -.:i- -
1:5>co ~~t)ffi~
ffi::::l~:!2~ft'SO~
0:; '"J:::l :::l c::: c.. g- '"
1; ~ E '0 ~ .~ .s 0. 2
..c::
:5
o 0
U?(5
u
0:;
'"C
c::
.9 0
S
=0
ro
>
o.~
~ ~
.....co
CD-o
=5 S
ilE
=5
~ 0
c::2
'E -C
0:; c::
a5 0
-C ~
en en
~C'O
en
C'O
LLl
Q.)
=5
ro
(J)
,~
c
c:: "'- 'ffi
.2 0 E
:5
..oC::"<"""
'C ,2 0
....... ...... "<"""
c:: (,)
8~0
CD~:::J
ro 0 Q.)
..c::(,):5
"'CD.8
..... :5 c::
~ ,2
t5
CD
c::
c::
o
(,)
III
C (])~ a5 u5
[tO~~ ~ CD~
oo{;5..o CD ~=5~
~ ~ '" ~ =5:::l C'O 'E
~ .9 ~ e ~ ~ ~~ ~
~c ~2:""" Cti:5 ~ ~
~ ~~~~{;5~ 0.:2
O::;c::~ffi~~~E
ffi 0. ~ CD Ctl c:: U CD I-
,,-~o..o..oOO-oCtl
~E:;2~""';-~25$:E5
~ 0. ~ 16 .~ g- 6 ~ t
g@-~ E o.o.~o ~
g;~~CD~15
,- - .-: =5 -'-'
:5 ,52 -. 'en
~-a3CD~~S
x > =5 0
!:!:!c..o CD$:
Q.) c..o ~ ~ ..0
~ c..o_ . c Ctl c::
~ -6 ~ ~
<( E '" .!: N
-o2CD
c::"-C3~"":'
~c:::C~~
c..9 ,2 g; 0::::::
t5 co ...::;
~ffi~l~
LLlQ:;O:::l1O
.8~NE=5
o.(J).9~c
~.e; 0. ~ ~
.....O:::lO'CD
0515s
~ ~
0>
c c::
C'O c::
(,) co
t+=U
U '~"<"""
~ 'en C';J
Eel'-;
,- co ~
CJ)~
;S~
~
'"C - co
-E.9
CD-c
E CD
~g
o.-c
,~ ~
cD
(,):0
co co
0. -c
.5 '~
'" co
;Ss
-o--g
CD Ctl
~c
~ CDE ~
U
,,-~t+=
,- o.'c
.....-.5 ,~
g;2:-c::
~ :9 'ffi
o ~ E
:cJE~
-71-
rT.J
j;;o;./
-
u
:3
o
~
~
z
<
00
z
<
...:l
~
~
rT.J
~
~
z
-<
~
-ci
,~
:::l
CT"
~
,~
c::
,2
10
0')
:;::.:
'E
o
2
as
'"
:::l
-c
c::
~
=5
'~
-0
CD
10
'u
o en
'" CD
~ :2
(5
$0.
~-g
Eco
,_ en
c::
o co
20..
rT.J
U
f::
j;;o;./
0::
E--
rT.J
j;;o;./
<
c::
,Q
t5
2
en
c:: c::
CO 0
U?~
..c:: c::
:5 co
c558.8
'O'~ ~
.c=-ffi~
GLt8
I-
.E
-c
CD c::
$: 0')
CD 'Ci)
'S; CD
~o
CD CD
..Cl:5
ro =5 ,Q
-v5 '~ .....
t5 ~;;
CD c:: CD
'0' 2 ,S:
o..~ 03
CDen-o
..c:: C::'S
1-8c.9
~ffio~
t5U)enC::
~cCD-c
'" '0 ~ c::
50..~co
u-o~'"
CD c:: CO ~ u5
..ClCOECti~
ro~eCD:S
{;5lD"'-~5S
",oaSo.~
:::l ~ ::; '" CD
0. ,- 0. c:: '"
~gSCDCD
U J: ~ 8"::
en "", 0
g ,~ CD 0 ~
::> V.I .5 "<""" CD
..c:: U) 'S;
U:::JCD
-c '"C
c:: .~'~
~ 5 0.
C3.9
,!: '"C
_ CD
'" c::
:::It:::f)
0. 'en
~~
UCD
..0
..c::-
2~
c:: CJ'J
I~g2.,
(]) Ctl
o c.9 $:
c:: -c
:::l CD Ctl
co=5e
~o
c:: ~
;S CD
.~ 'S;
C 0')-0
CD ,S: CD
E1?~
g-~g
- '"
g;t5~
~2CD
'-'en
~..o=5
:::l0-C
~.8ffi
"('-0
0, c::
-.:i- ~
0:: 0
0..",
Q.) C'O U
=5 ,~'~
U
'Osen
c:: ~ CO
,2 c::
1000
cc::t5
CD:!2~
E :::l CD
~ 0
0.$:Q.)
E.....~
-UCD
CD >
d: '2' 16
, 0._
-.::t -0 ,~
Q.)......
t)~2
~ g-~
.E 0. ~
C'O
o
ro
>
o
0.
0.
C'O
.8
'E
0:;
0.
>..
Cti
c::
,2
P2
U
CJ'J
:.0
t5 .~
CD..c::
.O'~
o.:s
'"
CD c::
:5 CD
'"C
og
$:
t-
-
I
o
-
c::
Ctl
U?
..c::
:5
o
U)
'0
.c=-
G
.....
.E
-c
CD
$:
CD
'S;
~
CD
..0
ro
..c::
en
t5
,~
0.
CD
..c::
I-
Cl.l
......
~
"0
Q..
;:J
E
o
~
....
c;
~
:...
Cl.l
......
Vl
~
~
CD
:0
'en
'S;
CO
CD
Cti
1:5
CD
'0'
0.
Vl
~
'tj
~
~
Cl.l
......
~
:...
o
P-
O
U
-
5
.~
c;
Q..
~
j;;o;./
'"C
CD
'"
o
0.
e
0.
CD
=5
c::
;S
'~
'"
c
CD
E
0.
o
05
>
CD
o
......
,~
.:::
,:!a
Q
;.....
~
Q)
...
o
N
0,
-.:i-
0::
0..
......
....
Q)
E
Q..
o
Q)
...
Cl.l
Q
"0
::
~
CD
:5
'0
c::
.Q
10
c
CD
E
Q.)
0..
.E
...
"E
~
Q)
Vl
Cl.l
~
LO
a,
-.:i-
....
"tj
Cl.l
......
...
Q)
::
Cl.l
C
.....
(,)
ft'S
c..
~
...
....
~
~
~
~
,~
1:::
~
&
i:l:::
c::
0')
'en
CD
'e 0
\:) CD
~= :5
~=5
~ ,-
)) ~
::: >-
!3 (,)c::
~ CD
~en
~ .~
o
(,)
~
~
,~
;..,
,~
~
~
....
,s
.....
~
.~
......
~
~
.....
....
~
~
~
u
co
o
ro
>
o
0.
0.
CO
.8
o
'ts..
'"
CD
.S:
05
-c
'3
c.9
......
'E
0:;
0.
c:-
co
c::
,2
~
U
'"
:0
c:: '0 ,!:
;SCD>-
'~ ~ ~
-E ,~ gs
Q.)ro";::
E :::l CD
g-,~ =5
05 CD =5
1]) =5 '~
-c CD
CD(.)~
:s ffi c::
:5 ..c:: t:::f)
I.l.. m'~
-c
CD
..0
..-
o
"<"""
U?
:::J
E
2
-ci
CD c::
=5 'E
c:: '"
C'O CD
2
.!: ~
......'"
S ~
rJ'J
~ U
'c
CD
(,)
rJ'J
t5c:5~-ct5
JEcot+=SCtl
"- 0.= 0 0.
~.~ m $:,~
;S 32NC1:5
-cc-oS~Ctl
ffi~o~~~
t+= c:: 0::: t:::f)'-
;:::: 'c 0 0.. .;;:; -:::::
~ ,2'~ on.....
>- '" C 2:- ~
~ CDm19~
E~E Ec 0,
t:::f) Ctl ~ ~ 2 'CiS
I ~ ~ '3 8. 2::
E 2 ,- g CD ~
08....:.....=5"Z
..::: CD CJ5
CD 5)uCD..92
::cs co ::;: ,92., g co
:~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ .9
c::
t5 0
CD ......
'0' a3
o.l:!=
CD
-0
CD CD
'" ~
8.g;
2-c
0. CO
c::
Ctl
U)
..c::
:5
o 0
U) ~
o "[5
.c=-ffi
uLt
..... CO
-E
-0 0
CDC::ro
$: 0') >
CD 'en 0
's; CD 0.
~ 0 0.
CD CD CO
..0=5.9
roEO
..c:: $: 'C
"'>-0.
t5 (,) en
CD c:: CD
'--' (]) c::
~]? ~
CD~32
~8~
.gs-g5u;
o CO 'en Q.)
E ~ 's; -g
o ~.~ ~
~'t:t5::cs
t:::f):::l CD CO
'~ ~*~
~'~ c:: g-
~~ ~~
8g;-g0
,- CO en
CDt5-oc::
:5CDCDO
c::1j3h5~
~ 2; "6>~
~oCDT5
:::l c::::cs ~
t5CD~'"
2=5-cQ.)
en 0 0') =5
~O:6a5
"'-C:::lCD
g, ~ C3 E
o .2 ,!: en
o..~ui:::l
CD""" CD E
=5 '0 ~ ~
offi-;~
~:::l~~
,!;2) ~ "6> '@
~~g;2
05t5~
~C3Jg<t
-.:i- .!: ~ u;
:Eroe~
::2E-55~"6>
CD ~
=5 CD
c::
o .!:
c::.......
,2 ~
10 ~
C
Q.)-c
ES
CD 0
o..$:
.s
-0
CD
'"
co
(!)
,~g
to 2'-
a, 0. "'-
-.:i- 0
-
(.)
ro
c..
.E
-0
Q.)
'"
o
0.
o
0.
'E
0:;
0.
c:-
co
c::
.2
a5
t5
rJ'J
:a
~ t5 ~
~ ~..92
~,~ .9
ECDCD
c:::..c:: ro
,2 ...... "6>
10 CD
t:::f)UCD
....... = :::l,~
ai ~ 'E ~ ~
0:; 0. ..... co
u ,~ 15 -c u
'~ c:: "5 =5
8 is ~'~
2 -c
cC::"<"""CD
~E~~
~CD~C,)
c:: 0.. ~ 55 ~
,~ ,~~ ~ :;:
~ ~~-
"6>c ~
CD 2 0
.~ 8.:r:
"'>.
{g C'O
en'~
CD
2 '"
:::l:c
551-
c::
co
U?
..c::
:5
o 0
U) (,)
'O'~
.effi
uLt
..... Ctl
-E
-c '0
CDC::ro
$: 0') >
CD 'en 0
'S; CD 0.
~ 0 Cl..
CD CD co
..0=5.9
~~ '@
"'>-0.
t5(,)",
CD c:: CD
'e- "* :E
0..- CD
CD~32
~8c:9
ui=5
,~'~ u;
CCCD
CDCD-g
t:::f)]? U
,!: ~ t:::f)
-c0C::
=s(,)~
..0 :g, E
10 'c -g
10 CO
..c::",c::
t:::f) -c CO
= coo..
2 ,~
15CD
....... :s
~gzu
CD'C CD
> 0. '"
~-o~
c:: U
CD co CD
~$c
0..Q ~
2 g> CD
0.._ c.9
g. ~ ,!:
0. -C
c:: _ (])
2.gs~
,!: ro a5
C'O >--c
~t",
~05
~(.)5)
~ ~E
(1)C'O:::l
-.:i- ~,~
::2E co ,!:
::2E$:E
CD~-C
=5 CDS
c:: 0
'O.!: U
10
=5
~
Ctl
C,)
t;:::
'i:;
,~
c::
o
~
C
CD -c
ES
CDO-c
o..~ffi
.Et5~
,92., g
r- 2 ,-
a, 0. "'-
-.:i--co
..... CD '"
(,) '" CD
ro 0 U
.Ec.. g- ~
0.",
S
en
~:C
g
-72-
.....
cu
C,)
~~~
N 0. 0,
oS E'CiS
~ ,- .....
~ '" --~
~;S
c:: ~
,2 _ Q.)
ro _:S:~
cCc::N.......
~I!~~
5, o.:e ~ -C
'en.~ E ~ ~
c::
co
U)
,....
"5
o 0
U? U
15'~
.c=-ffi
uLt
......
'E
0:;
0.
>,
ro
c::
o
~
t;
en
:0
.....
-E
-C 0
CDC::ro
$: t:::f) >
,CD>_ '~ 2
""' 0.
~ 0 0.
CD CD CO
..0:5.9
roEo
..c:: $:'C
rJ'J>-0.
t5 (,) '"
CD c:: CD
'e- "* :E
0.,- Q.)
CD~32
~8~
",-
~
:::l
X
t+=
:c
g
'0
CD
'"
:::l
C
CD
en
'en
c::
o
U
=5
'~
0:;
1:5
co
ro
..c::
U
'"
:::l
Cl..
E
Ctl
U
CD
U
ffi u;
~o
illg
;e:-g
N Ctl
~~
::2E ,~
::2E~
=5~
'~ t+=
~
CD
...:-c
CD ,-
>
CD
$: CD
~=5
CD Ctl
E (])
~..o
.!;2) -C
c::s
o ~
~:E
~1-
{gmcj'O
t5Cti~
~ CD'~
CO =5
2:-,....
CD.=
'"
0:; '"
> $:
-CCD
co's;
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o 0
U) U
'0 ,~
effi
oLt
co
.....
-E
-C
CD c::
$: t:::f)
CD 'en
'S; CD
~o
CD CD
..0:5
co
'0
ro
>
o
0.
0.
Ctl
.9
......
'E
0:;
0.
>-
ro
c::
.Q
a5
t;
en
:a
COEo
..c:: $:'C
rJ'J>-0.
1:5 U '"
CD c:: CD
'0' 2 ,!:
o..~ 05
CD~~
~8c.9
'"
CD
~
'"
t:::f)
c::
'~
.Q
:E
CD
=5
.9
E
-E
c::
o
U
ro
..c::
'"
'"
:c
t:::f)
'(ij
..c::
-C
c::
Ctl
'"
CD
0.
.c=-
CD
:s
x
u:
t:)
N
a,
.ocf
::2E
::2E
-c>-
(])05
rJ'Jro
.~ ,-
0.
c:: 0
00.
"'0.
CD CO
(5 _
o.:c
N,!;2)
N CD
c:::..c::
o -0
~Jg
I- '"
:::l'c
xt+=
t+=ro
-g:g
ei:n
N
~-c
'S; gs
o U
o.~
1 0
'" .......
-c .......
co 0
o c::
~ ~o
c:: ,!:
~o
:Q-E
~ ~'*
'en :s2 t;
co ro 5
JE 0.. U
'"
co
..c:: CD
0') ..0
:::l
O-c
:5S
o
$:
'E
0:;
0.
>-
ro
c::
,2
a5
t5
en
:0
..
ro
:::l
t:::r
CD
-0
CD
>
o
0.
0.
Ctl
c..
.9-0
....... CD
~-v5
o.'c
c:: t+=
0>-
g-2
....... CO
~'ts..
..c::2
-g8:
:::l CO
~~
-0 '03
'> ..c::
2-c
0. CD
1-55
en,-
~~
-fi1B
-cf2.
C::l.C?ro
Ctl "<""" :::l
uiai g
~CD-c
~ ~ CD
=5CDE)
~.9 0..
uio ~
~~o
$: CD
CD :S-5-
-c.......CO
iJ5~::CS
~-
U
CO
::cs
-0
CD
..c::
'"
'c
t+=
..
N
~
-c
CD
CD
U
x
CD
.9
o
C::ro
en:::l
~t:::r
:::l CD
X-C
t+=g;
~2
>- 0.
en@-
-C I-
!2 0
(5 ~-
..0 ~
CD::CS
-c
'S;~
2{;5
0.,_
I~
~2:-
= CD
:Q>~
- 0.
ffi 2
'C Cl..
enCl..
CD Ctl
-C .....;-
CD..c::
0. t:::f)
c~
~ro
.2tB
Q.l
......
t'\l
"'0
Q..
;:;J
=
t'\l
E::
:..
Q,l
.....
tIj
t'\l
:;;
tIj
,~
;<:;
'Cj
t'\l
~
Q,l
......
E
o
P-
o
U
-
c
o
.~
t'\l
Q.
\I<
r.1
.....
u
'i:
.....
tIj
is
>-.
t'\l.
i:
Q,l
~
o
.....
C
Q.l
S
g-
~
~
Q,l
Q
't:l
@
~
t'\l
Q,l
tIj
Q.l
~
...
(j
Q,l
-;:
~
Qj
C,;l
00
.....
I
o
.....
...
~
....
CJ:i
~
~
~
.:::
1::
~
&
i:l:::
~
~
~
'i:::
~
..;::
~
~
...
~
....
.....
l:::l
.~
.....
~
~
.....
~
~
6
1:5
CD
c:: '0'
Ctlo.
U?-c
..c:: c::
:5 co
o 0
~ ,~
.c=-ffi
uLt
c
C'O
.S?
0..
0.
Ctl
c:n.9
co c::
'E~
..0
:::l
'"
ro
..c::
'"
0:;
0.
o
05
>
CD
-c
CD
..c::
I-
co
'0
CD
c u
CD c::
E ~
CD '"
t:::f),~
~.9
coE 0 .~
'C CD
-c 0. 0.
ffi~~
€O:2
~~E
r:Jj
~
u
~
~
o
rJ:J
~
~
~
;:J
E--
~
~
u
C'O.8=a3~
,~CD $: 'OJ
o..u-g", 0
o.m.......coo
Ctl",~",CD
1:5 ~.......~jg
,92., o:~ ~
e~C::t5
Cl........ .~ co '0
~~:55~
.......c:..o:.;::;c::
>-CD u CD
...l:l-CcD2~
-c '~ -g en 0.
CD......C35
E) >- ,!: u ~
..... -C t:::f) .......
5: ~ f; ,!: C
Ctl E.9~
:m ~ >- 'c ~
t:::f) tj: -0 0 ,-
.Q-c.2E.9
o c:: '"
?i5co-c
13ro05
ro>i.:L
:c
-C u u5
~ro~
roO:;:::l
:::l..c:: ~
t:r" t ~
<(..2
-g-c
co 35
- :::l
~CJ'J
. E:: -g
~=5
:::l CD
co E
rot5
_:::l
..- -c
o 5
"'"": u
..q
::2Ero
::2E-55
ro
(,)
'OJ
o
o
Q)
co
..c::
(,)
ro
>.c::
g; 0
:s E
'" ~
c:: u
.~ 0:; ~
en..c::2
~o~
~~~
~ ~ ~ ,!: L.C")- 1:5 ~ ~
--~-c~ ~r5~
cCDoEt+=C::
CD c:: L.C") .- 'c CD
-c ~ "<""" '" t::TJ 32
.~ -c 5 ~ 'en '0
..?;-~15N
CJ'J CD
~~U)g
'S; :s <( 0
~OON
t5 ~UJ r-
,S2., Ctl 0 .2
N 0 "'- ro - 1:5
6 0. 0 u OCD
~ ~ 'OJ ~ U?
.ocf '-' 0
.....~ffioo:::o
(.)"'(.)CDl..l-o:::
ctlot+=cooo..
c.. g-'g, 13 -C
.E 0.' en ro 2f) ffi
'01:5
c::~
,2 co
10
C-C
CDS
E 0
CD u
0..
.E
o"'~
t5
C'O
c:
o .!: -0
(,) ..c:: CD
-c..?;-jt5
ffiCD ~
_:ffi .gs 0
CD -0 c:: u
en CD t+= .~
~ E CD
(,) ,S =5
ro
u ....... c::
.- ..c:: co
8' .!;2) .:e
oO:::~
?i52
132
roU)
-cCtl
~ ,!:
cC::
(]),2
~t5
:::l 2
c::en
CtlC::2ro
.. _ 0 ';r:; oS;
= (.) WJ WJ
~CDCD
..c::..oro
'" :::l
ro
>
(])
-0 ......
c:: U
co ~
-E
~.-
"<""" en
1'-
~=5
~5~ ~
co=~-@
~~~~~
2 CD CD -c (1j
8.~~l~
0.. ~ .l:TJ
E""'::O-V5
25 ,- E -- t:::
a5 ,2 ~ ~
........>ro"'""":C/)
'-' CD 0') ~ C/)
~~=~~
$: :c 'E ~ .9
1:5
(])
c:: '0'
co 0.
U)-c
..c:: c::
:5 Ctl
o 0
~ ,~
.c=-ffi
uLt
c
ro
,S?
0..
0.
co
t:::f).9
Ctl c::
'E~
..Dc
~ CD
ro E
..c::
'"
0:;
0.
o
05
>
CD
-c
CD
..c::
I-
co
o
CD
(,)
c::
co
:::l
CD '"
t:::f),~
~.9""";
Ctl ..... 'g
E ,g CD
-c c.. 0.
ffi~~
€O:2
~~E
CD
U
~
o
>-
-c
:::l
U5
c: ro ro .S? ,~ ro 0- ,!: 0
co ,2 .2 :0 ..c:: 0
~F8'cr ~~~-g ffi
0. 0 0 :::l .~ LL $: 0..
Ctl ?i5 ?i5 0 55 8' 0 '.2
~213:g~~2f)~ro
'0' Ctl ro Ctl Ctl co g
0. -C CD - ~ 13 '0- ~ 'E
..c::CD .t+=_92 :::l ~ 'OJ ro 2 N co
,Q"" to.Q CD c:: ~ "'-
......c C::oo..c::(]) C;O
E~P~~:-EOC::
-C 'c ..c:: CD- ~ 0
CD:::l co 5 ~ 2'5 ~~
> 15 ~ a520..
e 2:-'~ CD "'.....:::l E
5:~c::U)~~~~8
co .2 0 ...... (])
>=(j~~"'0:::~
~ ~~ t5 N 'g~ ~ i
-@CtlC:: ...;~1i5:::lCD
?i5 80-co ~ CJ'JC: E
13 0:; ~~~~ro..e ~
ro =5 '-', N Ctl =5 -C ~
(]) ,~ 0::: ,... (]) c:: c:: >-
-0 ..c:: :::l I..l- .2 :::l Ctl Ctl co
~ $: : ~ ] ~~~~ ~ ~
g.'~ ~ C'? Q) co = 0 t+= ~
<( 0:; :>..... CD ~~ (]) ~
_a5g~8~~5~~
e-c:::l:::l -cCtl15o",-
~en "'CD CD.eO
6 ,!::: CD -CD ~ c:: 2 U?'c >-
~ -- 2 u - 'i= co '[5 0:;
.ocf :::l:s:::l c::: S <(.- >
-=:=rooo55O:;EO>o
O::::;;..c::"''''CDw.....LUCDU
::2ECJ'J~~O::::-oJ20=5~
-73-
co ....... u
.~'~
~.QU5
,~ as I
CD jg .~
u 2 E
:SCtl~
~CDro
~=5o
-c(])
c::=5
Ctl
a3
c
CD
o
.9 c::
CD- E .2
EI-ro
~ J2 E
~ ,2 J2
roE
'~ "'E en
~8~
roo~=5
=5$:CDo
'" CD- =5 z
CD2='=E
c:: :::l E CD
'j:: ~ -S en
~~"'0'
w -C
-C ~ ffi.2
'6> CD 10
-@~E
CDCDJ2
jg=5E
u -C '"
ro 0 CD
u t.,)
CD CD :s
5-~55
'c Ctl CD
~:::lEo:::
ro
u
'OJ
o
o
CD
Ctl
..c::
2
Ctl
CD
=5
en
'6>
o
o
CD
co
.c
u
ro
CD
=5
-o"'u
CD CD'C
ro '8- ~
~OI
~~,~
-g15E
U5e~
>- 0. ro a3
ffirooc
"'-5 CD CD
o 'en =5 0
2 '" 0 c::
SJE......o
"'e-c~
~ c.. c:: E
CD -c co .....
..c:: CD >-J2
...- ......- -- .c:::
'0 ~u-
.......u en
og~~
0.
~ ~.9 =5
o
co '~ -c Z
CD .Q CD
roo:2E
0. "'- E CD
~ c:::..o ~
=~~U)
roc::CDC::
..c::o..oo
~~=~
.~ t:::f)jg E
8':e '" J2
oEtc::
Q)CtlO~
jg '0 ~ ~
~ t ~ :::lo.....
CD ~:5 en
..c::",,,,-CD
I- co 0 0:::
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o 0
U) t.,)
o ,~
.effi
uLt
0').8
co c:: Ctl
C'Oo
"E 0.. CD
..Clcu
:::l CD c::
en E ~
roQ)'"
-v5 ~.~
c::.8""";
~ coE ..... 'g
.Q ,g CD
CD -c 0. 0.
55 ffi .e ~
-o€u:o
~.2~=S
l-en......."O
o-gt5-g
tj: ,92., t+=
CD- CD e CD
E~i~
ffi w -0 0:;
EJEffi5
.eg-co
_ "<""" CD 0
roc::~.c=-
'5~"5 S
..0 $: 0. 0
co 0') CD 0
c::..o 0
o~~"*
~c,-v5~
g; 0 -g ffi
8c::t+=U)
'" 0 CD CD
::01i5=5=5
CD > 0 '>..
=5 r5 co ~.
~CD"5
o=roC::
coCDro
13 CD- =5 -v5
>c::>.>-
CDEQ505
CDc::roro
:5C'O::o:o
E CD CD
E :::l E E
N ~.S ,S
~2:g~
-.:i- ~ ..c:: ,2
::2E ;;} ~ 0..
::2E ~ -v5 @-
CD..o
=5 :s
en
0:0
~ro
.- E
-0 .....
~J2
,~
'0
Sen
8'ffi CD
E~
~:5
o
u
ctl
c..
.E
-c c::
~ ~
8-12 ~
e c:: 0
0.:::l=5
0\
....
I
o
,...(
Cl.l
......
t':l
'"0
C.
;:::J
....
;
~
l..
Cl.l
......
en
t':l
:?E
en
Cl.l
~
'Cj
t':l
~
Cl.l
......
e
o
c.
l..
o
U
-
=
o
.~
t':l
C.
;.<
W
......
.~
l..
......
en
Q
>>
~
Q)
;;..
o
-:::
Q)
2
~
0-
"Q)
;;..
Cl.l
Q
~
;
....
~
C':
Cl.l
en
Cl.l
~
....
c:i
Cl.l
-:::
Q)
c
Cl.l
~
....
~
....
~
ct
~
.:::
1'-'
~
&
~
~
~
~
.:::
~
.'t::
::::
~
~
CD~
> 0
~S
z
.9
1:5
CD
0.
'"
~
::::
~
....
.....
l:::l
.~
~
~
~
.......
'""
~
~
6
g2215
o:>o..-c
o:::....g
I..L.O$:
U=o
~ffi~
0.
,!: U? ,~
-o~'"
~~:c
t+=U?1-
~~c:O
rJ'Jocn
co~r---:
",Q.)cn
CDU)~
2<(5
CDo=
E LLJ U
~u~
>..
ro
en
en
CD
(,)'"C
CD CD
e:: >
"- ~
ro~
'5 .~
..Cl >-
~"8
..0
-0 CD
ffi:5
......0
m~
.5t5
CO CD
~o
......0.
ro,~
'5 co
CD
U
e::
o
CD
E
:::l
'"
~
.....- e:: '"
~ ,Q:C
(])ro-;
~~~
:c:E-c
-c~
CD
~
t::
(])
32
-c
S
o
~
N
2>
"<"""
c:::~
,2~
ro~
2:- t:: CD
Jg~:s
m ~ ~
"0 E Q)
0.,_ E
~
Ctl
U
t+=
'c "'-
0)0
'en
~
ctl
t.)
~
,5>
Ci)
r-
(U
:S
C/;)
C/)
~
.9
t5
co
0.
,~
Co-'
z;
(j)
::;J
o
:=
Q
z;
<
z;
o
-
Eo-<
<
....:l
::;J
~
o
~
-ci
~
'3
Ci
~
.~
e::
o
~
g
'E
o
2
e::
o
~
"S
0.
o
0.
r-
'~
'"C
2
Ctl
'[5
o
rJ'J
'"
co
$~
g 'en
o.:::l
E~
,- '"C
o e::
2Ctl
r.J'J
f;ro1
U
>
e:::
f;ro1
7JJ
U
-
....:l
~
::;J
~
-0
~
'3
Ci
~
,~
e::
o
~
g
'E
o
z
,5:2
:0
:::l
0.
r-
'~
-c
CD
10
'[5
o
'"
'"
co
'"
t5
CO
0.",
,~ ~
'S;
o 0:;
Z '"
o
U
'"
'[5
e::
co
Lt
e::
co
U?
..c::
:5
o
U)
'0
.c=-
C3
.....
..E
-c
CD e::
$: 0')
CD 'en
'5> CD
~O
CD Q.)
..0=5
C'O
o
ro
>
e
0.
0.
co
.9
'E
0:;
0.
>-
ro
e::
,Q
~
U
'"
:0
ro r-
..c::Eo
'" $:'c
t5 [) ~
CD e:: Q.)
'e'~ ~
0.,- CD
CD~:2
F80
r.I'"1
~
~
E-i
r.I'"1
~
r.I'"1
~
U
~
~
r.I'"1
~
0:;355c~"8
~~~~~0
I-gg-~
"'- ,'- 0 c
o ~~ ~ Ci ~
.gs 'g.:E ~ 0) E5
E ~ C 13 .~ '"
Q5 -0 0') ro t5 - e::
E ffi.!: 35 .El .2
,." :;; ~ ~ :;:j ~
-0 e::=..... ffi1i?
-f5 co..E 0 E .!:
"'CDc_E
,!: ~ =5 ~ ,~ ~
ro:Ooo.......
..c::S......._.Qij3g
'" ..Cl -0 CD U 0"'"
en2>Ctl
t:: ~ 'E ~ E '"Ce::
~Q5=~jgCtl
~.O' CD CD o.-c
~ 0.:: g ~ g ~
.......~go.oLL~
a3"'........9.......ooc.9
'-' 8.:::l >- ..... ~ ~
e 0..Cl- 0-' '"
0. 0. Q.)- ~.....;-.9 CD
-0 C'O c::: ,5:2
~CD:::l.......(])ct5
I- ~ ~ g ,~ ~ ct
ro ,- = S 5- :s t:::f)
:;::"' 5 ~ 0 (]) 0. 'E
M = en $: i:::' -c .2
~COrJ'J~02u
-.:i-2:-O:::l.......U~
CDO",Ctl:::l:::l
-== en =5 CO 0 -c e::
-==e::CDCD..oe::Ctl
::2E8E~~8~
r.I'"1
~
E-i
I-i
~
I-i
E-i
;:J
CD"OC52C:::uot::
=5e::rocog-CDctl
'0 ~ ~ ~..c:: 'e' ~
-g-g:e go.~
e:: -0 :::l :::l E p ~ 'Ci)
.2 S 0 0 - "'" I
10 0 0101'0=5 ~ t:::
~ ~ =5 c::: g-~
E CD '~ ,Q ~ 0. J;
CD ...... ro..- CD C/;)
0..t5~~c0=5~(j
.s '~.gs ~ ~ ~ 10 co ~
..- 0- 2 ~ ~ =5 ._E
M ,!: ~ ~ CD g;
;-c~o '" ~jg-*
_Q)"E"'~~m $:
o~2~ro:::l -0
coo.rJ'Jo. ~SS5
~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-74-
I
0:;
10
$:
-0 '"C
e:: e::
Ctl Ctl
g ,2
e:: 10
:c t:::f)
~ ~:~
E ~ 0.
~s ~
:c..Cl ci ft
~ ~ cD ~
$: e:: ~e
-gro Ec
~,!: "* 8
0:; '" >- e::
..c:: E '" 0
rJ'J CD e::=
Ctl en 0 co
$: >- ~ ,g'
..c:: rJ'J t:::f),!:::
'" t:::f) 'c '"C
:0 ,!: .!::: CD
~g ~~
'S; U 'S; -9
..... '"C ..... e::
~ ,f?l ~ is
R 1'0 0 e
...., - c.;> 'is..
:.!... c ..... rJ'J
2CD2e::
CO U CO Ctl
$:c $:t
ro ,~ ro 8.
en IE en gz
.!:CDELU
.. III
CD
en
=?
0:;
ro
$:
~
t::'.Q
u..
0.. 0:;
>-..c::
.5:2 "0
O-C
0.. ffi
ffi c
O::-ffi
ro 'en
0:; ~
m :i:
~g
~~
en r-
>-::;:::;
'" '~
,2 ~
10 'is..
t:::f) C'O
:~ ~
o:;-g
ro~
$: ~.$
~ '~ ffi
c.900..
.. III
o
U
rJ'J
'[5
e::
co
Lt
e::
co
U?
..c::
:5
o
U?
'0
.c=-
C3
..... CO
..E
-c 0
CDe::ro
$: 0') >
CD 'en 0
'S; CD 0.
~ 0 0.
CD CD CO
..D=5.9
~ ~ '@
'" >- 0.
t5 (,) en
CD e:: CD
'e'~ ~
0..- CD
CD~:2
F80
-c
e::
co
en
a5
U
:::l
~
rJ'J-
]2
:8
c
CD
'[5
IE
CD
03
10
$:
'"
Ctl
..c::
U
:::l
'"
'"
CD
U
'S;
CD
-c
t:::f)
e::
'5>
Ctl
Cf u5
0:;16
ro~
$: 0:;
ro$:
en ~
.!:U5
.....-c
..E CD
",10
0:;0')
CD :g;
E't:;
0:;8
roo
$:6
2"<"""
Ctl e::
rojg
0. ........
CD .....
'" CD
ro
ro CD
en en
,!: =5
ro '~
..c::
rJ'J '"
c~
Ctl co
,5:2 0.
0.......
@-..E
t5~
,~'iS..
e CO
o.~
CD-C
..c:: e::
I-~
:c-g
:;::"'C'O
M '"
~ 0')
.ocf .!:
::2E;:gg
::2EiSro
..
OJ
.....
eo:
"0
c..
;J
....
~
~
l..
OJ
.....
I:I'.l
eo:
~
I:I'.l
OJ
~
.~
eo:
l:;:;.;
OJ
.....
eo:
l..
o
E-
O
u
-
c
o
.~
~
c..
~
W
.....
.~
.....
I:I'.l
Q
;;.-.
~
Q)
:;.-
o
~
Q)
::
c..
o
Q)
:;.-
OJ
Q
"'0
C
eo:
....
U
l..
eo:
OJ
I:I'.l
OJ
~
....
u
OJ
.....
C
~
Q)
o
o
N
I
o
.....
....
~
~
Q::
~
':::
1::
~
&
i:l:::
~
~
~
';::
~
.....
'::::
~
...
c
.....
.....
l:::l
,~
.....
~
~
~
.....
r...
~
.....
~
~
\j
8.9
,~ (,)
c:: e
COc
Lt 0
c:: u
C'O c::
U) 0
..c::t5
:5 2
Oen
U) c::
o 8
>- -C
5ffi
'E
0:;
0.
~
co
c::
.Q
~
u
'"
:0
C'O Ctl
EO
...0 CD
:::l U
en c::
ro ~
..c:: CJ'J
en ,~
0:;.9
0......
o 0
~.ts..
CD 0..
'"Co..
~s:
f-U)
ro-g,g
{;5CO-c
c ~:m
~ 05 ~
= '"C
~.c=-15
co_......
.......coo
(,) :::l c::
CD cr
'0' ..... :5
0."* ..0
CD $: ~-
=5t'5:::l
en2C3-g
c e.!: .....
CD 0. = '~
Eojg~
~ ....... '" .Q
'5 5 0.. t'5
~t5 &: 2
2s:en
~enU)8
OC::t5
0.. 8.~ ~
z.ge.....
.9 0. .E
c ,g ~ ~
co 0. 1= :s
~ 0.. '"
:s &: 02 ~
o..s:t'5E
~U? 2 ~
~ co ~ -?;
C"') 0. 0 0
~ 0 u =
.ocf05 .E
0:: > 0:; CD
a.~~:E
.......;
'E
0:;
0.
0')
c::
:2
'5
..0
c::
..... ,Q
.EroO:;
- en '" C::...o
t:::f)c:: -o:Ou::
:2 :0 ..c::.......CD ro E
u CD -0 0
S ffi.!: ffi u
E 6 -c U5 .!:
$:-o~"'--c
ez;o55
en'"C~~~
~ffi_g~~
u ~= .-.JE
~:a~c.9.......
'" co ~ ri5 V)
~~~<(u5
,~ ,g ~ ";; ~
c::......c:::l
130..c::CD~
CDu='=E(])
~5$:c::~
o 'en ~ ~ "0
~oC::o..J::;
&:J 0:; co <..9 c::
:0 ",- ~ co 8
CtlO5UCDc
~-2~.::eCD
'0 ~ c:: >- E
.!!2 ..0 '-- ri3 :0
- - -c (])
,g,g~0U?
55~5-g
Uu:::l=Ctl
5 5 15 ,~ 5
'-.- 0'-
~~ro~~
WO:;-v5<(W
III
~ g ~ '0 ,2 13 .E
CO(]).......'"
c::~(,)Oro
'0 'ffi:::l 2 g- =
.2 S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 .!: =5 (,) ..c:: 0.
C $: en .....-...... Q.) c::'
CD 'x ~ CD ..c:: ..c::
E CD->............O
CD ro g2'~ CD
-t5CD ;> enc::
E ,~::= 0 E 13 ~ ,Q
-eCi32L:rou~
N 0. == .en .~ 'g .s: 'en
M co CD ..... '" -c
~ .2:- =5 ..... en S 0.....
.ocf ro",-ocoo
~"""'OE"'U
t)~2E~~t55
~ 2-.g ~ -t5 ~ .~ '~
.E 0. '" c.. co co 0. 0:;
ID- t5 ~
='=CD..-
~'e~
o 0. '"C
c:::
o '0 Ctl
u5t:::f)
CD c::
o.'s;
.Q '03
'" u
~~
'"C '"
co Ctl
0, CD
=rou5
~~O5
0'"C5
(]) ~ c::
g- .;:' '~
"tno-c
~ ~ E
o 0. 0
'"C$:en
~g-g
2~~
~ ...... ro
.- ,!: -c
(]) '"C c::
...o~Ctl
roro'"
..c::en~
'" .!: t+=
~15~
10
0:; ro -
...o..c::c
t+=..c::- _~ ~
....... c::
'~"2 8
t5
Ctl
0.
.s
'"
;S
...- 1::
c::Ctl.....,CiJ
,2 ~ jg ~
roC'?....... ,
c ..- (]) ,i5>
CD~:sV5
~ 0:: '" ,.....
~0..c:::a3
0. (]):S
E '" tr.J
,- c:!2 tr.J
......~~..92
~ ~ $: ~
~ .~:o'~
.,g~:;:=-~
U)
LLJ
OE
o..Ctl
z~
13 en
ro ~
~.g
e
.Q .9
t5 ci
2Q5
en
c:: CD-
805
0:; g
..c::o
o u
'OE
CD co
~o.
-5 ,~
CJ'J
:Oc
~~
~:o
,~ 35
c CD
CD-C
~ofg
0...0
..... '"
.Ec
'" co u5
0..:52
~8-~
III
-c
'"C ~
~~
(]) (,)
0. CD
,~ ..0
CDro
..o{;5
ro en
..c:: ~
'" :::l
"'t5
~2
"[5 en
.E~
(]) co
t:::f) c::
~ 'ffi
'ffi -0
-offi
ro~
'"C--C
CD c::
Q5 co
0.. ......-
E m
8 ,s"E
,~~ ~
c:::"':O
o '"C CD
:g2CJ'J
E~-g
'" E Ctl
c:: ..... '"
o c::5'c
Uu...o
O:;~~
~.E'O
II
-75-
o
u
'"
'C3
c::
co
Lt
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
o
.e
C3
CO.9E
.E ,Q 0:;
..0.....0.
~O't:::f)
ro ffi.!:
..c::o::;g
'" _ :::l
.....0..0
CD ..J::; co
g-5'O
05UCD
55 5 g
~ 'CJ5 ~
..c::e",
f- LLJ .~
C::CD enc.9 ffi..8 CD CD
~=5p""" ..0
u.. -ffiO:: c::~~
=5c 0 t
o 0<( CD:gtt::: 0
-= .~ u CD..c:: :::l c::0 0.
Cc::CD=5f-.....
o ,Q '"C u5 en 2 en
~ t5 -5 ~ ~ 8 .m .5,
os,!: .;: '" ,'" co
'en '2 CD co ~ $: en
o o]j g ~ 'S; c:: ....... ,,;
W U' 0:::::::;> 0 c:: u,
c::"tn~"O~t5CD2
ffi .; ffi 0 ..J::; .E 2 [2
CD .~_ 5: g 5 -g en '5
,,, - u.... C::o cr
.:; up'''' CD
0. c:: ~ ,!: c t:::f) u
g J: 0 5 ~ '2 -g -g
(,) c:: U ~ :0 -6 coE Ctl
roCOc::=CD'"C.....CD
{;5 U?,~ g, U? S5.9 ~
..c::o -C:::lenCD
.......c:: -=: w..... -c c:: ..c::
o c::COCD.......>
~U?CDcoc::~E'O
~-o..c::c'Q.......E
~ >- ~ ,~ e rf .E g
.......50ew~t:::f)=
a3 ~ CD 0 co ,!: ~
'0' CD u .....;- 4"- CD == 0
0.=5~~.gs=5 ~-;
CD.9~-cro15~'"C
..c:: '"C ....... c::- '"C ..... c:: :::l
f- CD 'E,Q ffi '; 00
:c E 0:; ~ U5 ~ ~ .!:
~ ~ 0.. 'C '0 ~ "0 -
~ ~ 0')2 '" o.jg
~ c:: c:: ro ro"2 '"
-.:i- 15 ~ .~ ~ - ....... c::
g:.9~.E~~8O:
'"
'"
CD
U
U
co
'"C
CD
c::
c::
co
0..
-c
c::
Ctl
-g ",-
co ffi
t:::f)o..
c::
:.a-g
e Ctl
0') CD
O')U
c:: c::
'C Ctl
:::l c::
-c:o
20
'en
CD
=5
>..
05
ro
:0
CD
~E
:0 .s
e-c
'U5 t:::f) CD
'S; CD t5
..c::~
.......0
=5u
'~ 15
U)-
co
Cl)
ro
c::
.Q
ro
&:J
:0
o
E
ro
..c::
'"
'"
Q.) CD
>uro
2ffi{;5
m=a....c::
'" E .52
~8~
~ ~ ",-
o ~ 5
tt=C::~
C'OCD"O
en .9 'S;
en >-
~ c:: c::
o 0 Ctl
~ :g CD
20
,52 en c::
J5c::-o
:::l 0 c::
o..uco
",-
E
o
e
en
~
o
u
'"
'C3
c::
co
Lt
c::
co
U)
..c:: co
:5U
fAo
o~
E-'-g
o co
Ctl .......0 ......;
'E
'E .Q 0:;
.0.....0.
:::lo.t:::f)
~ffi~
..c::5::=
en _ :::l
0..0
CD ..J::; co
o.c::",-
000
(.i30CD
5) 5 g
~'CJ5 ~
..c:: e '"
f- LLJ o~
0-t5.....
O-CD.E
0.. 'e '"
s 0. CD
U)CD~
"ffi..c::co
c:: f- CD
,Q c:: E
ro 2 0')
0:; u c::
g- E'~
en.Q
ffi5:E
c..(,)CD
.Q0:;=5
Q.)~
> Ctl -
CD__.9
-0 .;::;;'
= '"C
:g~:m
'" cr E
cO:;=
CO 1015
.52 $:
0.........0
o.Uc::
C'02
1)2]
Q.) 0.
'e .8 CD-
o.c::-C
o :::l
~t5]
f- 2'-
~enro
- c:: ..c::
N 0 CJ'J
M u
..... 0
-.:i-.......
::E
::E
c
o
~
0:;
0.
o
t5
CD
'0'
0.
0..
0..
0..
.2 s:
0..U)
~tg~
"-22
OCD:.a
c:::516
,Q ..0
ro~~
COc
CD u co
~:!2en
o..~-g
E (.) en
-t5-c
"d"ID-C
M '0' co
:; 0. -c '0
~s'"
U "'0 8 CD
ra 0....... u
c.Oco:S
~ 0.=5 ~
as
.....
.E
CD
0:;
=5
t:i:::
o
c::
2
'"C
~
"0
0.
-
M
I
o
-
OJ
-I-l
r::l
"0
C.
:;:J
==
r::l
E:
W
-I-l
en
Cl:l
~
en
OJ
~
'u
r::l
~
OJ
-I-l
r::l
l-
e
E-
o
U
',::;;;
o
'r.;;
;
C.
I><
~
-I-l
.~
I-
-I-l
en
Q
;>.
~
w
;;;..
o
--:::
w
=
Q..
e
Q;j
;;;..
OJ
Q
"0
==
r::l
-
t:i
I-
r::l
OJ
en
OJ
~
-
t:i
~
-
~
w
c."
....
...
~
~
~
~
~
.....
~
~
&
i:l:::
"S
~
~
.:0--
~
.....
.;:
~
~
....
~
.....
.....
~
.~
~
~
.....
....
~
.....
~
~
u
",ro
ro..c::
ff.~ ~
LLJ E'-
~CD~c
~ 13 -0 _-5
:;=l'"CCD
,!: c:: ..D 0
13 ~ '~ i
E""~c
~~15~
~Ero~
c:: c..c:: c::
co co '" co
c::~~t:::f)
0'- I- c::
.~ ~ <( ~
0:; 'en ~'x
'"C:::lCD
offiU5'O
'" c
~~o:::
~ ~ ~ ~
'" t5 ..c::CD ~
~Ctl.......",
C ~ .!: ~
~~~-a,
0. '"C '" :::l
"'- c:: :::l 0
O-(])O
c::cci..D=5
,2 ~ :!2 Ctl
0.. <( :::l (])
'5 >- 8 '"C
CJ) '"C ....... :::l
CD .2 Ctl C3
o U) =5 .!:
II
Ctl '"C '"C
2t&
g; ~ ~
jg 8.~
c:: .-
S~CD
o(,)..c::
(,) ~ ......
t5E=5
,~~.~
e ~
0. t+= 0:;
'"C 'c 55
CD ,!;2) $:
CJ'J en 0
~..:::-:c
e~
o.c ~
CD 0
:5g,2
-0 "2
CD c
'" 0
l!5 (,)
co C
CD CD
-<~~
>- U "..
'"C :s .......~
:::l 0
U5"':5
ff ~.~
~ :5 ",-
0::::: = 0..
CDO~
=5=co
,S: g 0
'"CC::..l::;
2~5
c:: 0. (,)
~ '"C ~
~ffi:s
E~g
.- = c::
CD'S; 0
~:g~
.......co(,)
cr~~
~enCD
CO:::l..o
"'- '"C
o ,S: ro
c::'"Cii5
.Q CD '"
cr5 ~ ~ 'en
CD L<= c:: co
~~~-5-
g~5JJ
..
COu s:::
N~~
~E-
..- ,-
~ J"
"'~
~;Sco
enca-.9
~q'"C
:::l M CD
"'..- u
~ ~.g .
E~~~
~ ~
c:: 15
.Q..c::
~ g'"C
:ee~
E =5 ::
co
t..)
~
,~
Ci5
o ro E
t5 S~CD15CD
CD CD t:::f)""'..o en
u> CD> ro>-.
~ ,~ gf ~ ~ ~ -55 ~
~~~~~~~~
~.s: 2 co U5 0 ro E
0::::: ....... ,- co U
.~~~S CD.Q.s
ffi:9 E. g t:::f)'"
0.. t5 ~ '+- .B Ctl.E: CD
c::"'00(])C::-c=5
~~~l~~~~
a32~~roE~~
E ~ '"C co '"C ~- Ctl
CDCOCDo..g;oCDE
o..ut5 ~ co~ 0...-
ECD:::l _o.;:::eco
,_ ..0 ..l::; CD I- CD 0. =5
-g~.2g~=5co'"
co-55 ~ ~o enro~
t:::f)>-OCD'"C~ro~
.!: U '"C E S '"C '" "'-
..... c:: CD ,"'..... 0 0
g ~ 55E2 ~ 0.",
c:: Cl"" 0 CD .Q ~:5' en
~ ~C3 @-~~ CDl!5
Ctl;'OU:;2..o-g..:::-
-0 '0 ffi ~.gs ro i=O' C3 'cu
~ c en 'C c:: 0. E .!: -0
CD CDC Ctl~- 0 co
CD CD~Co",.......c::
c:: [E U .2 ~ ~ ~ 0
~ .g ,~ cf 19 '5. co 05 ~
en >:::l..l::;CDgsE.g'ro
35 CD Cl""5g'$:O:::lCD
:::lO~u>",J::..oC3
..
-0
~
(]) 'E
:5 ..0 cr5
roffi55l5~
~U)-g=co
t5€C'OjgCD
:::l.....-o"'=5
'"Cc55Q)D..."'-
c:: "'E 0.. 0
8000..~
(]) .2:- a5 S 'u
..oC3~U?co
roo..o~5-
-55=O~I-~
EC::-v5o..:~
Ctl co 0.. ,-
I- co CD 0.. >-
t:::f)ogoffi
e 0 C'O I- '"
0. S a3 U? '"
~cr:cCD~
ffi CD 'cu =5 :g
m:5E=5co
c il-g .~ .9
'cu c:: co c:: >.
E 0 0'),2 ro
'"C g-,~ ~ ~
ffi~g:e ~
~~58~
'C ~ ~ U '"
g >- 0 ,!: co_
c:: (,) (.) >--0
~ a3 ,~ ~ 2
:::l g :::l ~
~ge~:.o
I-..l=LL CO co
III
-76-
CD >-
u.9 c::
c:: ~ '"C c:: Ctl
.g 2 2 .Q N '0 u5
'~iL~ ~ en ~ g .ffi
-g ~ ~ .E ~ 0.:0 -0
co 0 '"C ,!: 'E e:c E
CDuCDCDCD~eo
3~;;=513 Ctl o.en
co...... co E- O')'"C ~ 0
0:; ~ -55 :::l .g ffi ~ :s
::= 8. c:: E co 0. Ctl '"
ro (]) 0 'c ~ :::l ,- ro
c:: N ~ 'E (.) e.!:!1 ,~
2 'E E ~ co ~ E
Ctl ,- I- Ctl U ~ .- CD
Ec::o...........(,)E..c::
..... 'E c <( CD...- CD U
o ,-' E M ..c:: -0
'i::: .9,~ ~ E en U c::
,- ",..c:: ..... 0 -0 Ctl
~o..l-<(u~ffi.!:!1
~~ ~ ~'O 'E .!:!1'~
CDCO(]):::l-CDCOCD
0. ~ E U5 ~ 13 '~ 10
-;;:; 2 0. 0::: 0. 0') 10 E
,'" CD.Q - '" c:: E "'-
-55 E g; ~ :0 '5.. 0
......E(])o:::::.....c,o"'t:::f)
ffi 0'"C CD ~~ ~ c::
,~ U ~ =5 e -g "'E .~
0.. ~ ~ ,!: 0. ~ ~ :::l
@-Ctlo.",:;::,,,,-co'"C
......roOCD 0..c::'"C
a3:5 D-~~ 35'0 ffi
.~ '" CD .Q > :::l - en
e :::l..c:: 0. 0 ..... Ctl c::
o.-g....... E U Q.)~:C
CD .- E ~ 12 g- g. ~
~ 5.g ro U5 0.:0 $:
..
o
U
'"
'u
c::
Ctl
Lt
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o
U?
'0
.2:-
C3
o
(,)
'"
'u
c::
co
Lt
c::
Ctl
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
'0
.c=-
C3
'" CD
ffi=5
0..0
'E .2
-g~
"'ro
en
,!:
.8~
o E
'C 0:;
0.0.
00')
o..,!:
CD'"C
U :=
o:;E
ECO
.!: 0
e CD
'"C U
E ffi
.....':::l
o '"
en ,~
CD
=5
CD
'"C
:::l
C3
,!:
ro
..c::
CJ'J
0:;
0.
o
05
>
CD
'"C
CD
..c::
I-
ro
..c::
'" CD
CD =5
0. CD
.Qro
g;,~
CD'"C
'"C ,!:
~ro
1-=5
.s-g
0. co
~.!:!1
0:;'0
C CD
,- >
c:: EO 'c
'cu :::l
-o~CD
.9=5
o 0
-;:s
,2: c::
ro~
~JB
CD
..0 a.i
-0 N
S 'en
0-0
..c:: c::
o '" C'O
0') -0 05
C::C::'"C
'N co 0
'en c E
~-s2~'c
ro'~ 0 :::l
.!: ro 0. E 0
ro 0. e ,- 0.. ro
-55 35 ~,~ ~ -55
=<(coo:;
co,....: ~.......
Ctl ::::: CD co ,!:
g '0 10 CD CD
8:0 $:~:5
Ctl ..... E ,!: ~
t5 2 .8 e 'Ci)
CD Ctl '" -0 0
'0' 1: E CD 0
0. 13 .g ~ 13
CD c:: '" 't:: c::
..c::Ctl2~~
1-",~",1:
::c-Ctl:::l:::lC::
~ ~ :e .~ 2
C"')OCtlo:;e
~ c:: 0. 0. CD
-.:i-~ ~,s~
::2E '" C'O CD c::
::2E ~~ =5 8
E
02
en 'en
e
co 0
Cl.l
.....
~
"0
C.
::;;J
....
~
Q:;
:...
Cl.l
.....
1:1)
~
~
(])
Ctl
c::
'~
'"C
CD
>
~
c::
2
ro
(])
10
o
1:1)
Cl.l
~
'C:;
c:l
r...
Cl.l
.....
~
:...
o
Q.
:...
o
U
-
c
o
'Vi
c
c:l
Q.
~
J;:;:l
.....
.~
.::
1:1)
Q
~
.:s
~
~
o
o
U
,!:
'",::
Q:.i
a
Q.
o
~
~
Cl.l
Cl
"E
~
c
co
g
....
"E
~
Cl.l
1:1)
Cl.l
~
Ctl
....
'C:j
Cl.l
.....
I:
~
Q:.i
r.;i
t5
CD
o
0.
CD
..c::
I-
u-
N
M
~
.ocf
::2E
::2E
N
N
,
o
.....
-
-
~
;...
bJ,
~
Q::
~
,-
'E
~
&
i:l:::
~
~
~
'E:
~
.'S
~
~
-
~
*'"-t
.....
~
,~
~
~
~
.....
....
~
~
~
u
.....
o
't3.. 'E
~ as
,2 ~
:5 ,!:
0'"C
'" :-::
~E
Ctl Ctl
c:: "'-
'ffi 0
-c~
CD c::
ro~
c:: CJ'J
2 .~
ro.9
o-g
c:: co
~ui
C'O CD
:5~
..0 ..0
'0 ~- ~
-5'S
c::2
.- c::
~-[
E m'
'" co
c:: CD
.Q ro
:5
oC::
'" ,2
c
CD
05
o
:.0
'"
:::l
o
'2:
CD
0.
,S
o
u
'"
'u
c::
co
Lt
c::
co
U?
..c::
"5
o
U)
'0
.c=-
O
CD .c=-
=5CDU
CD =5 CD
5.9=5
C3 ,_c:: .9
,!:
c::'"CCO....;
ro .Q ~ 0 'E
-55 ~ 'E ro ID
CDQ5-@E:;o.
g- ~ '" 0. ~
05 ~ ffi ~ c::
55 0. 0 .9
'"C"'c::......Q.)
CD ~ ,~o b
..c:: 0 CD . C ,!:Q
t- '"C '"C 0.-0
u5
'"C
c::
o
0.
:5
o
0.
'"
e:::
$:
o
'"C
o
0.
o
l:l:;::
o
e
CD
10
o
0.
o
u
,!:
ro
..c::
'"
C
co
.5:2
0..u5
o.e:::
co Ctl
1:50..
(])t:::f)
'0' .!:
0.:!2
CD '5
..c::..Cl
t-ro
::0-0
N"E
Me:::
~,Q
.ocfc
::2E(])
::2E~
o
u
'"
'u
c::
Ctl
Lt
c::
C'O
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
'0
.2:-
U
CD .c=-
=5CDu
CD =5 CD
5.9=5
~ .!: .9 c
en '"C co
}g ~ ~ '0 'E
'" ~ 'E ro 0:;
0:; C'O ..0 > 0.
0.Q.):::l0>-
oE"'o.ro
~5~~5
~~ 5,.9i5
CD g'en.2 ~
~ 'E ~ 0.:0
~~~~
c:: "'- . u
o 0 '"C c::
U '" ffi Ctl
ro 'en Lt
..c:: >- $: c::
en ro 0 Ctl
cffit+=U?
COc::CD..c::
,5:2 co J:: :5
0.. 0
~ ~ ,Q, ~
~ g.~=5
'e- 0.. '"C .9
~~~~
=5 35 c-=
~c::~~.......
E 'a, ...... ~
..... c:: CD CD
~LLJ..c::~E
....... ....... (])
~~~;!
.- CD 'E..c:: c::
Eo 0:;'" co
ctQ5t$:
~ '"COCD
t+= ~ '"C at 'S;
.8U:c::I-~
o'"Cco~.E
. C CD t5 t+=
0.. ~ .92.. ~ C
roo:;eu~
_u 0.<(.......
MU) ro
MW~cc..
"-:w,,,oQ.)
-.;:f'UO=O
:Ezg-e~
:E Ctl o...g u:
o
(,)
'"
'u
c::
co
Lt
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
o
.e
U
CD .c:-
=5CDo
CD =5 CD
5.9=5
C3 J2 c::
.!: .!: -
'" '"C Ctl
}g ~ ~ '0 'E
CJ'J ~ 'E ro 0:;
~ Ctl..Cl > 0.
C5..CD:::lO>-
oE;o.ro
~5cn~5
~~c::.9i5
CD g'~ 0 t3
~ 'E ~ 't3.. ~
ro ~.gs ~-g
..c::.2ro~Ctl
-EU)-g~~
co 0::: Ctl E 1:5
,~ W U5 c:: ~
~~ ~,2 0
COCD......roU
t5 =5 ~ 0') 15
.92.. '0 :; 'E ro
e........(]) ..c::
c.. CD tE ,!: '"
~~5~'"C
.......o:.;:::e:::~
""';-OCtlt+=:::l
'E I..(j 'u ~ ~
o:;.!: ~ '" CD
~~ ~ ~ ~
:o",-c~m
:= C 0 t+= 'u
EeS2~
Ctl~(])~'"C
~..c:: 10 g E='
'S; ro S '"C <(
'05 ..... c:: co -c >,
e.er3~~~
.9 ~ '~ '~{3 g-
02<(>co8
'C $: .9 .9 CD 0
0.. 0 .-. ro .9
:ct+=~~roo
C? ~ ~ ~ ~ 't3..
~ E :s <(- ~ '"C
.ocf 0 0. S ~ "*
::2E~~S~2
::2E c.. ~ ::s ~ ~
Q.)CD en CD CD CDO"'-CD
=5=5Ctl>=5J::c::~..o~
CD -g ~ c:: '"C ,Q "? '"C ..92
o '" co '"C 0 ,g; 10 ~ g 1::
,2 ~ 2" g Co) 5- c ~ $: ~
...... u 'CJ5 u ~ ~ CDE ~ u l<::
~.!: CD t5 E CD ~ -= ~ 'c:
Q.) =5 CD ,- ..c:: c.. .E_ '~,
E S '0'....... ....... ,s
~ fZ 0 0. ffi 0:; ,f::; ~ ,~ ~
.......;>~'"C~~-:s..c::....
.s " ~ ffi 'c -0 .~ '" ......- ::r
...... 00') Ctl:s:~
~ .92.. ~ 0. 'en .9 0:;- ~ C"? ..92
we.......e>-E> ~Ctl
~ 0. m o.=ffi 2 ~ ' 0
-.:i-'"CECD=CJ'JOC::~"""
..... ffi 0. =5 m &'):J: 2 ..c:: ~
(.) 0 .Q ....... ...... ..... ,':' Ctl t:::f) U
res o.CDs 0 CD "" t:::f):::l:::l
c.. e 55 '" 0. 10 $: = 0 '"C
.5 0. '"C ~ C'O $: g 'E :S ~
-77-
o
(.)
en
'u
c::
co
Lt
c::
co
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
o
.e
U
CD .c=-
=5CDu
CD =5 CD
5 =5
C3
.~
.9
.!: .9 c::
en '"C Ctl
}g ~ ~ '0 'E
en '" 'E ro 0:;
Ctl..o > 0.
CD:::lO>-
E '" 0. ro
c:: Q5 0. c::
o '" co 0
~ ~.9i5
g 'en .2 ~
'E ~ 0.:0
0:;
c..
o
05
>
CD
-0
CD
..c::
I-
..... ..... CD
'0 .e ..0
C:'"C
35 ~.~
~ '5
10 gro
..c::.....:::;;-
....... ",- ~
c"'-~
tm~
~E
.Q~
}gro~
'" >- Ctl
>-u~
c::c::-=
co CD
c..2'e:::
ECD.Q
oEro
U CD ,Q>
~-g~
'2: Ctl
CD ,!:
U)
ro
0:; .2 ~
ro~~
S ~m
co 032
'E 'a=s c:: ~
~ =5 ,2 ~~
ro 1:5-
U-g2Ctl
_00......
(,) >- I- co
M CD 0. '"C
M ..0_2 ~
"-: ~ ~ ]j
-.;:f'coc-c::
::2E 0 CD 'ffi
:E en 16 E
o
(,)
'"
'u
c::
co
Lt
c::
C'O
U)
..c::
:5
o
U)
o
.e
U
CD .c:-
=5(])0
CD =5 (])
50=5
~E.9c::
",'"CCO....;
ro CD ~ 0 '-E
..c:: :3 '
"'",EroO:;
..... Ctl ..Cl > 0.
CD CD:::l 0>-
g- E '" 0. ro
~g~ @-5
~ co ~.9~
CD g 'en .2 ~
~ 'E ~ 0.:0
Q)
>
o
..0
res
e
..c::
C>
::s
o
'-
..c:
-
~
....
M
....
-.:i-
::2E
::2E
CD
CD
U)
cv? '"
:;f13co
en ......c::CD CD-
CCDro
ECD c:: -55
(]) .....
CD c.9 'ffi
E:;~,::
0...Cl ,-
EO?~
- C"?
'"C..-~
~~ 'S;
c:: '"C 0
coco.
0:: co
.....0 ro =ffi
--- ..c::
U- 0:::> '"
c;::)
"<"""
:j::j::
C
CD
E
CD
>
e
0.
.s
E
Ctl
:J:
>-
CD
.!!2
~
en "2
c :::l
CD r=
E c::
g; .9
e ~
~~
'"C
(])
c::
c::
co
0::
ro
co
cv?
..-
~
~ ,!: .~ ~ ffi ~ as ,2
"'-0 s 0.. ~ 0 :S E ~ 1:5
",o.CDg-r1>.,eX~
c::~~Eo..~o..';CDO
~ ~ ,2 ~ - ~ g ~ ~
13........ roCDcoO:;'"Cs:S
'-' t:::f)..... roCDO.9
~g2:e~CD$:1:5$:~
?=;>;:Ec::;;; CD.......
.......;> ~ CD ..c 5 'e- a5 05
.s 1:5 '0 '"C CL '0' E
r- CD c:: S '"C g I- g;
M '0' 2 ~ S 0. co 0.. 0
~ 0......... 2 r- ~ ,S ~ ffi 0.
-.:i- '"C c:: c::, 1:: -.:i- 0 .S
t) ffi'~ ~ ~ co..... g- ~
res O!:f;:: CD ~ a5 ~ resc..(.) 0. C::c::
c.. 0. :::l 0.. ~ ,-- t::
.E ~,~ ..s ~ ~,~ .5 ~ -[
l'I")
N
I
o
....
Cl.>
.....
~
"C
Q.
;::l
....
~
~
~
.....
In
~
~
In
,~
=
'~
~
~
Cl.>
.....
~
;...
o
Q.
;...
o
U
-
5
'r.;;
c
~
Q.
I><
~
.....
u
'C
.....
In
Q
~
~
~
;;..
o
.....
c
Cl.>
....
....
Q..
o
Q)
;;..
Cl.>
Q
"C
C
~
....
~
;...
~
Cl.>
In
Cl.>
c::::
....
~
Cl.>
......
C
Cl.>
C
Q.l
C-'
...
....
~
....
CJ:i
~
Q:;
~
.:::;
1::
~
&
~
~
~
~
'E
~
,1:;:
~
-0
ID Cto 2,8 C
~ CDO %~ $:~
'~......~~ E~g~~
e::~ ot ",-:::l
LLJ t+=.Q CD (,) CD 0_ 0 ~ c
>- CD g; =5 CD u g w(]) ...... ~
0::CD.9 ..oCOO(])>o..
CDo~c35ro'O~;eo:;
=5 8~ ~~-v5~.E ~ ~~
~ ffi 'E:::l '-E ffi ~ g C ~c..o
E3 -0 :::l 0:; 0. ffi CD ~ ffi (])> (]) 0
I.; CD ~ 0.'"C- E '" Eo
~ e:: ,- t:::f) CD> ':: (]) .- g. = 0. N
~ 'E .9 r:: > .9 U .s:g 0
~!:i .~ .....:0 e ~ e ..... OU :::lE 05 ~
~ Q) ,g s ~ C'O E ,@ 4- :::l [; .......
'"C 0...0 co ~ ,_ 0. 0 U '"C .8
lC)
"<"""
:t:l:
::0
eo
rh
~
-.i
....
~
....
.....
t:l
.:p
~
~
~
.....
~
~
6
1:'5e::
Ctl co
Q.) o...c::
=5 .~ -;;;
,S: ~ ~
=5;~
~ ~ E
co~2
(,)Ctlg2.,
0')",'"
:S<(o:;
,~~ 10
CD C'O $:
'"C 0.. 2
e:: '"
C'O e::: ;g
~ ~ CD
en 10=5
ij;' ~ .9
;::::-
:t:l:
C
CD
E
CD
>
o
0.
.s
E
Ctl
I
co
e::
,Q
10
U5
0.
E
:::l
0..
U
00
r:0
..-
.ocf
..-
..-
:t:l:
C
CD
E
CD
>
o
0.
.s
E
co
I
>-
CD
.!E.
$:
co
e::
.Q
ro
U5
0.
E
:::l
0..
.9
e::
'co
~
CD
U
o
LL
::c-
OO
r:0
..-
-.i
c:
co
U
t+=
'c
t:::f)
'en
lC)
:t:l:
to
:t:l:
C
CD
E
CD
>
o
0.
.s
E
co
:r:
>-
CD
.!E.
~
C
CD
E
(])
>
e
0.
.s
E ~
CO e::
I 2
>-:0
CD :::l
.!E. U)
~ gs
e::
CD
>
<(
'"C
e::
Ctl
cD
en
co
LLJ
c-
eo
rh
"<"""
~
e::
o
~
U5
0.
E
:::l
0..
CD
eo
r:0
~
-.i -.i
Cl)
-
e':I
'"0
Q.,
::J
c:
e':I
~
Q:l
-
tIl
e':I
~
..c:: >-
t:::f) ..0
:::l '"C '"C
e ro CD
-o=5~$: e::
~ ~ -55 .9 .~
~CO..c::~CD05
o...r:0UCO=5'"C
"<""" 2 -55 "'- '" .
:r ~ ~ 12 .~ ~ ~
~ a3 c.9 'a3 10 ~ '~
~ ~ C;::=5 ~ ~ ,~_
CD""'-CDE""'.:;::::'
:5E:;D?'"CCDE:;U
0.. C"? > - .....
o E""": e ~E~
LL _ ~ 0. ,_ ,_ ......
tIl
Cl)
~
'c;j
e':I
~
Cl)
..-
~
o
P-
o
U
"';::;
o
.~
;;
Q.,
I><
~
..-
.~
..-
tIl
Q
"..,
~
Q:l
>
o
..-
c:
Cl)
...
....
Q..
o
Q:j
>
Cl)
Q
~
;;
...
"E
e':I
Q.l
tIl
Q.l
~
....
U
Q.l
..-
c:
Cl)
c:
Q.l
c.;,
~
N
,
o
......
-78-
CHAPTER 11 Updated Report Preparers
Name
lssueAreolRole
%~,~;,~=_~: :':~~, ',:: '.~:~ :.,~~ ~;,'~',;, , ;,,~~Erin]]bn~~~~tillifs::~::' ~~:" b :,,,~;~~~,~~;;'~,'-:;~,:,y
City of South San Francisco
Marty Van Duyn Assistant City Manager
Susy Kalkin Acting Chief Planner
Mike Lappen Senior Planner
Dennis Chuck Senior Engineer
Ray Razavi City Engineer
CSG Consultants, Inc.
Cyrus Kianpour
Curt Luck
Vice President of Engineering
Project Manager
<;' < '" :>"~,,', '/:' ',~ ':, :' " , '!":,~l" ,?~~,~'::-^::',,o '~i';c. ':?"~~'L:,, ". ":,.' ". ' .: ," ;?,' :>~:' " "
--i'" ,," ',. ',,' . ", , .,' ':" ~RQ~Gm$RQNS()R i" '.;: , , , i" . ,.:: ':.,".,
Genentech
Lisa Sullivan
Shar Zaman pour
Meg Fitzgerald
Mark Cuzner
Minitier & Associates
Jim Harnish
Strategic Facilities Planning
Principal Planner
Senior Legal Counsel
Project Engineering Consultant
I Principal
Dyett Bhatia
Rajeev Bhatia
Sarah Nurmela
Principal
Project Planner
Wilsey Ham- Utilities Master Plan
Kristin J. Parsons, PiE, Principal
Ken Selby Senior Engineer
Kevin Okada Project Engineer
AEI Affiliated Engineers- Hydrology Modeling
James N. Sharpe, P,E., LEED AP I Principal
Fehr & Peers- Transportation
Matt Haynes, P.E, Transportation Engineer
Nelson/Nygaard- Traffic Report
Ria Hutabarat I Senior Associate
T.Y. Lin International/CCS- Traffic Impact Analysis
Shusuke Lida I Civil Engineer
Genentech Research and Development Overlay DistrL~ ~.?.t"..Jnsion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 11-1
Chapter 11 Updated Report Preparers
EIP Associates
Kim Avila, AICP Project Manager
Daniel Kenny Deputy Project Manager
Julian Capata Deputy Project Manager
Linda Tatum Planning Lead
Jordan Smith Water Resources Lead
Sam Anderson Technical Analysis
Jessie Barkley Technical Analysis
Kevin Beauchamp Technical Analysis
Demian Ebert Technical Analysis
Erin Efner Technical Analysis
Christina Erwin Technical Analysis
Shannon Kimball Technical Analysis
Ruta Kshirsagar Technical Analysis
Fan Lau Technical Analysis
May Ye Lau Technical Analysis
Shraddha Navalli Technical Analysis
Sheldon Nylander Technical Analysis
Seema Sairam Technical Analysis
Marissa Staples Technical Analysis
John Steere Technical Analysis
Teresa T aoia Technical Analysis
T.J. Weule Technical Analysis
Joel Miller Administrative Manager
Christopher Perry Administrative Support
Ron Arzaga Administrative Support
Pedro Vitar Administrative Support
James Songco Graphics/Cover Design
Korve Engineers, Inc.-Traffic Report
Tim Erney, AICP Principal Transportation Planner
Ryan Niblock Traffic Engineer
11-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay Dist - 80 - pansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update
EXHIBIT B
Findings Regarding Significant Impacts, Mitigation, and Project Alternatives
-81-
EXHIBIT B
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF
CERTIFICATION OF THE MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
MEIR05-0004, FOR THE GENENTECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY DISTRICT EXPANSION AND MASTER PLAN UPDATE
The California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code 21000 et
seq, (CEQA), particularly sections 21081 and 21081.5, and the State Guidelines for
Implementation of CEQA, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, sections 15000 et seq.
(CEQA Guidelines), particularly sections 15091 through 15093, specify that a City shall not
approve a proj ect for which an EIR has been certified where one or more significant effects of
the proj ect have been identified, unless the City makes written findings, including a rationale for
each finding, for each of the proj ect' s significant effects, Pursuant to these requirelnents, the
following findings are hereby adopted by the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission
with respect to the Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development (R&D) Overlay
District Expansion and Master Plan Update ("Project"), pursuant to an analysis of the 220-acre
Master Environmentall1npact Report Study Area ("MEIR Study Area"), The findings are based
on the entire record, which includes without limitation, the Final Master Environmental Impact
Report (FMEIR) and the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update, 1 The FMEIR, dated February 2007,
includes and incorporates the Draft Master Envirolunental Impact Report (DMEIR), August
2006, and the Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR),
December 2006 for the Project. As described in the Planning Commission's resolution to which
these finding are attached ("Resolution"), the entirety of the record also includes, but is not
limited to, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environnlental
documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study; all
comments received on the DMEIR and PRDMEIR; all proposed site plans, floor plans and
elevations subnlitted in cOilllection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review
Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning
Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for
the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning COlmnission meeting of
February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning
Commission meeting of February 15,2007:
The FMEIR identifies a number of significant or potentially significant impacts that can be
mitigated to less than significant. Related mitigation findings are presented below, All
mitigation measures are required as part of the Project, and may not be substituted except in
accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq, Some of the impacts cannot be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level; therefore, these findings also address Project
alternatives as required by Public Resources Code section 21002 and CEQA Guidelines section
15091, Additionally, for those significant and unavoidable impacts, a Statement of Overriding
1 The public hearing transcript(s), a copy of all letters regarding the Final1\1EIR received during the public review period,
the administrative record, and background documentation for the Final 1\1EIR including all of the documents that
comprise the Final1\1EIR are located at the Planning Department, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco. The
Planning Department is the custodian of these documents and materials, This information is provided in compliance
with Public Resources Code section 21081.6(a)(2), and CEQA Guidelines section 15091(e),
928816-5
-82-
1
Considerations has been prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines section 15093, and is included as Exhibit F to the Resolution, and incorporated herein
by reference.
Many of the impacts, mitigation measures, and project requirelnents in the following findings are
summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the FMEIR, including the DMEIR and
PRDMEIR, should be consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations.
FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.1-1: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not
substantially affect the California clapper rail, salt marsh vagrant shrew, or salt marsh harvest
mouse. There would be no impact associated with this effect.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.1-1: A small salt marsh area was identified along the shoreline at the end of Forbes
Boulevard, however, the area is fragmented with strands of salt grass and very small, scattered
patches of pickleweed, as well as ruderal grassland uplands. California clapper rails, salt Inarsh
vagrant shrews, and salt marsh harvest mice are dependent on high quality salt marsh habitats,
especially those with dense strands of pickleweed. Habitat of sufficient quality does not exist in
or adjacent to the MEIR Study Area, therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the
FMEIR, the Planning Commission fmds that there would be no impact associated with
construction activities' effect on the clapper rail, salt marsh vagrant shrew, or salt marsh harvest
mouse.
Impact 4.1-2: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project could substantially
affect the salt marsh common yellowthroat and Alameda song sparrow. This is considered a
significant ilnpact. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.1-
1, this impact would be reduced to less than significant.
MM 4.1-1: On land adjacent to the coastal salt marsh, pile-driving associated with construction
activities shall avoid the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period (Hunter 1999) to the
extent possible. If no pile-driving is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys are required.
If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a
qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to pile-driving. The area surveyed shall
include all areas within 150 feet outside the boundaries of the area where pile-driving is to occur
or as otherwise determined by the biologist. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following
the survey date.
In the event that an active nest is discovered in the areas within 150 feet of construction
boundaries, pile-driving shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until a wildlife biologist has
928816-5
-83-
2
determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no
evidence of second nesting attempts.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.1-2: Implementation ofMM 4.1-1 would minimize potential impacts to disruption of
nesting of sensitive species. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the
Planning Commission finds that implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1 would reduce
Impact 4.1-2 to less than significant.
Impact 4.1-3: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Project
could substantially affect sensitive plant species. This is considered a significant impact.
However, implementation of the identified project requirements, PR2 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1(b),
would ensure tlus impact would remain less than significant.
PR 4.13-1(a): Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the Project applicant shall develop a SWPPP
prior to construction to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP
shall include, but not be limited to, the following n1easures for the construction period:
. Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion
control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized, in
accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sedilnent Control
Measures. Silt fences used in combination with fiber rolls shall be installed down
slope of all graded slopes. Fiber rolls shall be installed in the flow path of graded
areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets.
. BMPs for preventing the discharge of other construction-related NPDES
pollutants beside sediment (i.e., paint, concrete, etc.) to downstream waters.
. After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for
accumulated sediment, and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and
sediment.
PR 4.13-1(b): The applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City
of South San Francisco in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control
Plan shall include controls for winterization, dust, erosion, and pollution in accordance with the
ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. The Plan shall also
describe the BMPs to be used during and following construction to control pollution resulting
form both storm and construction water runoff. The Plan shall include locations of vehicle and
equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Public
works staff or representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure
compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be
corrected immediately.
The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.13-1(a) and (b) is more fully described in the
2 Project Requirements (''FRs'') are applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations that are considered part of the
Project description. PRs "Will be further implemented through the :Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
928816-5
-84-
3
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progran1
Finding 4.1-3: As described in more detail in FMEIR section 4.13, PR 4.13-1(a) and (b) would
require the applicant to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and an Erosion Control
Plan that would address construction run off. Based on the entirety of the record, including the
FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofPR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1(b)
would reduce this impact to less than significant.
Impact 4.1-4: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Project
could lead to soil erosion that, if allowed to enter adjacent coastal salt marsh habitat, would
impact this sensitive resource. This is considered a significant impact. However, implementation
of the identified project requirements, PR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1(b), would ensure this impact
would remain less than significant.
Finding 4.1-4: As described in more detail in FMEIR section 4.13, project requirements PR
4.13-1(a) and (b) would require the applicant to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
and an Erosion Control Plan that would address soil erosion. Based on the entirety of the record,
including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofPR 4.13-1(a) and
PR 4.13-1 (b) would reduce this impact to less than significant.
Impact 4.1-5: l1nplementation of the proposed Project would not have a direct impact on
federally protected wetlands through direct ren10val, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means. There would be no impact associated with this effect.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.1-5: There are no wetlands on the MEIR Study Area. Coastal salt marsh habitat
occurs adj acent to the MEIR Study Area, but would not be directly impacted. The proposed
Proj ect does not include development in the Bay or on the salt marsh. Therefore, based on the
entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be
no direct impact on federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.
Impact 4.1-6: Implementation of the proposed Project could interfere with the movement of
species or established migratory corridors, or impede use of native wildlife nursery sites. This
would be a significant impact. However, implelnentation of the identified project requirements,
PR 4.13-1 (a) and (b), would ensure this impact would remain less than significant.
Finding 4.1-6: Construction and development associated with implementation of the proposed
Project would not occur within any critical or sensitive habitat. However, sensitive salt marsh
habitat occurs and sensitive species could occur adjacent to the MEIR Study Area, and may be
impacted by noise or soil erosion associated with construction activities. Noise impacts
associated with construction activities to sensitive species have been addressed and mitigated in
Impact 4.1-2, which requires pile-driving to occur outside of the nesting season, or if the nesting
season cannot be avoided, a nesting survey must be conducted by a wildlife biologist to
determine the presence of any nests. Soil erosion impacts to sensitive habitat (i.e., migratory
928816-5
-85-
4
corridors) have been addressed in Section 4.13 of the FMEIR (Utilities and Service Systems) and
Impact 4.1-4, where it was determined that proj ect requirements reduced the impact to a less-
than-significant level. Impact 4.1-4 is mitigated through PR 4.13-1 (a) and (b), which requires the
applicant to prepare and submit to the City a soil erosion control plan. Therefore, based on the
entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact
would be less than significant.
Impact 4.1-7: Vegetation removal and ground-clearing activities could result in minor disruption
of locally nesting birds. While the disturbance of active nests would be a violation of State Fish
and Game Code and potentially the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, there are ample altenlate nesting
sites available. Because of this, this impact is considered less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.1-7: The landscaping vegetation within the MEIR Study Area provides nesting
habitat. It is expected that relatively minor amounts of landscaping would be removed at anyone
time. Because of this, access to and use of native wildlife nursery sites will not be substantially
interrupted by the proposed Proj ect. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the
FMEIR, the Planning COll1lnission fmds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.1-8: Implementation of the proposed Project could conflict with the local Tree
Preservation Ordinance. This would be a significant impact. However, with implementation of
the identified mitigation measure, MM 4.1-2, this impact would be reduced to less than
significant.
MM 4.1-2: Prior to the start of construction, the Project applicant shall retain a certified arborist
to conduct preconstruction surveys of trees within the MEIR Study Area, and provide a map to
the applicant and the City. Each protected tree identified that will be directly impacted by
removal or pruning shall require a Tree Pruning/Removal Pennit per Title 13, Chapter 13.30 of
the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC). This permit shall be submitted to the City
and must be approved before building permits are issued.
Replacement trees shall be determined as set forth in SSFMC Section 13.30.080:
(a) Any protected trees that are removed shall be replaced as follows:
(1) Replacement shall be three 24-inch box size or two 36-inch box minimum size
landscape trees for each tree removed as determined below. However, the director
maintains the right to dictate size and species of trees in new developments.
(2) Any protected tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two thirty-
six-inch box minimum size landscape trees for each tree so removed as
determined below.
(3) Replacement of a protected tree can be waived by the director if a sufficient
number of trees exist on the property to meet all other requirements of the tree
preservation ordinance.
(4) If replacement trees, as designated in subsection (b)(1) or (2) of this section, as
applicable, cannot be planted on the property, payment of twice the replacement
value of the tree as determined by the International Society of Arboriculture
928816-5
-86-
5
Standards shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree
planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree purchase and planting. (Ord. 1271
91 (part), 2000: Ord.1060 91 (part), 1989).
Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.1-8: Landscaped areas in the MEIR Study Area may contain trees defined as
"protected" by the South San Francisco Tree Preservation Ordinance, Title 13, Chapter 13.30.
Development activities could involve "removal" or "pruning" of protected trees. Based on the
FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that
implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.1-2, would reduce this ilnpact to a less-than-
significant level.
Impact 4.1-9: hnplementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with Habitat
Conservation Plans (HCP) adopted by the City of South San Francisco. There would be no
impact associated with this effect.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.1-9: No HCP or Natural Community Conservation Plan has been adopted by the City
that includes the MEIR Study Area. Because the proposed Proj ect does not conflict with any
conservation plans, the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that there
would be no impact.
FLOOD AND INUNDATION HAZARDS
Impact 4.2-1: hnplementation of the proposed Project would not place housing in a designated
flood hazard area and would result in no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.2-1: Since housing would not be placed within the 100-year flood hazard area under
the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update (FMPU), the Planning Commission finds, based on the
entirety of the record, that there would be no impact.
Impact 4.2-2: hnplementation of the proposed Project could place structures in a 100-year flood
hazard area, but not in a manner that would substantially impede or redirect flood flows. This
impact is considered less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.2-2: The presence of the Bay Trail, a public open space area, make it unlikely that
development under the 2006 FMPU would place structures directly on the shoreline. However,
potential opportunity sites identified in the 2006 FMPU are near the shoreline. Unlike flood
flows along a drainage channel, flood flows at the shoreline would not travel a substantial
928816-5
-87-
6
distance on land. The flow of coastal flood waters that encounter a building constlucted under
the 2006 FMPU would not be substantially obstructed or redirected because the path of flow, i.e.,
the width of the shoreline, is short. ill addition, structures that substantially ilnpede flood flows,
such as dams and levees, would not be constructed under the 2006 FMPU. Therefore, the
Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that the impact of the 2006
FMPU on flood flows is less than significant.
Impact 4.2-3: Implementation of the proposed Project could place people or structures in an area
susceptible to flooding, but would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss,
injury, or death. This impact is considered less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.2-3: It is unlikely based on the proposed development under the 2006 FMPU, that
structures would be sited on the shoreline, where there is a flood hazard area. Structures near the
shoreline, however, could potentially be exposed to coastal flooding. Buildings constructed in
this area are required to cOlnply with Chapter 15.56 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code
(SSFMC), which identifies standards for construction in coastal high hazard areas. The MEIR
Study Area is not prone to flooding in the event of dam or levee failure. Failure of a small-scale
levee in the vicinity of the City would not release a volume of water such that the MEIR Study
Area would beconle flooded. Thus, based on proposed locations for development and required
compliance with the SSFMC, the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the
record, that the 2006 FMPU would not expose people or structures to flood risks associated with
coastal flooding or dam or levee failure, and this impact would be considered less than
significant.
Impact 4.2-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could expose people and structures to
inundation by tsunami, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Compliance with flood
dmnage prevention provisions of the City's Municipal Code would reduce tsunann inundation
impacts to less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.2-4: A few of the potential opportunity sites identified in the 2006 FMPU are in the
tsunami inundation zone. However, as described in Impact 4.2-3, buildings constructed in flood
hazard areas, including the tsunami inundation zone, are required to comply with the building
standards identified in SSFMC Chapter 15.56, including elevation of development above flood
level and use of materials resistant to flood damage. Additionally, both the City and Genentech
have in place emergency services to respond to natural disasters. Thus, based on the entirety of
the record, the Planning Commission finds that via compliance with the SSFMC, tsunami
inundation impacts are considered to be less than significant in the MEIR Study Area.
AIR QUALITY
Impact 4.3-1: Development associated with implementation of the Proj ect is consistent with
current zoning and land use designations, and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation
928816-5
-88-
7
of the Clean Air Plan. This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.3-1: Based on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that the Project's consistency with the Clean Air Plan indicates that this
impact will be less than significant.
Impact 4.3-2: The proposed Project would implement and conform to various transportation
control and trip reduction measures that are consistent with the BAAQMD' s goals for reducing
regional air pollutants, and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Clean Air
Plan. This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.3-2: TDM programs in place and planned for implementation would provide
amenities and incentives that would help to encourage non-motor vehicle transportation by
employees and visitors. The proposed Proj ect would implement and conform to various
transportation control and trip reduction measures that are consistent with the BAAQMD's goals
for reducing regional air pollutants. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that, based on the
entirety of the record, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct the
implementation of an applicable air quality plan, and this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.3-3: Implementation of the proposed Proj ect would include excavation, grading, and
construction activities which could generate dust, thus exposing people to the potentially
unhealthy effects of particulate matter or the annoyance of particulate matter soiling. This would
be a temporary but potentially significant impact. However, with implementation of identified
mitigation measures MM 4.3-1(a) and MM 4.3-1(b), this impact would be reduced to less than
significant.
MM 4.3-1(a): Implement appropriate dust control nleasures recommended by the BAAQMD as
outlined below. The Project contractor(s) shall comply with these dust control strategies.
Genentech shall include in construction contracts the following requirements or Ineasures shown
to be equally effective:
· Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose construction and demolition debris
from the site, or require all such trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
· Water all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces in active construction areas at least twice
daily.
· Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved
· parking areas and staging areas.
· Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved parking areas and staging areas.
· Provide daily clean-up of mud and dirt carried onto paved streets from the site.
· Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles
(dirt, sand, etc.).
928816-5
-89-
8
· Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
· Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public
roadways.
. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
· Install wheel washers for all existing trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks
and equipment leaving the site.
. Install wind breaks at the windward side(s) of construction areas.
. Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25
miles per hour over a 30-minute period or more.
· To the extent possible, limit the area subject to excavation, grading, and other dust
generating construction activity at anyone time.
MM 4.3-1 (b): Designate a dust control coordinator. All construction sites shall post in a
conspicuous location the name and phone number of a designated constnlction dust control
coordinator who can respond to complaints by suspending dust-producing activities or providing
additional personnel or equipment for dust control.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1(a) and MM 4.3-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implenlented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.3-3: Construction-related activities are generally short-ternl in duration and the
BAAQMD does not recommend any thresholds of significance for construction-related
emissions. Instead, the BAAQMD bases the detennination of significance on a consideration of
the control measures to be implemented. At this time, the only construction-related control
measures the BAAQMD recommends are those related to dust. If all appropriate emissions
control measures recommended by the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines relating to dust are
implemented for a Project, then the BAAQMD consider construction emissions to be less-than-
significant. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
Commission fmds that implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.3-1(a) and MM 4.3-1(b)
would reduce Impact 4.3-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 4.3-4: Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile sources would
result from normal day-to-day activities within the MElR Study Area. These would potentially
exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the proj ect region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).
As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce these emissions, this impact would be significant and
unavoidable.
No feasible mitigation measures available.
Finding 4.3-4: The proposed Project has incorporated certain features in its design that would
help reduce the operational emissions that would otherwise be generated. In addition, Genentech
offers employees several TDM programs. Still, the average daily emissions would exceed the
928816-5
-90-
9
thresholds of significance recommended by the BAAQMD. Although TDM and design features
have been incorporated into the proposed Project, the performance of these measures is
unknown. As there is no quantifiable and feasible mitigation to reduce these elnissions, the
Planning Commission finds that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. This impact
will be addressed further in the Statelnent of Overriding Considerations, attached to the
Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.3-5: The proposed Project would not potentially expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations. This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.3-5: As sensitive receptors would not generally be exposed to substantial pollution
concentrations, the Plmming Commission finds that, based on the entirety of the record, this
impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.3-6: Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not create objectionable
odors affecting a substantial number of people. This impact is considered less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.3-6: There would be no substantial odor impacts to on-site or off-site sensitive
receptors. Therefore, the Planning Commission fmds that, based on the entirety of the record,
this impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
NOISE AND VIBRATION
Impact 4.4-1: Construction activities associated with the proposed Proj ect would generate noise
levels that exceed the noise standards established by the SSFMC. This is considered a potentially
significant impact. However, compliance with the project requirement PR 4.4-1 and mitigation
measures and MM 4.4-1(a) through MM 4.4-1 (c) would reduce this impact. While noise levels
could still be substantial, the proposed Proj ect' s construction noise impacts would be temporary,
would not occur during recognized sleep hours, and would be consistent with the exemption for
construction noise that exists in Section 8.32.050(d) of the SSFMC. Therefore, this impact would
be considered less than significant.
PR 4.4-1: Consistent with the City's Municipal Code, Section 8.32.050(d), all construction
activity within the City shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on
weekdays, 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and
holidays, or at such other hours as may be authorized by the permit, if they meet at least one of
the following noise limitations:
(1) No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding ninety dB at
a distance of twenty- five feet. If the device is housed within a structure or trailer on
the property, the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as
close to twenty-five feet from the equipment as possible.
(2) The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not
928816-5
-91-
10
exceed ninety dB.
MM 4.4-1(a): The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following
construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce
construction noise levels:
.. Two weeks prior to the COll1ll1enCement of construction, notification must be provided to
surrounding land uses disclosing the construction schedule, including the various types of
activities that would be occurring throughout the duration of the construction period.
.. Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards.
.. Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas
away from sensitive uses, where feasible.
.. Schedule high noise-producing activities between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. to
minilnize disruption on sensitive uses.
.. Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are
not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets.
MM 4.4-1 (b): The proj ect applicant shall require by contract specifications that construction
staging areas along with the operation of earthmoving equipment within the MEIR Study Area
would be located as far away from vibration and noise sensitive sites as possible. Contract
specifications shall be included in the construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the
City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
MM 4.4-1(c): The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded
trucks used during construction would be routed away from noise- and vibration-sensitive uses,
to the extent possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the construction documents,
which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Project Requirement PR 4.4-1 and Mitigation Measures MM 4-4-1 (a) through MM 4-4-1 (c) are
hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Progrmn.
Finding 4.4-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
Commission finds that with in1plementation ofPR 4.4-1 and MM 4.4-1(a) through 4.4-1(c), this
impact would be less than significant. Construction noise that occurs during these hours is
exelnpt from the City's Noise Ordinance because these hours are outside of the recognized sleep
hours for residents, and outside of evening and early morning hours and time periods where
residents are most sensitive to exterior noise. Consequently, the Planning Commission fmds that,
based on the entirety of the record, impacts resulting from construction noise during these hours
would be less than significant. Additionally, the mitigation measures will further reduce noise
impacts on sensitive receptors where feasible.
Impact 4.4-2: Operation of the proposed Project would not expose noise-sensitive land uses off
site to noise levels that exceed the standards established by the City of South San Francisco. This
impact would be less than significant.
928816-5
-92-
11
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-2: Large HV AC systems would be the project's primary source of noise. While
occupants of the proposed childcare center on Allerton could potentially be exposed to noise
levels as high as 72 dBA CNEL, This noise level, however, will likely be substantially reduced
(perhaps by as much as 30 dBA CNEL) by several factors, including intervening structures and
the exterior-to-interior reduction. In any case, the noise level would not exceed the City's 75
dBA CNEL threshold for the land use designation for the MEIR Study Area. Furthermore, the
noise level that the proposed childcare center will experience will be further Noise levels that
would be experienced by the sensitive receptor nearest to the MEIR Study Area (Larkspur
Landing Hotel) would be below the City's 50 dBA CNEL standard for night-time use. Therefore,
based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds this
impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.4-3: Operation of the proposed Proj ect would not generate traffic that would contribute
to the exposure of persons off site to noise levels in excess of the standards. This is considered a
less-than-significant impact.
No Initigation required.
Finding 4.4-3: Traffic-related noise would increase by as much as 4.1 dBA CNEL at Project
buildout in the Year 2016, which is in excess of the 3.0 dBA CNEL threshold of significance for
traffic-related noise (see Impact 4.4-6). However, as shown in Table 4.4-10 in the FMEIR, traffic
noise levels would not exceed the 75 dBA CNEL noise limit for industrial and institutional uses.
As the proposed Project would not exceed local noise standards for the City of South San
Francisco, the Planning Commission finds that the Proj ect would not generate traffic that would
contribute to the exposure of persons off site to unacceptable noise levels, and therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.4-4: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not generate or
expose persons or structures off site to excessive groundbome vibration. However, the
construction activities may adversely affect vibration sensitive equipment within the MEIR
Study Area. Implementation oflnitigation measures MM 4.4-2(a) and MM 4.4-2(b) would
reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.4-2(a): Prior to the commencement of ground clearing activities, the Project applicant
shall conduct a preconstruction survey to determine whether the construction activities would
impact vibration sensitive equipment located in adjacent buildings within 100 feet of the
construction activity. If it is determined that no impact would occur then construction activities
shall begin and no further action need be taken.
MM 4.4-2(b): If the Proj ect applicant determines that vibration sensitive equipment has the
potential to be affected, it shall implement a construction schedule to ensure that construction
activities would occur during times when vibration sensitive equipment would not be in use.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.4-2(a) and MM 4.4-2(b) are hereby adopted and will be
928816-5
-93-
12
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.4-4: hnplementation of mitigation measure MM 4.4-2(a) would ensure that
construction related activities, including caisson drilling would not occur adjacent to existing
buildings containing vibration sensitive equipment. If construction activities were to occur
adjacent to building containing vibration sensitive equipment, mitigation measure MM 4.4-2(b)
would ensure that construction activities that could potentially impact vibration sensitive
equipment, such as pile-driving, would be scheduled such that vibration sensitive equipn1ent
would not be impacted. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the
Planning Commission finds that with implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.4-2(a) and
MM 4.4-2(b), the potentially significant impact to vibration sensitive equipment would be
reduced to a level of less than significant.
Impact 4.4-5: Operation of the proposed Project would not generate and expose sensitive
receptors on or off site to excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels. This is
considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-5: Because no substantial sources of groundbome vibration would be built as part of
the proposed Project, no vibration impacts would occur during operation of the proposed Project.
Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors on or off site
to excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels, and the Planning Commission
finds that, based on the entirety of the record, this impact would be less than significant. No
mitigation is required.
Impact 4.4-6: Operation of the proposed Project would generate increased local traffic volumes
that would cause a substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise levels in the proj ect vicinity.
This is considered a significant impact. As no feasible mitigation is available to reduce this
impact, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
No feasible mitigation available.
Finding 4.4-6 : Four roadway segments are expected to experience a significant increase over
existing conditions, with a maximum increase of 4.1 dBA CNEL, which is considered an audible
and substantial increase and would exceed the identified thresholds of significance. All other
roadway segments in the proj ect vicinity would not experience increase in traffic-related noise
above the 3.0 dBA CNEL threshold of significance. However, it should be noted these roadway
segments would not be located adjacent to any existing or proposed sensitive uses. Nonetheless,
these roadway segments would experience an increase in traffic-related noise levels in excess 3.0
dBA CNEL, which is considered a significant impact. As no feasible mitigation is available to
reduce this impact, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be significant and
unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.4-7: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in a
928816-5
-94-
13
substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels at off-site locations. However,
construction noise is exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance; thus, this impact would be less
than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-7: The construction activities associated with the proposed Proj ect would only occur
during the permitted hours designated in the SSFMC. ill addition, as discussed in Impact 4.4-1,
construction noise that occurs within the permitted time frames is exelnpt from the City's Noise
Ordinance. Due to this exemption, the Planning Commission finds that the temporary increases
in ambient noise at off-site locations associated with construction activities of the proposed
Project would be less than significant.
Impact 4.4-8: Operation of the proposed Project would not result in temporary or periodic
increases in ambient noise levels at off-site locations. There would not be a substantial temporary
or periodic increase and, thus, no impact would occur.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-8: Operation of the proposed Proj ect would not include special events or temporary
activities which would cause an increase in ambient noise levels. ill addition, operation of the
proposed Project would not require periodic use of special stationary equipment that would
expose off-site sensitive receptors to an increase in ambient noise levels above those existing
'without the proposed Proj ect. Therefore, there would be no temporary or periodic noise impacts
to off-site receptors due to operation of the proposed Proj ect. Based on the entirety of the
evidence, including the FMElR, the Planning Commission finds that no impact would occur. No
mitigation would be required.
Impact 4.4-9: The proposed Project would not expose people working in the project area to
excessive noise levels due to proximity to airport-related noise sources. No impact would occur.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-9: The MEIR Study Area is located approximately one mile from the San Francisco
illtemational Airport. Noise measurements taken on site showed the ambient levels at the site to
be 71 dBA during daytime hours and contour levels from the East of 101 Area Plan indicate that
the exposure level at the project site is less than 65 dBA CNEL. ill addition, no residences
currently, or are planned to, exist within the MEIR Study Area. Therefore, the proposed Project
would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Based
on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that no
impact would occur. No mitigation would be required.
Impact 4.4-10: The proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the project
site to excessive noise levels from a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No
impact would occur.
928816-5
-95-
14
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.4-10: The MEIR Study Area is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
Thus, no impact related to the exposure of people residing or working in the MEIR Study Area to
excessive noise levels is anticipated. Based on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR,
the Planning Commission frnds that the proposed Project would not expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels, and no impact would occur. No mitigation
would be required.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 4.5-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose people and/or
structures to potentially substantial adverse effects resulting from rupture of a known earthquake
fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic related ground failure (i.e., liquefaction), or
landsliding. Implelnentation ofproject requirements, PR 4.5-1(a) through PR 4.5-1(d) would
ensure the impact would remain less than significant.
PR 4.5-1(a): Development within the preliminary boundary of the Coyote Point hazard area, as
depicted on Figure 15 of the East of 101 Area Plan and referred to as Figure 4.5-6 in the FMEIR,
shall be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual
development sites where feasible and determined necessary by the engineer. No structure for
human occupancy shall occur within 50 feet of active faults identified as Earthquake Fault Zones
on maps prepared pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act or the Seismic
Hazards Mapping Act, unless a geotechnical investigation and report determine that no active
branches of that fault underlie the surface.
PR 4.5-1(b): New slopes greater then 5 feet in height, either cut in native soils or rock, or created
by placing fill material, shall be designed by a geotechnical engineer and should have an
appropriate factor of safety under seismic loading. If additional load is to be placed at the top of
the slope, or if extending a level area at the toe of the slope requires relnoval of part of the slope,
the proposed configuration shall be checked for an adequate factor of safety by a geotechnical
engineer, based on applicable codes and professional standards,.
PR 4.5-1(c): The surface offill slopes shall be cOlnpacted during construction to reduce the
likelihood of surficial sloughing. The surface of cut or fill slopes shall also be protected from
erosion due to precipitation or runoffby introducing a vegetative cover on the slope or by other
means. Runoff from paved or other parts of the slope shall be directed away from the slope.
PR 4.5-1(d): Steep hillside areas in excess of30 percent grade shall be retained in their natural
state. Development of hillside sites should follow existing contours to the greatest extent possible
and grading should be kept to a minimum.
The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.5-1(a) through PR 4.5-1(d) is more fully
described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.5-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
928816-5
-96-
15
Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. The proj ect site is not located
within an Earthquake Fault Zone, and no known active or potentially active faults traverse the
Genentech Campus. Because ground rupture generally only occurs at the location of a fault, and
no active faults have been identified in the MEIR Study Area, the Area would not be subj ect to a
substantial risk of ground surface rupture. Compliance with PR 4.5-1(a) through (d) will ensure
that this impact remains less than significant by requiring the applicant to prepare geotechnical
reports, and provide design recommendations in response to any identified hazard. Continued
compliance with the California Building Code, as well as applicable provisions of the Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, and following identified
proj ect requirements will ensure that this impact remains less than significant.
Impact 4.5-2: The construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.5-2: All construction activities will be required to comply with California Building
Code, Chapter 18, which regulates excavation activities and the construction of foundations and
retaining walls, as well as Chapter 33, which regulates grading, including drainage and erosion
control. Additionally, given the other construction requirements discussed in the FMEIR and
these findings, specifically, Impacts 4.3-3 (dust control) and 4.13-1 (drainage and erosion
control) construction and operation of the Project will not result in a substantial loss of topsoil.
Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that
substantial erosion is unlikely to occur, and therefore, this impact would be considered to be less
than significant. No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.5-3: The proposed Project would not expose people or structures to on-site or off-site
landslides, lateral spreading, ground subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Implementation of
project requirements PR 4.5-2(a) and 4.5-2(b) would ensure this impact remains less than
significant.
PR 4.5-2(a): The City shall assess the need for geotechnical investigations on a project-by
proj ect basis on sites in areas of fill as depicted on the East of 101 Area Plan, Figure 17 and
referred to as Figure 4.5-7 in the FMEIR, and shall require such investigations where needed.
PR 4.5-2(b): Where fill remains under a proposed structure, project developers shall design and
construct appropriate foundations.
The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.5-2(a) and PR 4.5-2(b) is more fully
described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.5-3: Adherence to the City's codes and policies and following the identified Proj ect
Requirements would ensure the maximum practicable protection available for users of the
project and would result in a less than-significant impact. Pursuant to the City's permitting
process, the applicant will need to prepare geotechnical reports, which identify any potentially
unsuitable soil conditions, and if necessary, apply measures to eliminate these conditions.
Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
928816-5
-97-
16
Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.5-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in construction of
facilities on expansive soils, and would not create a substantial risk to people and structures. This
is considered a less-than-significant ilnpact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.5-4: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that identification of expansive soils before construction and implementation
of appropriate design measures, as required by the Uniform Building Code and California
Building Code, would ensure that foundations and structures would provide an adequate level of
protection according to current seisnlic and geotechnical engineering practice to provide
adequate safety levels, as defined in the California Building Code, Uniform Building Code, and
the East of 101 Plan Geotechnical Safety Element, and as subjected to structural peer review.
Therefore, no substantial risk to people or structures with respect to expansive soils would result.
Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission fmds that this ilnpact .
would be less than significant, and no lnitigation is required.
Impact 4.5-5: The Project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systelns. There would be no impact associated
with this effect.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.5-5: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that because no septic tanks or alternative wastewater systenls are proposed,
there are no effects associated with soils incapable of adequately supporting these systems and
no additional analysis is required. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning
Commission finds that there would be no impact associated with this impact.
HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUSMATE~S
Impact 4.6-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose Genentech elnployees
or the nearby public to significant hazards, due to the routine transport, use, disposal, or storage
of hazardous materials (including chemical, radioactive, and biohazardous waste). This is
considered a less-than-significant impact.
No nlitigation required.
Finding 4.6-1: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds as follows: While the proposed Project would result in the development of
additional laboratories and other research facilities that would use, store, or require the
transportation and disposal of hazardous materials, as well as a limited increase in the average
population that could be exposed to hazardous materials risks, compliance with Genentech
programs, practices, and procedures and safety standards related to the use, disposal, and
928816-5
-98-
17
transport of hazardous materials and wastes, and the safety procedures mandated by applicable
federal, state, and local laws and regulations (RCRA, Califonua Hazardous Waste Control Law,
and principles prescribed by the USDHS) would ensure that risks resulting from the routine use
of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous wastes remain less than significant.
In addition, safety programs reduce the risk of exposure to biohazardous and chemical hazardous
materials by establishing protocols to safely handle and store hazardous substances, which
ensures that a less-than-significant impact would occur. Genentech ensures that their facilities
are in compliance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 17) and conditions of the
radioactive materials license, and the utilization of radiation use authorizations and ongoing
training regarding radiation safety also reduce the risks from radiation-related use or disposal on-
site, thereby ensuring that a less-than-significant impact would occur. In addition, the CHP and
USDOT strictly regulate hazardous materials transportation to and from the site.
Although implelnentation of the proposed Proj ect would expose more people to potential
hazards, safety procedures mandated by federal and state laws and regulations, as previously
described, as well as the continuation of existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices,
and procedures would ensure that the use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials does not
expose employees, visitors or the nearby public to significant health or safety risks. As part of
implementation of the proposed Project, federal and state law, as well as all Genentech
procedures for handling hazardous wastes, would be extended to all new facilities developed
under the proposed Proj ect. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission
finds that the potential impact of increased hazardous chemical, radioactive material, and
biohazardous material use at Genentech would remain less than significant. No mitigation is
required.
Impact 4.6-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose construction workers or
Genentech employees to a significant hazard through the renovation or demolition of buildings,
or relocation of underground utilities, that contain hazardous Inaterials. This is considered a less-
than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.6-2: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that compliance with federal and state health and safety laws and regulations,
as well as following existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices, and procedures,
would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Pursuant to federal and state
regulations, federal and local government agencies must be notified prior to the renovation or
demolition of any structure that could potentially disturb asbestos. These regulations further
require use of precautions and safe work practices to eliminate or reduce the risk of asbestos
exposure. Similar programs exist for reducing lead exposure. Additionally, Genentech's
comprehensive asbestos management program, which includes regular surveys, annual
notifications, signage, and notification to all employees, will help further reduce these risks.
Genentech's programs and practices with respect to demolition of buildings containing
biohazardous materials, including medical waste, will also operate to ensure that this impact
remains less than significant. Consequently, the Planning Commission finds that Impact 4.6-2 is
928816-5
-99-
18
a less-than-significant impact.
Impact 4.6-3: Implelnentation of the proposed Proj ect would not create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. This is considered a less-than-
significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.6-3: Genentech progralns, practices, and procedures specifically govern receipt of
hazardous materials at Genentech. Additionally, the USDOT Office of Hazardous Materials
Safety prescribes strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, as
described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and implemented by Title 13 of the
California Code of Regulations. fu addition to transport of hazardous materials to and froln the
Genentech facility, the movement of hazardous materials also occurs among Genentech
facilities. Genentech's various business units exercise appropriate practices to prevent against the
risks of accidental spills or releases of hazardous materials during internal transfers and
movement of these materials. If a spill occurs, the Genentech First Alert Team (FAT) would be
immediately notified. If required, the area of potential affect would be isolated and evacuated as
appropriate in accordance with the futegrated Contingency Plan to reduce the potential for
human exposure and to allow for prompt and effective cleallUp by the Genentech F AT, an
eInergency response contractor, or the appropriate regulatory agency. Furthermore, Compliance
with all applicable federal and state laws and existing Genentech programs, practices, and
procedures related to the storage of hazardous materials will continue to be implemented to
maximize containment. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that compliance with federal and state health and safety laws and regulations,
as well as following existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices, and procedures,
would ensure that this inlpact remains less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.6-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not create a significant risk of
exposure of Genentech employees and construction workers to contalninated soil or
groundwater. Implementation of mitigation measure, MM 4.6-1 would ensure this impact
remains less than significant.
MM 4.6-1: While not expected to occur on-site, if contaminated soil and/or groundwater is
encountered during the removal of on-site debris or during excavation and/or grading activities,
the construction contractor(s) shall stop work and immediately inform the appropriate Genentech
representative. An on-site assessment shall be conducted to determine if the discovered materials
pose a significant risk to the public or construction workers. If the materials are determined to
pose such a risk, a remediation plan shall be prepared and submitted to comply with applicable
legal requirements to assure the proper handling and management of contaminated soil and/or
debris, and the protection of human health and the environment for the new building. Soil
remediation methods could include, but are not necessarily limited to, excavation alld on-site
treatment, excavation and off-site treatment or disposal, and/or treatment without excavation.
Remediation alternatives for cleanup of contaminated groundwater could include, but are not
928816-5
-100-
19
necessarily limited to, on-site treatment, extraction and off-site treatment, and/or disposal. The
construction schedule shall be modified or delayed to ensure that construction will not inhibit
remediation activities and will not expose the public or construction workers to significant risks
associated with hazardous conditions.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.6-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.6-4: Pursuant to the California Water Code, the Regional Water Quality Control
Board issues Waste Discharge Requirements to control discharges (including groundwater) to
land or water. Additionally, MM 4.6-1 would require that Genentech follow specific procedures
in the unlikely event that contaminated groundwater is discovered during construction activities
to ensure that the risk of exposure to Genentech employees or construction workers renlains less
than significant. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
Commission finds that implementation ofMM 4.6-1 would ensure that this impact remains less
than significant by providing specific procedures to follow in the event that contaminated soil
and/or groundwater is discovered.
Impact 4.6-5: The proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school. There would be no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.6-5: CEQA Appendix G specifically identifies schools as an area of concern for
exposure to hazardous materials, apparently distinguishing schools from other areas where
children may congregate such as childcare centers, parks, and playgrounds. There are no existing
schools within one-quarter mile of the MEIR Study Area. There are existing and planned child
centers within the MEIR Study Area, but no schools. The MEIR Study Area is located in an area
zoned for industrial uses only. Thus, no school can be proposed within one-quarter mile of the
MEIR Study Area. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that
there would be no impact. No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.6-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in construction of
facilities on a site containing hazardous materials, and thus would not create a significant hazard
to the public or environment. Following MM 4.6-1 would ensure that this impact remains less
than significant.
Finding 4.6-6: The EDR Report identifies the locations of known hazardous materials sites on-
site based upon a review of federal, state, and county hazardous waste lists and databases
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The lists and databases include, but are not
limited to, the Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substances Site
List (Cortese List), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) database, and the
California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS).
These lists and databases contain information about asbestos waste, underground storage tanks,
928816-5
-101-
20
photo processing chemicals, PCBs, unspecified solvent and organic mixture wastes, unspecified
aqueous solution, metal sludge, other hazardous materials monitored by statute or regulation,
known releases of hazardous substances, and locations where radioactive or other hazardous
materials are stored or used.
There are no listed contaminated soil or groundwater sites on-site; however, there are on-site
active or inactive Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) included on the lists and databases, as
well as locations where hazardous materials are stored and/or used. These USTs conform to
applicable federal, state, and local regulations and are registered and permitted by the SSFFD. If
future UST-related cleanup were determined to be necessary, all work would be performed in
accordance with appropriate guidelines of the regional Underground Storage Tank Program. All
non-UST hazardous waste storage locations are managed in accordance with all applicable
federal and state laws, such as RCRA and the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, as well
as with all existing Genentech programs, practices, and procedures described in Section 4.6.3
(Existing Conditions) and Section 4.6.4 (Regulatory Framework) of the FMEIR. Based on the
FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that compliance
with federal and state law, as well as implementation ofMM 4.6-1, which would require an on-
site assessment if contaminated soil or groundwater were to be discovered, would ensure that this
impact remains less than significant.
Impact 4.6-7: The proposed Project is located within an airport land use plan; however, the
proposed Proj ect would not result in a safety hazard for people working in the proj ect area. There
would be no impact.
No nlitigation required.
Finding 4.6-7: The MEIR Study Area is located within two Iniles of the San Francisco
International Airport. Both the existing and the proposed Genentech R&D Overlay District areas
are within the San Francisco International Airport Flight Zone and are subject to the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Airpoli Height Limits established in the San Mateo County
Airport Land Use Plan. In addition to FAA standards, the 2006 FMPU keeps a maximum
building height limitation of 150 feet above ground level on buildings within the MEIR Study
Area, which is in compliance with the FAA standards. Based on the entirety of the record,
including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. No
mitigation is required.
Impact 4.6-8: The proposed Project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would
pose no safety hazard for people residing or working in the proj ect area.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.6-8: No private airstrips are located in the vicinity of the MEIR Study Area.
Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds there would be no impact.
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.6-9: Implementation of the proposed Project would not impair implementation
928816-5
-102-
21
of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plan.
Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.6-2(a) and 4.6-2(b) would ensure this impact
remains less than significant.
MM 4.6-2(a): To the extent feasible, the Project applicant shall maintain at least one
unobstructed lane in both directions on the site's roadways. At any time only a single lane is
available, Genentech shall provide a telnporary traffic signal, signal carriers (i.e., flagpersons), or
other appropriate traffic controls to allow travel in both directions. If construction activities
require the complete closure of a roadway segment, Genentech shall provide appropriate signage
indicating alternative routes.
MM 4.6-2(b): To ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles when construction Projects
would result in temporary lane or roadway closures, the Project applicant shall consult with the
South San Francisco Police and Fire Departments to disclose temporary lane or roadway closures
and alternative travel routes.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.6-2(a) and MM 4.4-2(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.6-9: Construction and operation activities associated with development under the
proposed proj ect could potentially affect emergency response or evacuation plans due to
temporary construction barricades or other obstructions that could impede emergency access on-
site. However, through implelnentation ofMM 4.6-2(a), multiple emergency access or
evacuation routes would be provided on-site to ensure that in the event one roadway or travel
lane is temporarily blocked, another may be utilized. Furthennore, ongoing coordination between
Genentech and local agencies pursuant to MM 4.6-2(b) would ensure that roadway or travel lane
closures will be coordinated with emergency response personnel to ensure that individual
development proj ects under the 2006 FMPU would not impair implementation of, or physically
interfere with, emergency response and evacuation efforts. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety
of the record before it, the Planning Con1IDission finds that implementation ofMM 4.6-2(a) and
MM 4.6-2(b) ensures that impacts associated with emergency response or evacuation would
remain less than significant by providing multiple emergency access or evacuation routes and
coordinating roadway or travel lane closures with emergency response personnel.
Impact 4.6-10: The proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires. There would be no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.6-10: The MEIR Study Area is highly developed, and no wildlands are intermixed
within this urbanized area. The MEIR Study Area is bordered by developed land to the north,
east, and south. To the west is the San Francisco Bay. No wildlands are directly adjacent to the
MEIR Study Area. The closest wildlands area, San Bruno Mountain County Park, is located
approximately one mile away. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds there would be no
impact. No mitigation is required.
928816-5
-103-
22
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact 4.7-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at
Oyster Point Boulevard/U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This
would be a significant impact. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures MM 4.7-
l(a) (included in the East of 101 plan) and 4.7-1(b) would reduce the impact; however, it would
not reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. There are no additional feasible mitigation
measures that can be implemented to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Therefore this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
MM 4.7-1(a): Oyster Point BoulevardlU.S. 101 NB On-Ramp (East of 1013):
" Create additional westbound right-turn lane.
MM 4.7-1(b): Oyster Point Boulevard/U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp:
" Add an additional lane on northbound Dubuque Avenue between the D.S.101 Ramps
intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. Reconfigure the northbound approach to Oyster
Point Boulevard to provide two exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and
two exclusive right turn lanes. As part of this widening, eliminate the left turn lane on the
southbound Dubuque Avenue approach to the U.S.101 Ramps intersection (which serves
mini warehouse facilities) and allow southbound left turns from the southbound through
lane. This will allow provision of five full northbound travel lanes on Dubuque Avenue
between the northbound Off-Ramp intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard.
" Adjust signal timing.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1(a) and MM 4.7-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For mitigation
measure MM 4.7-1(a), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation by paying the East of 101
traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Genentech will be responsible for
funding its fair share (as determined by the City Engineer) of the implementation (including
design, approval, and construction) ofMM 4.7-1(b).
Finding 4.7-1: After implenlentation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Oyster Point
Boulevard/U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp intersection would still operate at an unacceptable level
during the P.M. peak hour. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be
implemented to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, based on the
FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that despite
inlplementation ofMM 4.7-1(a) and MM 4.7-1(b) tIns impact would remain significant and
unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.7-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. peak hour, and LOS F
during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the
3 :Mitigation measures that are taken from the East of 101 Study have ''East of 101" in parentheses.
928816-5
-104-
23
identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-2 would reduce this ilnpact to a less-than-significant level
in the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant.
MM 4.7-2: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard:
· Create an additional through lane on westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach.
· After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the Oyster Point
Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours would be
reduced to less than significant, as the intersection would operate at LOS D with an
average delay of 48.5 seconds during both periods. Genentech would be responsible for
its fair share contribution (as detern1ined by the City Engineer) towards the
in1plementation of this measure. As shown in Table 4.7-20(a), analysis of this
intersection and proposed mitigation measures using the Synchro software, also
demonstrates that with mitigation, operation at this intersection will be reduced to an
acceptable LOS D.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech will be responsible for funding its fair
share (as determined by the City Engineer) of the ilnplementation (including design, approval,
and construction) of the mitigation measure, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000
cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments
shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the
1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows.
Finding 4.7-2: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours
would be reduced to acceptable levels of service. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the
entirety of the record before it, the Planning COlllinission finds that with the implementation of
MM 4.7-2 this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection during the A.M. peak hour, and LOS F during the
P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified
mitigation measure MM 4.7-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-3: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive (East of 101):
· Widen northbound Gull Drive to provide two left-turn lanes and one through/right-shared
lane and adjust signal timing;
. Existing signal modification.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-3 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation
by paying the East of 101 traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit.
Finding 4.7-3: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection would be reduced to less than significant. During
928816-5
-105-
24
the A.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS D with an average delay of 44.7
seconds. During the P.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS C with an average
delay of33.5 seconds. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it,
the Plamling Commission finds that with the implementation of MM 4.7-3 this impact would be
less than significant.
Impact 4.7-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Gull
Drive/Forbes Boulevard intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant
impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-4 would reduce
this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-4: Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard:
· The existing westbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured to be a right-
turn only lane;
· The westbound right-turn Inovement 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.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-4 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech will be solely responsible for funding
of the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of the mitigation measure.
Design of improvement shall begin prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative
square feet of developnlent approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payment or construction
shall be completed prior to issuance of building permit for 1,400,000 cumulative square feet of
new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan.
Finding 4.7-4: After implelnentation of the identified mitigation measure, this intersection
would operate at an acceptable LOS D (37.9 second delay) during the P.M. peak hour. Therefore,
based on the entirety of the record including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission hereby finds
that after iInplenlentation of the proposed mitigation measure, the proposed Project's impact at
this location would be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-5: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at
Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a
significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-5
could reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level if the entire mitigation measure was
feasible.
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
928816-5
-106-
25
· Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck traffic on
westbound Grand Avenue
· Existing signal modification
The widening of Grand Avenue, as proposed in Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-5 is infeasible due
to the effect that the expansion of the right of way would have on the businesses located on either
side of the street. Such an expansion would require acquisition of a substantial portion of the
business owners' property. Therefore, improvements to Grand Avenue will not be implemented.
The infeasibility of this portion of the Mitigation Measure will be addressed further in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
The remainder of improvements identified in MM 4.7-5 are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall
satisfy its fair share obligation by paying the East of 101 traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a
building permit.
Finding 4.7-5: Those improvements to Airport Boulevard, as identified in MM 4.7-5, will be
implemented in accordance with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Such
improvements, including re-striping of existing southbound Airport Boulevard right turn lane to
a shared through-right lane, and the southbound shared through-left lane to a left turn lane, will
reduce the severity of the impact at this intersection. However, due to the infeasibility of the
proposed Grand Avenue improvements, this intersection is expected to operate at an
unacceptable level. Because the identified mitigation measure for this impact cannot be feasibly
ilnplelnented in its entirety, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact
will be addressed further in the Statelnent of Overriding Considerations, attached to the
Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.7-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at East
Grand A venuelHarbor Master Road/F orbes Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak
hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation
measure MM 4.7-6(a) and 4.7-6 (b) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-6(a): East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master RoadIForbes 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 AvenuelHarbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard:
928816-5
-107-
26
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 and
southbound right-turn overlap.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-6(a) and MM 4.7-6(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For MM 4.7-
6(a), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through paYInent of the East of 101 fee prior
to issuance of a building pernlit. For MM 4.7 -6(b), Genentech shall pay its "fair share"
contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,500,000
cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments
shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the
1,500,000 cumulative square feet of new developlnent that the particular building permit allows.
Finding 4.7-6: After inlplementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation measures and
mitigation measure MM 4.7 -6(b), the Planning COlTIlnission finds, based on the entire record,
that the impact at the East Grand A venue/Harbor Master RoadlF orbes Boulevard intersection
would be reduced to less than significant. During both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, this
intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS D with an average delay of 43.3 seconds.
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 P.M. peak hours. This would be
a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation nleasure MM 4.7-7
would reduce this impact to less than significant.
MM 4.7-7: East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue (East of 101):
. New signal installation
. Signal interconnection installation
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-7 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progrmn. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share contribution
through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit.
Finding 4.7-7: By applying the previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the
proposed Project's impact would be less than significant at this location. After mitigation, the
intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS ofB in both the A.M. (lOA second delay) and
P.M. hours (17.3 second delay). Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the
FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation of the identified mitigation
measure, this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 4.7-8: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at East
Grand A venue/Grandview Drive intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This would be
a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measures MM 4.7-
8( a) and 4.7 -8(b) would reduce this impact to less than significant.
MM 4.7-8(a): East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (East of 101):
928816-5
-108-
27
. 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.
MM 4.7-8(b): East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive:
· 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
require less green time, 4 creating more available green time for the eastbound approach.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-8(a) and MM 4.7-8(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For MM 4.7-
8ea), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior
to issuance of a building permit. Genentech is solely responsible for implementation of MM 4.7-
8(b). Therefore, for this mitigation measures, Genentech shall pay for full implementation prior
to issuance of building permit for 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved
pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based
on the proportionate share of the 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the
particular building permit allows.
Finding 4.7-8: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that after implementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation
measures and mitigation measure 4.7 -8(b), the impact at the East Grand A venue/Grandview
Drive intersection would be reduced to less than significant. During the A.M. peak hour, this
intersection would operate at LOS B with an average delay of 18.7 seconds. During the P.M. peak
hour, this intersection would operate at LOS C with an average delay of 20.1 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 P.M. peak
hour. TIns would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation
measure MM 4.7-9 would reduce this impact to less than significant.
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
4 "Green time" is the amount of green light allotted to any given phase at a traffic signal,
928816-5
-109-
28
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-9 is hereby adopted and will be ilnplemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share contribution
through paYlnent of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit.
Finding 4.7-9: After inlplementation of the identified mitigation measure, this intersection
would operate at an acceptable LOS D (38.2 second delay) in the P.M. peak hour. Based on the
entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that by applying the
previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the proposed Proj ect' s impact would
be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-10: hnplementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at
South Airport/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a
significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-10
would reduce this impact to less than significant.
MM 4.7-10: South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (East of 101):
. Widen eastbound Airport Boulevard to add one additional right-turn lane; re-shipe 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
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-10 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation
through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building pennit.
Finding 4.7-10: After ilnplementation of the identified Initigation measure, this impact would
operate at an acceptable LOS D (38.2 second delay) in the P.M. peak hour. Based on the entirety
of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that by applying the
mitigation measure previously identified by the East of 101 Study, the proposed Project's impact
would be less than significant at this location.
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 substantial safety risks. This
would be a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission
finds that hnpact 4.7-11 would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.
928816-5
-110-
29
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) U.S. 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.
No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding 4.7-12: In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to-capacity ratios for the
U.S. 101 mainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new freeway would need to be
constructed. Given the location of this segment of the U.S. 101, and its close proximity to the
surrounding developlnent, such widening or new construction is not possible. Additionally, this
mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would
benefit. For these reasons, mitigation of Impact 4.7-12 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA
S 21061.1, which states that "economic. . . and technological factors" are to be taken into
account when determining feasibility. Additionally, potential mitigation measures to reduce this
ilnpact would require approval from outside agencies. The South San Francisco's General Plan
Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[a ]ccept LOS E or F after finding that: There
is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The uses resulting in
the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit." Thus, based on the entirety of the
record, the Planning Commission finds that no feasible mitigation measures exist that would
reduce Impact 4.7-12 to a level of less than significant, and therefore, this impact would remain
significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.7-13: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at
Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue U.S. 101 Off-Ramp during the A.M. peak hour. This would be
a significant impact. However, ilnplementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-13
would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-13: Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue Off-Ramp:
· Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe
(reconfigure) of the eastbound Grand Avenue approach from an existing exclusive right
turn land and a shared through/left turn lane to provide an exclusive left turn land and a
shared through/right turn lane.
· Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe
(reconfigure) of the southbound Airport Boulevard approach from an existing left, shared
through/left turn, exclusive through and exclusive right turn lane configuration to provide
two exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and a shared through/right turn
lane.
. Adjust signal timing.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-13 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its
"fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit
for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master
928816-5
-111-
30
Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate
share of the 1,000,000 cUlTIulative square feet of new development that the particular building
permit allows.
Finding 4.7-13: After implementation of the proposed nlitigation measure, the Airport
Boulevard/Grand Avenue Off-Ramp would operate at an acceptable LOS D (49.9 second delay)
during the A.M. peak hour. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning
Commission finds this impact would be considered less than significant after mitigation.
Impact 4.7-14: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-RmTIp during the A.M.
and P.M. peak hours. TIns would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the
identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-14 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant
level.
The proposed Project would degrade the baseline operation from an acceptable LOS D to an
unacceptable LOS E at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over
Off-Ramp during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-14,
however, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
MM 4.7-14: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard/U.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp:
.. Adjust signal tilning.
.. Implement MM 4.7-2.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-14 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its
"fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit
for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master
Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate
share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building
permit allows.
Finding 4.7-14: After implenlentation of the proposed mitigation measure, the Oyster Point
Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp would operate at an acceptable
LOS D (52.1 second delay) during the A.M. peak hour and an acceptable LOS D (41.0 second
delay) during the P.M. peak hour. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the
FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be considered less than
significant after mitigation.
928816-5
-112-
31
Impact 4.7-15: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic at the already
unacceptable Oyster Point BoulevardlDubuque AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp by more than two
percent. This would be a significant impact. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure
MM 4.7-15 would reduce the impact, however, not to a less-than-significant level. There are no
additional feasible mitigation measures that can be ilnplemented to reduce this impact to a less-
than-significant level. Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
The proposed Proj ect would increase traffic volume at the Oyster Point BoulevardlDubuque
AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp by more than two percent (12.7%) during the P.M. peak hour.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-15, however, would reduce this impact to a still-
significant LOS E. Therefore, this ilnpact is considered significant and unavoidable.
MM 4.7-15: Oyster Point BoulevardlDubuque AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp:
ell Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the addition
of a second exclusive right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach.
ell Implement MM 4.7-1 (b).
ell Adjust signal timing.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its
"fair share" contribution, as detennined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit
for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master
Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate
share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building
permit allows.
Finding 4.7-15: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact will
be reduced, however not to a less-than-significant level; operations at this location would still
exceed the City's thresholds. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be
implemented to reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would be
considered significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement
of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.7-16: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic by more than one
percent (12.1 %) at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue off-ramp, where baseline 95th
percentile queuing is already Projected at unacceptable lengths. This would be a significant
impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-16 would reduce
the impact to a less-than-significant level.
The proposed Project would increase traffic at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue off-ramp by
more than one percent (12.1 %). Because the Projected baseline 95th percentile queuing at this
off-ramp is already at an unacceptable length, this would be considered a significant impact.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-16, however, would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
MM 4.7-16: Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue:
928816-5
-113-
32
. Implement measures identified in Mitigation Measure 4.7-13.
· Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards an exclusive
right turn lane on the southbound Airport Boulevard approach to Miller Avenue.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-16 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation
through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit.
Finding 4.7-16: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the queuing will be
less than the 95th percentile. In accordance with the City's identified thresholds of significance,
the 12.1 % increase will no longer be considered significant. Therefore, based on the entirety of
the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be
considered less than significant after mitigation.
Impact 4.7-17: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic by more than one
percent during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours (8.5% and 12.7%, respectively) at the Oyster
Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue off-ramp, where baseline 95th percentile queuing is already
proj ected at unacceptable lengths. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation
of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-1 7 would reduce the impact to a less-than-
significant level.
The proposed Project would increase traffic at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue off-
ramp by more than one percent during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours (8.5% and 12.7%,
respectively). Because the Projected baseline 95th percentile queuing at this off-ramp is ah"eady
at an unacceptable length, this would be considered a significant impact. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.7 -1 7, however, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
MM 4.7-17: Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue:
. Implement measures identified in Mitigation Measure 4.7-15.
. Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe
of the U.S. 101 NB Off-Ramp approach to Dubuque Avenue from an existing exclusive
left, shared through/left and exclusive right turn lane to provide two exclusive left turn
lanes and a shared through/right turn lane.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-17 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its
"fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit
for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master
Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate
share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building
permit allows.
Finding 4.7-17: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the queuing will be
less than the 95th percentile. In accordance with the City's identified thresholds of significance,
the percentage increase will no longer be considered significant. Therefore, based on the entirety
928816-5c
-114-
33
of the record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be considered less than
significant after mitigation.
Impact 4.7-18: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the
northbound off-ran1p to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the
A.M. peak: hour. This would be a significant impact. To the extent that MM 4.7-18 can be feasibly
implemented, this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. However, if MM 4.7-
18 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
The proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque
Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be
considered a significant impact.
MM 4.7-18: Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue:
.. Provide a fair-share contribution, as determined by City Engineer, to provision of a
second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Dubuque
Avenue off-ramp.
Proposed Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-18 is infeasible for the reasons stated below, and those set
forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Therefore, this Mitigation Measure will not be implemented.
Finding 4.7-18: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the
northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue would not increase past unacceptable levels. However,
as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting Dubuque Avenue east
of its current location, in1plementation of the mitigation measure would require an expansion of
the right of way, and have a substantial effect on adjacent businesses. Given these specific
economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-18 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See
Pub. Resources Code 9 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . .
taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an
obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic and technological concerns,
against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code 9 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA
Guidelines, 9 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic and technological concerns render a particular
mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources
Code 9 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that
would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, and based on the entire record, the
Planning Commission finds that the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This
impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the
Resolution as ExhibitF.
Impact 4.7-19: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the
southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128
vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. To
the extent that MM 4.7-19 can be feasibly implemented, this impact would be reduced to a less-
than-significant level. However, ifMM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact
would remain significant and unavoidable.
928816-5
-115-
34
The proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to
Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the
A.M. peak hour. This would be considered a significant ilnpact.
MM 4.7-19: Southbound Fly-Over Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard:
.. Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the
construction ofa second southbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101
mainline at the Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp.
Proposed Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-19 is infeasible for the reasons stated below, and those set
forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Therefore, this Mitigation Measure will not be implemented.
Finding 4.7-19: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the
southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard would not increase
past unacceptable levels. However, implementation ofMM 4.7-19 would require the relocation
of at least one support column for the Oyster Point flyover ranlp. Such relocation is not feasible
given the expense and geometrics of the right of ways. In light of these specific econolnic and
technological concerns, MM 4.7-19 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources
Code S 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account
economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the has an obligation to balance public
objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub.
Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic
concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the
measure. (See Pub. Resources Code 9 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no
feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, and
based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the impact would relnain
significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F.
Impact 4.7-20: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the
northbound off-ranlp to South Airport Boulevard/Wondercolor Lane intersection from 1,807
vehicles up to 2,031 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour-a 12% increase. This would be a
significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-20
would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-20: Northbound off-ramp to South Airport Boulevard/Wondercolor Lane:
.. Provide a fair-share contribution towards the provision of a second northbound
off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the South Airport off-ramp.
(This measure is already programmed as part of the East of 101 capital
improvement program).
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-20 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation
through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit.
928816-5
-116-
35
Finding 4.7-20: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the
northbound off-ramp to South Airport Boulevard/W ondercolor Lane would not increase past
unacceptable levels. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the
Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant after mitigation.
Impact 4.7-21: hnplementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the
northbound off-ramp to East Grand A venue/Executive Drive intersection from 1,666 vehicles up
to 2,065 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour-a 24% increase. This would be a significant
impact. Implementation ofMM 4.7-21 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.7-21: Northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive:
· Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the
construction ofa second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101
mainline at the East Grand Avenue off-ramp.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-21 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its
"fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit
for 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master Plan.
Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of
the 750,000 cumulative square feet of new developlnent that the particular building permit
allows.
Finding 4.7-21: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that after implementation of the proposed Initigation measure, traffic at the
northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive would not increase past
unacceptable levels. Therefore, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure, the
Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-22: hnplenlentation of the proposed Project would not cause an increase in transit
use that is substantial in relation to existing transit conditions. This impact is less than
significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.7-22: When implemented, enhanced shuttles, as described in the FMEIR, 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 be accommodated. Therefore,
based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that his
impact is less than significant.
Impact 4.7-23: hnplementation of the proposed Project would not result in inadequate parking
capacity. This impact is less than significant.
No mitigation required.
928816-5
-117-
36
Finding 4.7-23: Genentech is expected to create a daily parking demand of approximately
10,204 spaces in the 2015 Future Plus Proj ect 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. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including
the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-24: 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.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.7-24: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that in consideration of the Proj ect' s compatibility with surrounding uses and
the incorporation of design features to ensure traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle safety, the inlpact
would be less than significant.
Impact 4.7-25: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in inadequate
emergency access. This impact is less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.7-25: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds that in consideration of the incorporated design features to ensure adequate
enlergency access, the Proj ect would have a less-than-significant impact upon emergency access.
Impact 4.7-26: 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.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.7-26: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning
Commission finds as follows: ill 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 Proj ect would result in a less than significant
effect upon these alternative transportation modes. Since the City has a TDM ordinance and
requires implementation ofTDM programs, development of the Project would result in a less-
than-significant impact on alternative transportation as the Project is expected to exceed the
City's TDM requirements.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Impact 4.8-1: The proposed Project would not physically divide an established community.
There would be no impact.
928816-5
-118-
37
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.8-1: Existing and future uses within the MEIR Study Area include commercial,
manufacturing and research and development activities. These uses are consistent with existing
land uses in the surrounding area, which include industrial, warehouse, cOlnmercial and research
and development activities. No residential structures currently occupy the existing project site,
and they are not permitted in the East of 101 Area. Further, the Proj ect will not entail any
residential development. No existing business or residential community would be displaced by
the proposed Proj ect. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that
there would be no impact. No mitigation required.
Impact 4.8-2: The proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the proposed Proj ect (including, but not limited
to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, this impact is considered
less than significant.
No lnitigation required.
Finding 4.8-2: Developlnent standards relating to building height, Floor Area Ratio and parking
within the 2006 FMPU are not consistent with the Planned fudustrial District regulations.
However, as identified in the 2006 FMPU, the Genentech Campus development standards have
been designed to reflect the current Genentech R&D Overlay standards. The Planning
Commission is concurrently recommending approval of Genentech's application to expand the
R&D Overlay District to include the Genentech property currently within the boundaries of the
underlying Planned fudustrial District. As such, any future Project-related development in the
existing Planned fudustrial District would be subject to the expanded Genentech R&D Overlay
District standards. As the proposed Proj ect is consistent with the Genentech R&D Overlay
District, the fact that potential impacts associated with the proposed Proj ects are not consistent
with the P- I District standards would be less than significant. Therefore, based on the entire
record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be a less-than-significant impact.
Impact 4.8-3: The proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or plan or natural community conservation plan. There would be no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.8-3: No natural community plan or applicable habitat conservation plan are located
within the MEIR Study Area and the MEIR Study Area does not contain any critical or sensitive
habitat. Impacts to potential biological resources are addressed in Section 4.1 (Biological
Resources) of the FMEIR. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds
there would be no impact. No mitigation required.
AESTHETICS
928816-5
-119-
38
Impact 4.9-1: Implementation of the proposed Proj ect would not result in a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista. Implenlentation of the project requirement PR 4.9-1 would ensure this
impact remains less than significant.
PR 4.9-1: Future development within the West Campus shall be constructed so as not to obstruct
existing views of San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill and the associated "Wind
Chimes" sculpture, from areas west of the Genentech Campus, including U.S. 101. Open space
areas and new roadways shall be designed to provide views of these resources.
The implementation of Project Requirement PR 4.9-1 is more fully described in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.9-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the PlaIming
Commission finds that proposed development would not substantially alter or obstruct existing
views of the San Francisco Bay, San Bruno Mountains, Point San Bruno Hill, or the "Wind
Chime" or "Wind Harp" sculpture. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that this impact
would be less than significant.
Impact 4.9-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial adverse
effect on scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway. There is no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.9-2: The Genentech Campus is built on and around Point San Bruno Hill-the highest
point in the East of 101 Area-with views overlooking San Francisco Bay and many major
landmarks in the Bay Area. Sections of Bay Area Interstate-280 (1-280), Interstate-580 (1-580),
and Interstate-680 (1-680) have been designated as scenic corridors under the State Scenic
Highway program but do not provide motorists with expansive or continuous, uninterrupted
views of the Bay. None of these designated highways is in the vicinity of the Genentech Campus.
The closest scenic highway is 1-280, which runs north-south more than 5 miles to the west of the
Genentech Campus. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that
there are no impacts to resources within a scenic highway.
Impact 4.9-3: Construction of the proposed Project would not adversely alter the visual
character or quality of the MEIR Study Area. This is considered a less-than-significaIlt impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.9-3: While the 2006 FMPU proposes redevelopment and intensification in the next ten
years of various sites in each of the Campus neighborhoods, the 2006 FMPU does not establish
the location, size, or design of each individual building which will follow over the next ten years.
However, during construction, four basic types of activities would be expected. First, demolition
of existing structures within the Genentech Campus would occur. Second, the sites would be
prepared, excavated, and graded to accommodate the new building foundations. Next, new
buildings and associated landscaping and site improvements would be developed. Visual impacts
928816-5
-120-
39
associated with construction activities would be temporary in nature as they would only exist for
the duration of construction activities. Such temporary impacts would include exposed pads and
staging areas for grading, excavation, and construction equipment. In addition, temporary
structures could be located in the MEIR Study Area during various stages of demolition or
construction, within material storage areas, or associated with construction debris piles. While
these activities would take place exclusively within the MEIR Study Area, these visual impacts
could affect surrounding land uses to the north, south, and west of the Genentech Campus, which
is comprised of primarily industrial areas. In addition, automobiles traveling along Forbes
Boulevard and East Grand Avenue would have short-term views of the MEIR Study Area during
construction. Boats and bicyclists along the Bayshore bike path may also have short-term views
of construction activity occurring on the eastern side of the Genentech Campus. However, this
visual condition would be a temporary visual distraction typically associated with construction
activities and equipment and would be considered less than significant. Therefore, based on the
entire record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.9-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not adversely alter the visual
character or quality of the existing MEIR Study Area. This is considered a less-than-significant
impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.9-4: The comprehensive list of design strategies identified in the 2006 FMPU, in
combination with guiding policies from the East of 101 Area Plan and development and design
standards of the Genentech R&D Overlay District, and implementation of the identified Proj ect
Requirement PR 4.9-2, will ensure that new development as a result of implementation of the
2006 FMPU enhances the visual quality and character of the existing MEIR Study Area. Based
on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission fmds that this
impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary.
Impact 4.9-5: Implementation of the proposed Project could result in an adverse effect on
scenic resources visible from U.S. 101 and this effect is a potentially significant impact.
However, implementation of identified Project requirement PR 4.9-2 would reduce the
potentially significant impact to a less-than-significant impact.
PR 4.9-2: Developments within the proposed MEIR Study Area visible from U.S. 101 be
designed with a high visual quality. Future developments within the proposed MEIR Study Area
shall be designed to enhance the visual image of the area as seen from U.S. 101 and shall be
designed with the views from U.S. 101 in mind in order to create an aesthetically pleasing and
inviting environment from U.S. 101.
The implementation of Project Requirement PR 4.9-2 is more fully described in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.9-5: According to the General Plan, buildings and structures which reflect the
character of districts and centers for activity, provide reference points for human orientation, and
may add to (but can detract from) topography and views. People perceive the visual quality of
928816-5
-121-
40
developments from the streets while traveling, and from entranceways and observation points,
such as U.S. 101, while visiting the City. New buildings erected as part of implementation of the
proposed Project would be subject to the SaIne height requirements as the existing structures in
the MEIR Study Area, and be similar in size and scale as those currently on site, in order to
protect existing views. Project requirements PR 4.9-1 and PR 4.9-2 above would also ensure that
views of the Wind Harp from U.S. 101 are retained. Therefore, through implementation of City
policies, existing height regulations, and PR 4.9-1 and PR 4.9-2, the proposed expansion and
intensification of the Genentech Campus would not create adverse effects with respect to
potential impacted views from U.S. 101. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the
record before it, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant,
and no mitigation is required.
Impact 4.9-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in new sources of increased
daytime glare. This is considered a potentially significant impact. However, ilnplementation of
mitigation measure MM 4.9-1 would reduce the impact associated with daytime glare to less
than significant.
MM 4.9-1: Design for the proposed structures on the Campus neighborhoods shall include the
use of textured or other non-reflective exterior surfaces and non-reflective glass types, including
double glazed and non-reflective vision glass. All exterior glass must meet the specifications of
all applicable codes.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.9-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.9-6: Implementation ofMM 4.9-1 would reduce impacts from daytime glare on the
Campus neighborhoods to a less-than-significant level by eliminating or minimizing increased
glare by the use of non-reflective glass and non-reflective textured surfaces for new
development. New development in the other Campus neighborhoods as a result of
implementation of the proposed Project would not create an adverse affect on views created by
an increase of daytime glare due to the absence of sensitive land uses in the vicinity or within
viewing distance of these other neighborhoods. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the
record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation ofMM 4.9-1, this
impact would be considered less than significant.
Impact 4.9-7: Implementation of the proposed Proj ect would result in new sources of increased
light that could adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. This would be a
significant impact. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, MM
4.9-2(a) through 4.9-2(c), would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 4.9-2(a): Maintain appropriate levels of light at building entries, walkways, courtyards,
parking lots and private roads at night consistent with minimum levels detailed in Genentech's
security plan and building codes.
MM 4.9-2(b): Enhance campus character with consistent use of light fixtures, fmishes and
colors.
928816-5
-122-
41
MM 4.9-2(c): Fixture types and heights shall conform to the following styles as feasible:
· Parking lots and roads-provide round fixtures on 22' poles on raised concrete footings
not to exceed 25' total finished height, appropriately finished black, or approved equal.
· Sidewalks, pathways, and plazas-provide round hardtop on post top fixtures not to
exceed15 'total finished height, appropriately finished black, or approved equal.
· Accent pedestrian lighting-provide bollard style fixtures, not to exceed 42" total height,
appropriately finished black, or approved equal.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.9-2(a) through MM 4.9-2(c) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.9-7: Additional lighting would not have the potential to create "spillage" onto
sensitive land uses, as none exist within the area. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the
record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation ofMM 4.9-2(a)
through MM 4.9-2( c), this impact would be considered less than significant.
CUL TURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.10-1: Implementation of the proposed Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. This impact would be less than
significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.10-1: As discussed in Section 4.10.1 (Existing Conditions) of the FMEIR, there were
no previously identified historic structures located within the MEIR Study Area. State and
federal inventories list no historic properties within the MEIR Study Area. The nearest NRHP-
listed structure is outside the MEIR Study Area on East Grand Avenue. The MEIR Study Area
currently comprises non-historic structures used to support the functions of Genentech. The
Proj ect would not require demolition of a structure or structures which are potentially eligible for
listing on the NRHP or CRHR. The Planning COll1lnission finds that, based on the entire record,
this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Impact 4.10-2: Implementation of the proposed Project could affect the significance of a
previously unidentified archaeological resource as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section
15064.5, and PRC Section 21083.2. This impact would be potentially significant. However,
implementation of identified mitigation measures MM 4.10-1(a) and MM 4.10-1(b) would
reduce this impact to less than significant.
MM 4.10-1(a): If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a
qualified archaeologist approved by the Project applicant shall conduct further archival and field
study to identify the presence of archaeological resources in the area surrounding the discovery.
Field study may include, but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and monitoring
construction activities as well as other common methods used to identify the presence of
archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area.
928816-5
-123-
42
If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during project related construction in a
State Right of Way, all construction within 50 feet of the site shall cease, and Caltrans District 4
Cultural Resources Study Office shall be immediately contacted and a Caltrans staff
archaeologist shall evaluate the finds within one business day after the Cultural Resources Study
Office is contacted.
MM 4.10-1(b): If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a
qualified archaeologist approved by the Project applicant shall first determine whether this
resource is a "unique archaeological resource" under 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5,
and/or Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the archaeological resource is determined to
be a "unique archaeological resource," the archaeologist shall fornlulate a mitigation plan that
satisfies the requirements of, 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5, and/or Public Resources
Code 21083.2. Work in the vicinity of the find may resume at the completion of a mitigation
plan or recovery of the resource.
If the archaeologist detennines that the archaeological resource is not a unique archaeological
resource, work will resume, and the archaeologist may record the site and sublnit the recordation
form to the California Historic Resources Information System Northwest Information Center.
The archaeologist shall prepare a report of the results of any study prepared as part of a
mitigation plan, following accepted professional practice. Copies of the report shall be submitted
to the City and to the California Historic Resources Information System Northwest Information
Center.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.10-1(a) and MM 4.10-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.10-2: A records search conducted for the preparation of the FMEIR revealed that
there are four historic-period archaeological resources in the MEIR Study Area and two Native
American resources in or adjacent to the Study Area. Given this moderate to high possibility that
such resources will be identified during construction, MM 4.10-1(a) and 4.10-1(b) would protect
against substantial adverse change in the resources by requiring further field study to determine
the uniqueness of the resource. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the
Planning Commission finds that the potentially significant impact on previously unidentified
archaeological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation
ofMM 4.10-1(a) and MM 4.10-1(b).
Impact 4.10-3: The proposed Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. This impact remains less than
significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.10-3: As discussed in FMEIR Section 4.10.1 (Existing Conditions), no previously
identified unique paleontological or unique geologic features are located in the MEIR Study
Area. A review of a map produced by Kleinfelder Associates depicting the MEIR Study Area
928816-5
-124-
43
shows the potential existence of vertebrate and invertebrate fossils within the MEIR Study Area.
However, according to the LACM, no vertebrate fossil localities exist on the San Francisco
peninsula, thus, no unique paleontological resource or unique geologic features are anticipated to
exist in the MEIR Study Area. The University of California, Berkeley Museum of Paleontology
database was also searched to determine whether invertebrate or vertebrate fossils were present.
No vertebrate fossils were listed (UCB 2006). Based on the entire record, the Planning
Commission finds that this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Impact 4.10-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could disturb unlmown human
remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA
Section 15064.5 and/or PRC Section 5097.98. This impact would be potentially significant.
However, implementation of identified mitigation measure MM 4.10-2 would reduce this impact
to less than significant.
MM 4.10-2: In the event of the discovery of a burial, human bone, or suspected human bone, all
excavation or grading within 100 feet of the find shall halt immediately, the area of the find shall
be protected, and the Project applicant immediately shall notify the San Mateo County Coroner
of the find and comply with the provisions ofPRC Section 5097 with respect to Native American
involvement, burial treatment, and re-burial, if necessary. Work may resume once the area is
protected or the body is removed.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.10-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.10-4: The MEIR Study Area is not known to be located within a human burial ground,
and no known human burial sites were identified within the MEIR Study Area or its immediate
vicinity. However, previous unidentified human remains could be encountered during ground
disturbing activities. MM 4.10-2 will ensure that should such an encounter occur, the remains
will not be disturbed by requiring excavation to cease until the area is protected or the remains
removed. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission
finds that this potentially significantly impact on previously unidentified human remains would
be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation ofMM 4.10-2.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
Impact 4.11-1: Implementation of the proposed Proj ect could directly and indirectly induce
substantial population growth in the area by proposing increased employment. This is considered
a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.11-1: The significant increase in employees during the 10-year planning horizon
could simultaneously create a significant demand for new housing in and around the City.
Continuedjob growth in the City will promote a greater regional balance between jobs and
housing. Because Genentech's continued employment growth would serve to balance regional
needs between jobs and housing, this impact is considered to be less than significant. Based on
928816-5
-125-
44
the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact
is considered less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary.
Impact 4.11-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not displace existing housing, and
would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, there would
be no impact.
No Initigation required.
Finding 4.11-2: Residential uses are not permitted in the East of 101 Area. As South San
Francisco's employment base, the East of 101 Area is expected to accommodate a major share of
South San Francisco's new non-residential development. As no residential uses exist in the
MEIR Study Area, implementation of the proposed Project would not displace existing housing.
Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that
there would be no impact.
Impact 4.11-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers
of people, and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Therefore, there would be no impact.
No nlitigation required.
Finding 4.11-3: No residential uses exist in the MEIR Study Area. Thus no residents would be
displaced, and construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be necessitated.
Existing businesses in the proposed expanded Genentech R&D Overlay District could be
displaced by Genentech. However, these employees would likely find other locations in the East
of 101 Area. Therefore, displacement of existing businesses and associated employees would not
necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere as these potentially displaced
employees could find employment in the East of 101 Area. The Planning Commission finds that,
based on the entire record, there would be no impact.
PUBLIC SERVICES
Impact 4.12-1: The proposed Project would not result in the alteration of existing police
protection facilities or require the construction of new police protection facilities resulting from
the SSFPD's inability to Inaintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives. This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.12-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would constitute a negligible increase
in the City's population, and would not result in SSFPD's inability to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Current response times and service ratios
are adequate, and no new facilities that would result in potential significant impacts would be
required. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission fmds that the Proj ect
will result in a less-than-significant impact.
928816-5
-126-
45
Impact 4.12-2: The proposed Project would not result in the alteration of existing fire protection
facilities or require the construction of new fire protection facilities resulting from the SSFFD' s
inability to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives.
This is considered a less-than-significant impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.12-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would constitute a negligible increase
in the City's population, and would not result in SSFFD's inability to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Current response times and service ratios
are adequate, and no new facilities that would result in potential significant impacts would be
required. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the Proj ect
will result in a less-than-significant impact.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Impact 4.13-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Implementation of mitigation
measures MM 4.13-1(a) through (c) would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less-
than-significant groundwater impact.
MM 4.13-1(a): The Project applicant shall include methods of water conservation in the
proposed Project's buildings and landscaping. These methods shall include, but not be lilnited, to
the following (this Mitigation Measure would not apply to process development or research
development laboratory equipment, or to biopharmaceutical manufacturing processes conducted
pursuant to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's current Good Manufacturing Practices
(cGMPs).):
· Install water-conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water-efficient
centralized cooling systems in all new buildings.
· Install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g., drip irrigation and Evaportranspiration-
based irrigation controllers).
· Gray water irrigation system (as detailed in General Plan Policy PF - 7, but other elements
of that policy do not apply here, such as wastewater treatment facilities).
· Design landscaping with drought-resistant and other low-water-use plants.
· Install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads.
MM 4.13-1(b) The Project applicant shall install separate water meters for buildings and
landscaping for parcels with greater than 10,000 sf irrigated area.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-1(a) and MM 4.13-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.13-1: The California Water Supply Company (CWSC), which provides the South San
928816-5
-127-
46
Francisco District with water, supplements the water supply that it purchases from the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) with groundwater from several operational
wells. CWSC does not plan to expand production of groundwater as a result of growth in the
service area, but is actively participating in groundwater management planning to ensure safe
yield of the basin is not exceeded. Furthermore, the water conservation measures identified in
MM 4.13-1(a) and 4.13-1(b) will operate to reduce the proposed Project's contribution to total
groundwater demand. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
Commission finds that implantation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-1 (a) and 4.13-1 (b) would
render Impact 4.13-1 less than significant.
Impact 4.13-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or alter the course of a stream or river; however, construction
activities associated with the proposed Project could increase the potential for erosion or siltation
on- or off-site; however, implementation of Project requirements PR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1 (b)
would ensure that this impact remains less than significant.
PR 4.13-1(a): Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the Project applicant shall develop a SWPPP
prior to construction to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP
shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures for the construction period:
. Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion
control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized, in
accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures. Silt fences used in combination with fiber rolls shall be installed down
slope of all graded slopes. Fiber rolls shall be installed in the flow path of graded
areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets.
. BMPs for preventing the discharge of other construction-related NPDES
pollutants beside sediment (i.e., paint, concrete, etc.) to downstream waters.
. After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for
accumulated sediment, and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and
sediment.
PR 4.13-1(b): The applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City
of South San Francisco in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control
Plan shall include controls for winterization, dust, erosion, and pollution in accordance with the
ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. The Plan shall also
describe the BMPs to be used during and following construction to control pollution resulting
form both storm and construction water runoff. The Plan shall include locations of vehicle and
equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Public
works staff or representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure
compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be
corrected immediately.
The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1(b) is more fully
described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
928816-5
-128-
47
Finding 4.13-2: Based on the FMElR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning
Commission finds that when erosion and run-off is controlled with the NPDES general permit
for construction activities, the impact would be considered less than significant. Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plans are an integral part of construction planning, and the Planning
Commission frnds that PR 4.13-1 (a) and (b) are designed specifically to mitigate the impacts
associated with construction run-off and reduce them to less than significant.
Impact 4.13-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site, alter the course of a stream or river or substantially increase runoff
which would cause on- or off-site flooding. Therefore, the ilnpact of flooding would be less than
significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.13-3: While Colma Creek is the City's nlain natural drainage system, Colma Creek
does not intersect the MElR Study Area, nor does the Proj ect area drain to Colma Creek.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not alter the course of the waterway. Additionally,
because the proposed Project would not substantially increase the amount of impervious surface
area on the MElR Study Area, and would not increase the amount of runoff from the MElR
Study Area, the proposed Proj ect would not cause increased runoff levels that would induce on-
or off-site flooding. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that
the impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.13-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could contribute runoff that could
add substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; therefore, the proposed Proj ect could have a
potentially significant impact on polluted runoff. However, with the identified mitigation
measures, MM 4.13-2(a) through MM 4. 13-2(d), this impact would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level.
MM 4.13-2(a): The Project applicant shall develop an operational SWPPP prior to construction
to protect water quality after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include, but not be limited
to, the following measures for Project operation:
It Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the Proj ect site. Industrial
activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed
Project site shall be described. This shall include a thorough assessment of existing and
potential pollutant sources.
It Identification ofBMPs to be implemented at the Project site based on identified industrial
activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control
BMPs, with treatment controls uses as needed.
It Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and
frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or
obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetationJlandscape maintenance, replacement of
media filters, regular sweeping of parking lots and other paced areas, etc. Wastes
removed from BMPs may be hazardous; therefore, maintenance costs shall be budgeted
to include disposal at a proper site. Parking lot areas shall be cleared on a daily basis of
debris that may enter the storm drain system.
928816-5
-129-
48
· The monitoring and maintenance pro gram shall be conducted at the frequency agreed
upon by the RWQCB and/or City of South San Francisco. Monitoring and maintenance
shall be recorded and submitted annually in coordination with the STOPPP. The SWPPP
shall be adjusted, as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs.
. The Project applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on industrial
and commercial BMPs to minimize pollutant contributions from the proposed
development. This information shall be distributed to all employees at the Project site. At
a minimum, the information shall cover: (1) proper disposal of commercial cleaning
chemicals; (2) proper use of landscaping chemicals; (3) clean-up and appropriate disposal
of hazardous materials and chemicals; and (4) prohibition of any washing and dumping
of materials and chemicals into storm drains.
MM 4.13-2(b): The Project applicant shall install a storm drain interceptor (also known as an
oil/water or oil/grit separator) on-site to remove oils and heavy particulates from stormwater.
Appropriate sizing of the unit relative to the impervious surface drainage area is important and
should be taken into consideration when choosing the interceptor unit model and size.
MM 4.13-2(c): The Project applicant shall incorporate alternative drainage solutions around
surface parking lots and near large areas of impervious surfaces such as public plazas. Such
solutions may include, but are not limited to, vegetated swales, bioretention areas, planter/tree
boxes, and ponds.
MM 4.13-2(d): The Project applicant shall incorporate rooftop or downspout retention into all
building plans.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-2(a) through MM 4. 13-2(d) are hereby adopted and will be
implelnented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.13-4: Surface and stormwater runoff in the MEIR Study Area is collected by the
City's storm drainage systen1 and is discharged to San Francisco Bay east of the Project area.
The existing storm drainage system in the Proj ect area is designed to accommodate flows from
industrial development and takes of the amount of existing impervious surfaces in the area. The
proposed Proj ect would relnove existing buildings on the site and redevelop the area with similar
uses. The exact uses of the buildings that could be developed are cUlTently unknown, as a result
potential sources of pollutants can not be quantified. However, simply as a result of increased
traffic, increased stonnwater pollutants, such as copper and zinc from break pads (W oodward-
Clyde, 1994) or oil frOlTI leaking engines, may result in a potentially significant change in storm
water quality.
To comply with the Clean Water Act (CW A), San Mateo County and the twenty cities and towns
in the County formed the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
(STOPPP). STOPPP holds a joint municipal NPDES permit from the San Francisco Bay
RWQCB. The permit includes a comprehensive plan to reduce the discharge of pollutants to
creeks, San Francisco Bay, and the ocean to the maximum extent possible.
The San Mateo Countywide STOPPP has a Site Design Standards Checklist to evaluate proposed
928816-5
-130-
49
Proj ects against guidelines intended to reduce stormwater pollution. These guidelines are
regulated by the SSFMC, General Plan, or other best management practices guidelines.
Construction impacts are mitigated through PR 4.13-1(a) and (b). Still, operation of the proposed
Project could contribute to polluted stormwater runoff. This would be a potentially significant
impact. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission
finds that implementation of mitigation measures MM 4. 13-2(a) through (d) would reduce
operation impacts associated with polluted runoff to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 4.13-5: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase the development density
of the site; and as result the proposed Project could have a potentially significant impact the
water systeln to deliver the required fire flows. However, with implementation of mitigation
measures MM 4.13-3(a) through MM 4.13-3(c), this impact would be reduced to less than
significant.
MM 4.13-3(a): Prior to first building permit, the Project applicant shall consult a NCEES
certified Fire Protection Engineer to prepare an analysis of the proposed Project and determine
the required design fire flow and fire duration. A certified report shall be submitted to the South
San Francisco Fire Department for review and comment.
MM 4.13-3(b): Prior to receiving a building pennit, the Project applicant shall perform fire flow
tests for all hydrants within 500 feet of the Project site pursuant to American Water Works
Association filed testing standards (A WW A 1989) to verify if adequate fire flows defmed in
mitigation measure MM 4. 13-3(a): are achieved. Any deficiency measured shall be corrected and
retested prior occupancy.
MM 4.13-3(c): California Water Service Company shall certify that reservoir storage, beyond
their operational and emergency allotments, required for adequate protection identified in
mitigation measure MM 4.13-3(a) will be maintained at all times.
Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-3(a) through MM 4. 13-3(c) are hereby adopted and will be
implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Finding 4.13-5: The water distribution system is owned and operated by the California Water
Supply Company. The water system consists of a network of 12 and 10-inch lines which should
be adequate to serve the required flows (Brady, 1994). Several buildings in the 2006 FMPU have
water storage tanks and fire pUlnps for local pressure control (Dyett & Bhatia, 2005). The
automated fire suppression systems in existing buildings significantly reduce the risk of fITe
spreading and may require fire flows beyond the current design standard of 2,000 gpm. Because
the 2006 FMPU does not detail the ultimate building configuration and land use, the fITe risk can
be assessed generally and not in fine detail. As a result, there is a potentially significant impact to
the water system to serve the peak flow demands. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the
record before it, the Planning Commission fmds that implementation of mitigation measures MM
4.13-3(a) through (c) would reduce the construction impacts associated with an increased fITe
flow demands to a less-than-significant level.
928816-5
-131-
50
Impact 4.13-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Therefore, the impact is
less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.13-6: The 2006 FMPU would redevelop an area of the Genentech CaInpus that is
already populated by buildings and impervious surfaces. The expansion of the Genentech
Campus will require new drainage structures and localized on-site storm drain systems.
However, the amount of stormwater created in the 2006 FMPU area would not increase above
existing conditions because the an10unt of impervious surfaces would be approximately the SaIne
as existing conditions. Because no additional stormwater runoff would be created, no additional
stormwater would need to be accommodated in existing stormwater drainage facilities, aIld no
expansion of stormwater drainage facilities would be warranted. Therefore, the Planning
Commission finds that the impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.13-7: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in insufficient water
supplies. l1nplementation of mitigation measures MM 4.13-1(a) and (b) would ensure the
proposed Project would have a less-than-significant impact on water supply.
Finding 4.13-7: Approximately 89% of the South San Francisco District's water supply is
purchased from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) through the Califonna
Water Service Company (CWSC). The remaining 11 % is acquired through reservoirs and local
groundwater. According to the SFPUC's Water Supply Master Plan, there is sufficient water to
meet all expected future demand in normal and wet hydrological periods. SFPUC system
operations are designed to allow sufficient water relnaining in SFPUC reservoirs after six years
of drought to provide some ability to continue delivering water, although at significantly reduced
levels. While there is some potential for CWSC and SFPUC to experience water shortages, there
would be enough water for the proposed Project based on current supply levels during normal
and wet years. Furthermore, the water conservations measures identified in Mitigation Measures
MM 4.13-1(a) and (b) would reduce the proposed Project's contribution to the total water
demand during all years. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it,
the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.13-8: Projected flows from the proposed Project would not exceed planned
improvements to the collection system and existing capacity in the treatment plant. As a result,
the impact to the wastewater system is less than significant.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.13-8: No water quality violations have occurred within the last two years, and as a
result, the projected 3 percent increase in dry weather flows from the proposed Project to the
WQCP would not exceed the WQCP capacity. Improvements identified as part of the City's
Sewer Master Plan and subsequent updates are included in a capital improvement plan that once
fully implemented, would ensure that flows do not exceed capacity. Pursuant to a 2007 report
from Genentech's consultant, Wilsey Ham, several of these improvements benefit only the
928816-5
-132-
51
Genentech development. As such, Genentech will be responsible for funding 100% of the cost of
implementing these improvements. Other improvements benefit many of the East of 101 area
developments. For these in1provements, Genentech will be responsible for funding its fair share
of the implementation of improvement. Genentech's "fair share" for each improvement will be
as determined by the City Engineer. The estimated costs for both "100% improvements" and
"fair share improvements" will be as determined in the forthcoming report from Carollo,
expected in February 2007. These costs will be calculated in current-year dollars, and will be
adjusted annually in accordance with Engineering News-Record's (ENR) fudex for San
Francisco, California. Additionally, for each building permit, Genentech will be responsible for
paying the applicable sanitary sewer connection fee in effect at the time Genentech applies for
the particular building permit. Based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission
finds that Genentech's funding of the sewer improvements, in accordance with the tem1S of this
paragraph, will ensure that the impact is less than significant.
Impact 4.13-9: Solid waste generated under the proposed Project would be sufficiently served
by the Scavenger Company's Blue Line MRF ITS and the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill;
therefore, the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant solid waste impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.13-9: Development under the proposed Project would result in an additional
approximately 2,775 tons of solid waste per year. The remaining capacity of the MRF/TS would
be able to accommodate the additional solid waste. Furthermore, the Scavenger Company has
stated that a doubling of the Genentech South San Francisco Campus and subsequent increase in
solid waste generation would not impact Scavenger's current available capacity of 500 to 600
tons per day (Formosa 2005). While the Ox Mountain landfill is currently in excess of its
permitted capacity, BFI continues to accept waste as the landfill gradually settles and new space
becomes available. Thus, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the
increase in waste generated under the proposed Project would be sufficiently served by the
MRF ITS and the Ox mountain landfill and the impact would be less than significant.
Impact 4.13-10: The proposed Project would comply with federal, state, and local regulations
related to solid waste and would not impede the City of South San Francisco from compliance;
therefore, the proposed Proj ect would have no impact.
No mitigation required.
Finding 4.13-10: Genentech currently complies with Municipal Code regulations, including
those requiring collection of solid waste by the Scavenger Company. Genentech would continue
to comply with this requirement under implementation of the proposed Project. The Genentech
Campus is not a substantial contributor to the City's generation of solid waste disposal at the Ox
Mountain Sanitary Landfill. Implementation of the proposed Project could double Genentech's 3
percent contribution to 6 percent, but Genentech's contribution would remain relatively smalL
Additionally, the proposed Project would not impede the City's compliance with AB 939.
Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no
impact.
928816-5
-133-
52
The Project Sponsor has agreed to implement all Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements
identified in the FMEIR, and the Planning Commission has imposed those Mitigation Measures
and Proj ect Requirements as Conditions of Approval, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit H.
Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6, adopted Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements will
be implemented and monitored as described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
that is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit G, and incorporated herein by reference.
The Mitigation Measures and Proj ect Requirements proposed for adoption in these findings, and
the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F, are the same
as, or are summaries of, the Mitigation Measures and Proj ect Requirements identified in the
FMEIR. Further, the Plmming Commission finds that the Mitigation Measures and Project
Requirements identified in these findings are appropriate mld feasible for adoption, unless
otherwise specifically noted above or in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as Exhibit G is designed to ensure
compliance with the measures and requirements that are identified in these findings, and includes
the same Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements described herein. Thus, the Program
set forth in Exhibit G should be adopted and implemented.
FINDINGS REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
CEQA requires that EIRs assess feasible alternatives or mitigation measures that may
substantially lessen the significant effects ofprojects prior to approval. (Pub. Res. Code
S 21002.) With the exception of the "no proj ect" alternative, the specific alternatives or types of
alternatives that must be assessed are not specified. CEQA "establishes no categorical legal
inlperative as to the scope of alternatives to be analyzed in an ElR. Each case must be evaluated
on its own facts, which in turn must be reviewed in light of the statutory purpose." Citizens of
Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors, 52 Cal. 3d 553, 556 (1990).
The CEQA Guidelines state that the "range of potential alternatives to the proposed Project shall
include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the Proj ect and could
avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects" of the Project. CEQA
Guidelines S 15126.6(c). Thus, an evaluation of the Project Objectives is key to determining the
range of alternatives that must be assessed in the EIR.
The Planning Commission certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered the
information on alternatives provided in the FMElR and in the record. The FMElR reflects the
Planning Commission's and the City's independent judgment as to alternatives. The Planning
Commission finds that the Proj ect provides the best balance between satisfaction of the proj ect
objectives and mitigation of environmental impacts to the extent feasible, as described and
analyzed in the FMElR. The following are the Project objectives for both the City and the
Project Sponsor, as identified in Section 1.3 of the DMEIR:
. Provide appropriate setting for a diverse range of non-residential uses.
928816-5
-134-
53
· Promote campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and development
uses.
· Unless otherwise stated in a specific plan, allow building heights in the East of 101 Area
to the maximum limits permissible under the Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77.
· Do not vary permitted maximum development intensities based on lot size.
· Encourage the development of employee-serving mnenities with restaurants, cafes, and
support commercial establishments such as dry cleaners, to meet the need of the
employees in the East of 101 Area. Such uses could be located in independent centers or
integrated into office parks or technology campuses.
· Keep Genentech's key scientific personnel in proximity, so that they may continue to
work together in support of research, development, and production goals.
· Keep certain aspects of Genentech's business, both scientific and adnunistrative, together
physically for efficiency and maximum support.
· Assure Genentech's proximity to world-class scientific and academic institutions.
· Foster a sense of community among Genentech's employees, creating interconnectivity
and ease of access.
· Articulate vision and policies that will server as a general guide for the placement and
design of individual buildings and other Genentech Campus elements, as well as an
overall development program to provide the basis for future approvals.
· Foster development of a Genentech Campus befitting its setting on the City's eastern
bayshore, that capitalizes on views and access to the waterfront.
· Promote alternatives to automobile transportation to further the City's transportation
objectives by emphasizing shuttles, linkages, transportation demand managelnent, and
pedestrian access and ease of movement between buildings.
· Establish the basis for the zoning provisions to be contained in an amended Genentech
R&D Overlay District.
· Provide design guidelines to be enacted after adoption of the 2006 Facilities Master Plan
Update that will serve as a basis for design review and approval for development in the
2006 Facilities Master Plan Update area.
· Establish a facility-wide architectural character, a system of open space elelnents and a
pedestrian and vehicular circulation plan linking buildings and uses together in a flexible,
logical, and orderly manner for the Genentech facility.
· mcrease the flexibility of the City's land use regulations and the speed of its review
procedures to reflect the quickly changing needs of a research and development focused
corporation.
· Establish facility-wide development standards and design guidelines consistent with the
City's General Plan and East of 101 Area Plan.
· Define a baseline of existing conditions for each lot reclassified to the Genentech R&D
Overlay District.
928816-5
-135-
54
Alternatives Analysis in MEIR
The CEQA Guidelines state that the "range of potential alternatives to the proposed Project shall
include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic obj ectives of the Proj ect and could
avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects" of the Project. Pursuant to CEQA,
the Planning Commission considered the following alternatives to the Project described in the
FMEIR, which would reduce or avoid certain Project-specific and cumulative impacts, and
rejected them as infeasible for the reasons set forth below. The Planning Commission adopts the
FMEIR's analysis and conclusions regarding alternatives eliminated from further consideration
during the scoping process.
Alternative 1: No Project Alternative (Continuation Of 1995 Master Plan)
Under the No Project/1995 Master Plan Alternative, the Master Plan Update would not be
inlplemented and development of the Project site would continue under the tenns of the 1995
Master Plan. The existing campus would continue to operate on its 124-acre site, and building
would be limited to current project entitlements (which are all under construction or approved).
Alternative 1 would avoid or reduce impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources,
air quality, noise and vibration, transportation and traffic, geological hazards, population and
housing, public services, and utilities and services. Most impacts would be reduced because
Genentech has largely built out its existing acreage within the Genentech R&D Overlay District,
and without further new development, many development-associated ilnpacts would be avoided.
However, some impacts could be greater under Altelnative 1 than under the proposed Proj ect.
For example, transportation and traffic impacts would not benefit from mitigation proposed by
the proj ect, including mitigation related to supporting alternative transit and pedestrian safety.
Without the proposed Project, the interconnectedness of the campus would not occur, with
resulting benefits to separating parking uses from the central campus area as well as promoting
even greater TDM effectiveness. FUliher, Alternative 1 would not encourage the development of
employee-serving amenities, and would fail to keep Genentech's key scientific and
administrative personnel in proxilnity. Alternative 1 would also not achieve the City's or
Genentech's objectives with regard to fostering the City's reputation as a bio-technology capital.
The City's objectives with regard to cOlnpleting the transition of the East of 101 Area from an
industrial and light industrial area to a research and development and office center would also
not be realized.
Finding: Alternative 1 is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the Project's
objectives or the objectives of the City.
Explanation: Although Alternative 1 reduces or avoids many of the impacts associated with the
Project as proposed, it fails to achieve several of the principle objectives of the project, including
objectives of the City's General Plan, including, but not limited to:
III GP 3.5-G-3 (promote campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and
development uses). Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it fails to
provide for the expansion of an existing campus-style biotechnology and research and
development use.
928816-5
-136-
55
11II GP 4.3-G-1 (develop a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that
pron10te bicycle riding for transportation and recreation). Alternative 1 would not
achieve this policy because it would not result in Genentech's development of new
bike lanes along Forbes Boulevard and DNA Way/Grandview Drive.
ill Implementing Policy 3.5-1-8 (development of employee-serving amenities):
Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it would not provide new space
for campus amenities such as cafeterias and Grab-and-Go facilities for food, a fitness
center, various amenities and services that allow Genentech employees to attend to
personal and family needs without having to leave the Campus, and a robust new
childcare pro gram.
11II Implementing Policy 3.5-1-13 (waterfront enhancements): Alternative 1 would not
achieve this policy because it would not involve a commitment by Genentech to
develop approximately one mile of the San Francisco Bay Trail along its entire bay
frontage.
iii Implementing Policy 5.1-1-2 (parkland standards):. Alternative 1 would not achieve
this policy because it would not result in the development of an open green space for
public use of approximately 0.8 acres.
Continuing to operate the Project site under the terms of the 1995 Master Plan would avoid many
development-related impacts, but could also possibly result in an increase in severity of other
impacts, because other development, not integrated in a Master Plan (and therefore not providing
similar benefits) could otherwise occur. For these reasons, Alternative 1 is rejected as an
alternative.
Alternative 2: Reduced Development Alternative
Though the total campus build out area would remain the same as with the proposed Project (160
acres), Alternative 2 proposes less development: total final buildout would be 4.6 million square
feet compared to 6.0 million square feet with the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would result in
nearly three-quarter million less square feet of laboratory space, nearly one-half million less
square feet of manufacturing/warehouse space, and approximately 166,000 less square feet of
office space. Additionally, Alternative 2 would employee nearly 2,300 fewer individuals than the
proposed Project. This Alternative would involve less construction and would result in less
development, less traffic volumes, and less traffic-related air quality and noise impacts.
Additionally, impacts related to population, employment and housing, public services, and
utilities and service systems would be less than the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would also
meet most of the City's objectives for the site and East of 101 Area. However, it would not meet
some of those objectives, including less new employment and less tax revenue. Further, this
Alternative would fail to meet many of Genentech's objectives, including: it would fail to
include sufficient space for the development of certain employee-serving amenities; it would fail
to keep certain of Genentech's key scientific personnel in proximity; it would fail to keep certain
aspects of Genentech's business, both scientific and administrative, together physically for
efficiency and maximum support; and it would fail to promote, to the same extent, alternatives to
automobile transportation to further the City's transportation objectives.
928816-5
-137-
56
While Alternative 1 would be environmentally superior to the proposed Project, CEQA requires
lead agencies to identify the environmentally superior alternative that is not the "No Project"
alternative. As Alternative 1 is the no project alternative, Alternative 2 would be the
environmentally superior alternative under CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(e)(2).
Finding: Alternative 2 is rejected as infeasible.
Explanation: While Alternative 2 would have fewer environmental impacts than the proposed
Project, the reduced laboratory, manufacturing, and office space would not allow for full
realization of the many of the Proj ect' s obj ectives, as set forth above. Additionally, the reduced
development alternative would deprive the City of many of the proposed Project's benefits,
including the increased tax revenue of the proposed Project and the nearly 2,300 additional jobs
created by the proposed Project.
928816-5
-138-
57
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco adopts this
Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified as significant and
unavoidable in the Master Environmental Impact Report ("MEIR") for the Genentech
Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master
Plan Update ("Master Plan Update" or "Proj ect"), and hereby finds that the specific
overriding economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project
outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts. (Resolution The
City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to approve the
Proj ect, and that decision is based on the findings of fact and the substantial evidence
presented in the whole record of this proceeding.
The Project proposes to increase the size of the current Genentech campus to
approximately six million square feet of office, research and development,
manufacturing, amenities buildings, and parking structures. The proposed Project is
located in the City's East of 101 Area and is controlled by the East of 101 Area Plan.
The City Council adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations
concurrently with the Project findings, and adoption and approval of the MEIR, the 2006
Facilities Master Plan Update, reclassification and zoning map change often parcels in
the Planned Industrial zone into the Genentech R&D Overlay District, zoning text
changes to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 20.39 and 20.40, and the
Transportation Demand Management Plan. The City Council hereby adopts specific
overriding considerations for the impacts listed below that are identified in the MEIR as
significant and unavoidable. The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable
environmental effects identified in the MEIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation
measures adopted through the current proj ect approval, and further implemented through
the related Conditions of Approval for each future development that is part of the Proj ect,
including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the MEIR and Master Plan
Update. Even with mitigation, however, the City Council recognizes that the
implementation of the Project carries with it certain unavoidable adverse environmental
effects as identified in the MEIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent
the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts from the Proj ect cannot be mitigated
to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, legal, social, teclmological,
environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the Project.
2. Unavoidable Si2nificant Adverse Impacts. The following significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts have been identified in the Master Environmental
Impact Report for Genentech Corporate Facilities Research and Development Overlay
District Expansion and Master Plan Update:
Impact 4.3-4: Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile
sources would result from normal day-to-day activity within the MEIR Study Area.
These would potentially exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an
existing or proj ected air quality violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an
-139-
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding: As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce these en1issions, this impact
would be significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.4-6: Operation of the proposed Project would generate increased local
traffic volumes that would cause a substantial permanent increase in alnbient noise levels
in the project vicinity. This is considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation Ineasures.
Finding: As no feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact, this impact
would be significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F
conditions at Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M.
peak hour. After implementation of the proposed mitigation n1easures, the impact would
be reduced, but the Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection would still
operate at an unacceptable level during the P.M. peak hour.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-l(a): Create additional westbound right-turn lane.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-l(b): Add an additional lane on northbound
Dubuque Avenue between the V.S.lOl Ramps intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard.
Reconfigure the northbound approach to Oyster Point Boulevard to provide two
exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and two exclusive right turn lanes. As
part of this widening, eliminate the left turn lane on the southbound Dubuque Avenue
approach to the V.S.lOl Ramps intersection (which serves mini warehouse facilities) and
allow southbound left turns from the southbound through lane. This will allow provision
of five full northbound travel lanes on Dubuque Avenue between the northbound Off-
Ramp intersection al1d Oyster Point Boulevard. Adjust signal timing.
Finding: While MM 4.7-l(a) and (b) would reduce this impact, even after
implementation of the mitigation measures, this intersection would still operate at an
unacceptable level of service (LOS E). Therefore, this is considered a significant and
unavoidable impact.
Impact 4.7-5: Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E
conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour.
This would be a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-5: Re-stripe southbound Airport Boulevard right turn
to a shared through-right lane and southbound shared through/left lane to a left turn lane.
-140-
Widen eastbound Grand Avenue to add two left lanes; re-stripe the eastbound
through/left shared lane to a through lane and eastbound right turn lane to a shared
through/right lane. Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck
traffic on westbound Grand Avenue. Existing signal modification.
Finding: Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level. However, construction of additional lanes along
Grand Avenue, as identified in MM 4.7-5, would require expanding the right of way,
which in addition to the expense associated with such an expansion, would have a
negative effect on adj acent businesses. In light of these specific economic and
technological concerns, to the extent MM 4.7-5 requires a widening of Grand Avenue,
the mitigation measure is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code
S 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account
economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the lead agency (here, the
City) has an obligation to balance public obj ectives, including specific economic and
technological concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code
S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic or
technological concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency
may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore,
only the improvements to Airport Boulevard are feasible. Because there exist no
additional feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
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) U.S. 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.
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact
to a less than significant level. In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to-
capacity ratios for the U.S. 101 mainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new
freeway would need to be constructed. Given the location of this segment of the U.S.
101, and its close proximity to the surrounding development, such widening or new
construction is not possible. Additionally, this mitigation would be prohibitively
expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would benefit. For these reasons,
mitigation of Impact 4.7-12 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA S 21061.1, which states
that "economic. . . and technological factors" are to be taken into account when
determining feasibility. Additionally, potential mitigation measures to reduce this impact
would require approval from outside agencies. The South San Francisco's General Plan
Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[aJccept LOS E or F after finding
that: There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The
uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit."
Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
-141-
Impact 4.7-15: Inlplementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic at
the already unacceptable Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque AvenuefU.S. 101 NB On-
Ramp by more than two percent.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by
the City Engineer) towards the addition of a second exclusive right turn lane on the
westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. Implement MM 4.7-1 (b). Adjust signal
timing.
Finding: While implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 would reduce
this impact, it would not reduce it to a less-than-significant level. The increase in traffic
volume would still be significant after mitigation, therefore this impact would be
considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-18: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline
traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674
vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation
measure MM 4.7-18 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, however,
because MM 4.7-18 CalIDOt be feasibly ilnplemented, this impact would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-18: Provide a fair-share contribution, as determined
by City Engineer, to provision of a second northbound off-ramp lane cOilllection to the
U.S. 101 mainline at the Dubuque Avenue off-ramp.
Finding: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the
northbound off-ralnp to Dubuque Avenue would not increase past unacceptable levels.
However, as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting
Dubuque Avenue east of its current location, implementation of the mitigation measure
would require an expansion of the right of way, and have a substantial adverse effect on
adjacent businesses. Given these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-
18 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21061.1 (defining
"feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account econolnic . . . alld
technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public
objectives, including specific economic and technological concerns, against the benefits
of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines,
S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic and technological concerns render a particular
mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub.
Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible
mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, this
impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-19: Implementation of the proposed project would increase baseline
traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway
Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This
would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-19 would reduce this impact
-142-
to a less-than-significant level; however, because MM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly
implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-19: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by
the City Engineer) towards the construction of a second southbound off-ramp lane
connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp.
Finding: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the
southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard would not
increase past unacceptable levels. However, implementation of MM 4.7-19 would require
the relocation of at least one support colunm for the Oyster Point flyover ramp. Such
relocation is not feasible given the expense and geometrics of the rights of way. In light
of these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-19 is not feasible, as
defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code 9 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable
of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological
factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public objectives,
including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub.
Resources Code 9 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, 9 15021, subd. (d).) Where
economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency
may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code 9 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore,
because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a
less-than-significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
3. Overridin2: Considerations. The City Council now balances the
unavoidable impacts that will result from future development of the Project, against its
benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the
benefits of the Project, as further set forth below.
The following specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, land
use, and other considerations support approval of the Proj ect:
A. Genentech anticipates paying more than $100 million to South San
Francisco and its school districts in property taxes. Furthermore, at full build out, the
Project is expected to employ approximately 6,700 additional employees. Many of these
new positions will be filled by residents of local communities.
B. The existing physical environment in which the Project will be
developed consists primarily of industrial development, with wide roadways, limited
sidewalks, and minimal site improvements. Additionally, current development lacks
amenities and connections to the shoreline. The Project, including the expansion of the
Overlay District, will convert several of these properties to uses consistent with campus-
style development (pursuant to General Plan Guiding Policy 3.5-G-3), including
additional amenities and improvements, as well as increased access to the shoreline.
C. The Project is consistent with the General Plan Guiding Policies
for the East of 101 Area, which provide appropriate settings for a diverse range of non-
-143-
residential uses and promotes campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research
and development uses. Specifically, the Project complies with the following Guiding
Policies:
i. GP 3.5-G-l (Provide appropriate settings for a diverse
range of non-residential uses). The Project complies with this policy because it will
provide a campus setting for non-residential uses, including manufacturing, research and
development, and office uses, as well as amenities space.
ii. GP 3.5-G-3 (Promote campus-style biotechnology, high-
technology, and research and development uses). The Project complies with this policy
because it provides for the expansion of an existing campus-style biotechnology and
research and development use.
iii. GP 4.3-G-l (develop a comprehensive and integrated
system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation). The
Proj ect complies with this policy because, pending city approvals, Genentech will
develop bike lanes along Forbes Boulevard fi.om the intersection of Forbes at Allerton to
the terminus of Forbes Boulevard, and DNA Way/Grandview Drive froIn the terminus of
Forbes to East Grand Boulevard.
D. The Project is consistent with General Plan Implementing Policies,
including:
1. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-3 (do not permit any residential
uses in the East of 101 area). The Project complies with this policy because it will not
entail any residential use.
ii. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-7 (signage and streetscape plans
for Business Commercial and Business and Technology Park). The Project complies
with this policy because Genentech has a comprehensive signage plan that has been
reviewed and approved by the City.
111. l1nplementing Policy 3.5 - I -8 (development of employee-
serving amenities). The Project complies with this policy because it includes space for
campus amenities such as cafeterias and Grab-and-Go facilities for food. Further,
Genentech has developed a fitness center, various amenities and services that allow
Genentech employees to attend to personal and family needs (such as dry cleaning)
without having to leave the Campus, as well as a robust childcare program.
iv. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-13 (waterfront enhancements).
The Proj ect complies with this policy because Genentech has committed to developing
approximately one mile of the San Francisco Bay Trail along its entire bay frontage.
v. Implementing Policy 5.1-1-2 (parkland standards). The
Proj ect complies with this policy because Genentech will develop an open green space
-144-
for public use of approximately 0.8 acres. This will also include a food concession with
inside seating area and public restrooms.
E. The Project is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan Policies,
including Policy LU-16 (encouraging development of campus settings and plaImed
growth for multiple parcel developlnents, and promoting the developnlent of facility
"Master Plan"). The Project complies with this policy because it entails the development
of a master planned canlpus, which supports a diverse range of R&D facilities.
F. The Project is designed to take advantage of and promote the use
of public transit by adopting a Transportation Demand Management Plan that provides
incentives for employees to use alternative modes of transportation, promotes parking
cash-out incentives, and uses a lower parking ratio to increase ridership on BART and the
East of 101 shuttle service, as well as constructing pedestrian walkways linking the
Proj ect to the adj acent shuttle stops and bikepaths.
G. The Project will contribute to the City's reputation as a premier
biotechnology and research and development center by maintaining the corporate
headquarters of one of the biotechnology industry founders in South SaIl Francisco.
H. The Project will provide stability and predictability for the possible
development of future facilities, encouraging Genentech to continue its growth within the
City. Demonstrating the City's support for such facilities will enhance the City's
reputation as the "birthplace of biotechnology", and will attract other biotech companies
to the area.
1. In the past, Genentech's practice has been to conduct business with
more than 200 local South San Francisco businesses and vendors, spending
approximately $15 million on an annual basis. The Project will enable Genentech to
continue and expand this practice.
J. The Project will enable Genentech to continue its practice of
supporting many local organizations and non-profit groups, as well as its encouragenlent
of employee spending at South San Francisco local businesses, which it has promoted for
the past 14 years through the Genentech Goes To Town program.
K. With the company's growth and expansion, Genentech has
incurred approximately $800 million in construction costs alone in South San Francisco
in the past five years. The Project will result in the growth of this expenditure by
approximately $600 million over the next five years. This additional Proj ect-related
growth will result in the employment of an average of 800 to 1000 people per year to
support Project-related construction projects.
L. Over the past five years, Genentech has contributed to numerous
local organizations and non-profit groups. Last year the company provided funds to
various South San Francisco nonprofit organizations like Day in the Park, South San
-145-
Francisco Fun Run, the Fire Department's Fire Safety Week, Police Department events
and to various science programs in the South San Francisco School District. The Project
will allow Genentech to continue and expand this practice of contribution.
M. Genentech has to date spent approximately $6 million on public
trail development. Implementation of the Proj ect will allow Genentech to continue its
commitment to developing the Bay Trail as an mnenity for members of the community
and the company's employees.
923489_3; 405.1027
-146-
EXHIBIT C
Statement of Overriding Considerations
-147-
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco adopts this
Statement of Overriding C011siderations for those impacts identified as significant and
unavoidable in the Master Environmental Impact Report ("MEIR") for the Genentech
Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master
Plan Update ("Master Plan Update" or "Project"), and hereby finds that the specific
overriding economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project
outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts. (Resolution The
City Council has carefully considered each iInpact in reaching its decision to approve the
Project, and that decision is based on the findings of fact and the substantial evidence
presented in the whole record of this proceeding.
The Project proposes to increase the size of the current Genentech campus to
approximately six million square feet of office, research and developn1ent,
manufacturing, amenities buildings, and parking structures. The proposed Project is
located in the City's East of 101 Area and is controlled by the East of 101 Area Plan.
The City Council adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations
concurrently with the Project findings, and adoption and approval of the MEIR, the 2006
Facilities Master Plan Update, reclassification and zoning map change often parcels in
the Planned Industrial zone into the Genentech R&D Overlay District, zoning text
changes to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 20.39 and 20.40, and the
Transpoliation Demand Managelnent Plan. The City Council hereby adopts specific
overriding considerations for the iInpacts listed below that are identified in the MEIR as
significant and unavoidable. The City Council believes that Inany of the unavoidable
envirom11ental effects identified in the MEIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation
n1easures adopted tlnough the current proj ect approval, and further implemented through
the related Conditions of Approval for each future development that is part of the Project,
including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the MEIR and Master Plan
Update. Even with n1itigation, however, the City Council recognizes that the
implementation of the Project carries with it certain unavoidable adverse environmental
effects as identified in the MEIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent
the identified adverse or potentially adverse ilnpacts from the Project cannot be mitigated
to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, legal, social, technological,
environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the Project.
2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts. The following significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts have been identified in the Master Environmental
Impact Report for Genentech Corporate Facilities Research and Development Overlay
District Expansion and Master Plan Update:
Impact 4.3-4: Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile
sources would result from normal day-to-day activity within the MEIR Study Area.
These would potentially exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation or result in a cun1u1atively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an
-148-
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding: As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce these emissions, this impact
would be significant and unavoidable,
Impact 4.4-6: Operation of the proposed Project would generate increased local
traffic volumes that would cause a substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity. This is considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding: As no feasible n1itigation is available to reduce this impact, this impact
would be significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F
conditions at Oyster Point BoulevardJUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M.
peak hour. After implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the impact would
be-reduced, but the Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection would still
operate at an unacceptable level during the P.M. peak hour.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-1(a): Create additional westbound right-turn lane.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-1(b): Add an additional lane on northbound
Dubuque Avenue between the U.S.I01 Ramps intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard.
Reconfigure the northbound approach to Oyster Point Boulevard to provide two
exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and two exclusive right turn lanes. As
part of this widening, eliminate the left turn lane on the southbound Dubuque Avenue
approach to the U. S.1 01 Ran1ps intersection (which serves mini warehouse facilities) and
allow southbound left turns from the southbound through lane. This will allow provision
of five full northbound travel lanes on Dubuque Avenue between the northbound Off-
Ramp intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. Adjust signal tnning.
Finding: \Vhile MM 4.7-1(a) and (b) would reduce this impact, even after
implementation of the mitigation measures, this intersection would still operate at an
unacceptable level of service (LOS E). Therefore, this is considered a significant and
unavoidable impact.
Impact 4.7-5: Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E
conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour.
This would be a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-5: Re-stripe southbound AirpOli Boulevard right turn
to a shared through-right lane and southbound shared through/left lane to a left turn lane.
-149-
Widen eastbound Grand Avenue to add two left lanes; re-stripe the eastbound
through/left shared lane to a through lane and eastbound right turn lane to a shared
through/right lane. Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck
traffic on westbound Grand Avenue. Existing signal modification.
Finding: Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level. However, construction of additional lanes along
Grand Avenue, as identified in MM 4.7-5, would require expanding the right of way,
which in addition to the expense associated with such an expansion, would have a
negative effect on adjacent businesses. In light of these specific economic and
technological concerns, to the extent MM 4.7-5 requires a widening of Grand Avenue,
the mitigation measure is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code
9 21 061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accolnplished . . . taking into account
economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the lead agency (here, the
City) has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic and
teclmological concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code
921081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, 9 15021, subd. (d).) \Vhere economic or
technological concerns render a particular nlitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency
may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code 921081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore,
only the improvements to Airport Boulevard are feasible. Because there exist no
additional feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
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) U.S. 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.
Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures.
Finding: There are no feasible mitigation nleasures that would reduce this impact
to a less than significant level. In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to-
capacity ratios for the U.S. 101 nlainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new
freeway would need to be constructed. Given the location of this segInent of the U.S.
101, and its close proximity to the surrounding developlnent, such widening or new
construction is not possible. Additionally, this mitigation would be prohibitively
expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would benefit. For these reasons,
mitigation of lInpact 4.7-12 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA 9 21061.1, which states
that "economic. . . and teclmological factors" are to be taken into account when
determining feasibility. Additionally, potential mitigation measures to reduce this impact
would require approval from outside agencies. The South San Francisco's General Plan
Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[a]ccept LOS E or F after finding
that: There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The
uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit."
Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
-150-
Impact 4.7-15: l1nplementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic at
the already lmacceptable Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque AvenuelU.S. 101 NB On-
Ramp by more than two percent.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by
the City Engineer) towards the addition of a second exclusive right turn lane on the
westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. Implement MM 4.7-1(b). Adjust signal
timing.
Finding: VVhile implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 would reduce
this impact, it would not reduce it to a less-than-significant level. The increase in traffic
volume would still be significant after mitigation, therefore this impact would be
considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-18: Implelnentation of the proposed Project would increase baseline
traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674
vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation
measure MM 4.7-18 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, however,
because MM 4.7-18 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain
significant and unavoidable. .
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-18: Provide a fair-share contribution, as determined
by City Engineer, to provision of a second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the
U.S. 1011nainline at the Dubuque Avenue off-ramp.
Finding: After implementation of the proposed mitigation Ineasure, traffic at the
northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue would not increase past unacceptable levels.
However, as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting
Dubuque Avenue east of its current location, implementation of the mitigation measure
would require an expansion of the right of way, and have a substantial adverse effect on
adjacent businesses. Given these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-
18 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21061.1 (defining
"feasible" as "capable of being accolnplished . . . taking into account economic. . . and
technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public
objectives, including specific economic and teclmological concerns, against the benefits
of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines,
S 15021, subd. (d).) Where econolnic and tedmological concerns render a particular
mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub.
Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a )(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible
mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, this
impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact 4.7-19: Implementation of the proposed project would increase baseline
traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway
Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This
would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-19 would reduce this impact
-151-
to a less-than-significant level; however, because MM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly
implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-19: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by
the City Engineer) towards the construction of a second southbound off-ramp lane
cOID1ection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp.
Finding: After implementation of the proposed nlitigation measure, traffic at the
southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard would not
increase past unacceptable levels. However, implementation of MM 4.7-19 would require
the relocation of at least one support column for the Oyster Point flyover ramp. Such
relocation is not feasible given the expense and geometries of the rights of way. In light
of these specific economic and teclmological concerns, MM 4.7-19 is not feasible, as
defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21 061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable
of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological
factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public objectives,
including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub.
Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where
econOlnic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency
may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore,
because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a
less-than-significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.
3. Overridin2: Considerations. The City Council now balances the
unavoidable impacts that will result from future development of the Project, against its
benefits, and hereby detennines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the
benefits of the Project, as further set forth below.
The following specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, land
use, and other considerations support approval of the Project:
A. Genentech anticipates paying more than $100 million to South San
Francisco and its school districts in propeliy taxes. Furthermore, at full build out, the
Project is expected to employ approximately 6,700 additional employees. Many of these
new positions will be filled by residents of local COlTIll1unities.
B. The existing physical environment in which the Project will be
developed consists primarily of industrial development, with wide roadways, limited
sidewalks, and minimal site improvements. Additionally, current development lacks
amenities and connections to the shoreline. The Project, including the expansion of the
Overlay District, will convert several of these properties to uses consistent with campus-
style development (pursuant to General Plan Guiding Policy 3.5-G-3), including
additional amenities and improvements, as well as increased access to the shoreline.
C. The Project is consistent with the General Plan Guiding Policies
for the East of 101 Area, which provide appropriate settings for a diverse range of non-
-152-
residential uses and proInotes campus-style bioteclmology, high-teclmology, and research
and development uses. Specifically, the Project complies with the following Guiding
Policies:
i. GP 3.5-G-1 (Provide appropriate settings for a diverse
range of non-residential uses). The Project complies with this policy because it will
provide a campus setting for non-residential uses, including manufacturing, research and
development, and office uses, as well as amenities space.
ii. GP 3.5-G-3 (Promote campus-style bioteclmology, high-
teclmology, and research and development uses). The Project complies with this policy
because it provides for the expansion of an existing c81npus-style bioteclmology and
research and development use.
iii. GP 4.3-G-1 (develop a comprehensive and integrated
system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation). The
Project complies with this policy because, pending city approvals, Genentech will
develop bike lanes along Forbes Boulevard froIn the intersection of Forbes at Allerton to
the terminus of Forbes Boulev81'd, and DNA Way/Grandview Drive from the terminus of
Forbes to East Grand Boulevard by maintaining the corporate headquarters for one of the
bioteclmology industry founders in South San Francisco.
D. The Project is consistent with General Plan Implementing Policies,
including:
1. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-3 (do not permit any residential
uses in the East of 101 area). The Project complies with this policy because it will not
entail any residential use.
ii. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-7 (signage and streetscape pl811S
for Business Commercial and Business and Teclmology Park). The Project complies
with this policy because Genentech has a comprehensive signage plan that has been
reviewed and approved by the City.
111. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-8 (development of employee-
serving amenities). The Project complies with this policy because it includes space for
campus amenities such as cafeterias and Grab-and-Go facilities for food. Further,
Genentech has developed a fitness center, various amenities and services that allow
Genentech eInployees to attend to personal and family needs (such as dry cleaning)
without having to leave the Campus, as well as a robust childcare program.
iv. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-13 (waterfront enhancements).
The Project complies with this policy because Genentech has committed to developing
approximately one mile of the San Francisco Bay Trail along its entire bay frontage.
v. Implementing Policy 5.1-1-2 (parkland standards). The
Project complies with this policy because Genentech will develop an open green space
-153-
for public use of approximately 0.8 acres. This will also include a food concession with
inside seating area and public restrooms.
E. The Project is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan Policies,
including Policy LU-16 (encouraging development of campus settings and plmmed
growth for multiple parcel developments, and promoting the development of facility
"Master Plan"). The Project complies with this policy because it entails the development
of a master planned campus, which supports a diverse range of R&D facilities.
F. The Project is designed to take advm1tage of and promote the use
of public transit by adopting a Transportation Demand Managen1ent Plan that provides
incentives for employees to use alten1ative modes of transportation, promotes parking
cash-out incentives, and uses a lower parking ratio to increase ridership on BART and the
East of 101 shuttle service, as well as constructing pedestrian walkways linking the
Project to the adjacent shuttle stops and bikepaths.
G. The Project will contribute to the City's reputation as a premier
biotechnology m1d research and development center by maintaining the corporate
headqumiers of one of the bioteclmology industry founders in South San Francisco.
H. The Project will provide stability and predictability for the possible
developlnent of future facilities, encouraging Genentech to continue its growth within the
City. Demonstrating the City's support for such facilities will enhance the City's
reputation as the "birthplace ofbioteclmology", and will attract other biotech cOlnpanies
to the area.
1. In the past, Genentech's practice has been to conduct business with
more than 200 local South San Francisco businesses and vendors, spending
approximately $15 lnillion on an mIDual basis. The Project will enable Genentech to
continue and expand this practice.
J. The Project will enable Genentech to continue its practice of
supporting Inany local organizations and non-profit groups, as well as its encouragement
of employee spending at South San Francisco local businesses, which it has promoted for
the past 14 years through the Genentech Goes To Town program.
K. With the company's growth and expansion, Genentech has
incurred approximately $800 million in construction costs alone in South San Francisco
in the past five years. The Project will result in the growth of this expenditure by
approximately $600 million over the next five years. This additional Project-related
growth will result in the employment of an average of 800 to 1000 people per year to
support Project-related construction projects.
L, Over the past five years, Genentech has contributed to numerous
local organizations and non-profit groups. Last year the company provided funds to
various South San Francisco nonprofit organizations like Day in the Park, South San
-154-
Francisco Fun Run, the Fire Departlnent's Fire Safety Week, Police Department events
and to various science programs in the South San Francisco School District. The Project
will allow Genentech to continue and expand this practice of contribution.
M. Genentech has to date spent approximately $6 million on public
trail development. Implementation of the Project will allow Genentech to continue its
commitment to developing the Bay Trail as an mnenity for members of the community
and the company's employees.
923489_3; 405,1027
-155-