HomeMy WebLinkAbout1070-1080 San Mateo DEIR
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmC~NI~LJMmLQc:;I~I1c.:SP~QJEQ
Draft Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2009012023
June 2009
City South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue - P.O. Box 711
South San Francisco, CA 94083
~
LAMPHIER - GREGORY
URBAN PLANNING, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS & PROJECT MANAGEMENT I 510.535.6690
CONTENTS
Page
Cha pter 1: Introd u cti on.................................................................................................................... 1-1
Purpose of the Environmental Impact Report.................................................................................. 1-1
EIR Review Process......................................................................................................................... 1-1
Content and Organization of the EIR...............................................................................................1-2
Chapter 2: Executive Summary and Impact Overview .................................................................2-1
Proposed Project............................................................................................................................... 2-1
Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................... 2- 2
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ........................................................................................ 2-2
Impacts Determined Not to be Significant ................................................................................2-3
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes....................................................................... 2-4
Growth-Inducing Impacts.......................................................................................................... 2-4
Cumulative Impacts................................................................................................................... 2-5
Chapter 3: Project Description ........................................................................................................3-1
Project Location and Site Conditions ............................................................................................... 3-1
Project Description........................................................................................................................... 3-4
Project Objectives............................................................................................................................ 3-9
Intended Uses of This EIR ............................................................................................................. 3-10
Chapter 4: Air Quality ......................................................................................................................4-1
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 4-1
Meteorology and Climatology................................................................................................... 4-1
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 4-2
Existing Air Quality................................................................................................................... 4-4
Impact Analysis...................................................................................................................... ..........4-6
Standards of Significance.......................................................................................................... 4-6
Conflict with Air Quality Plan................................................................................................... 4-6
Air Quality Standards................................................................................................................ 4-7
Cumulatively Air Quality Impacts........................................................................................... 4-11
Sensitive Receptors.................................................................................................................. 4-13
Odors....................................................................................................................................... 4-14
Chapter 5: Geology and Soils...........................................................................................................5-1
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 5-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 5-1
Regional Seismicity ................................................................................................................... 5-1
Regional Geology...................................................................................................................... 5-4
Site Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................. 5-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE i
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Landsliding and Slope Stability ................................................................................................ 5-5
Primary Seismic Hazards - Surface Fault Rupture................................................................... 5-5
Secondary Seismic Hazards ...................................................................................................... 5-6
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 5-9
Impact Analysis............................................................................................................................. 5-11
Standards of Significance........................................................................................................ 5-11
Seismic Impacts...................................................................................................................... 5-12
Soil Erosion............................................................................................................................. 5-15
Unstable Geologic Unit........................................................................................................... 5-16
Expansive Soils....................................................................................................................... 5-17
Septic Systems........................................................................................................................ 5-18
Chapter 6: Hazardous Materials.....................................................................................................6-1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 6-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 6-2
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 6-2
Site History ............................................................................................................................... 6-4
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment ................................................................................... 6-5
Vicinity Hazardous Materials Sites........................................................................................... 6-6
Current Contamination Levels and Health Risks ...................................................................... 6-6
Impact Analysis............................................................................................................................... 6-7
Standards of Significance.......................................................................................................... 6-7
Hazardous Materials Use, Transport.........................................................................................6-7
Accidental Hazardous Materials Release ................................................................................ 6-11
Hazardous Materials Sites....................................................................................................... 6-12
Hazardous Materials Near Schools ......................................................................................... 6-15
Airport Land Use Plan ............................................................................................................ 6-16
Adopted Emergency Response Plan....................................................................................... 6-16
Wildland Fires......................................................................................................................... 6-16
Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts.......................................................... 6-17
Chapter 7: Hydrology ....................................................................................................................... 7-1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 7-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 7-1
Climate and Topography ........................................................................................................... 7-1
Regional Hydrology.................................................................................................................. 7-2
Site Hydrology.......................................................................................................................... 7-2
Groundwater.................................................................................................................... .......... 7-3
Flooding.................................................................................................................................... 7-3
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 7-3
Impact Analysis............................................................................................................................... 7-6
Standards of Significance.......................................................................................................... 7-6
Increased Erosion or Siltation to Receiving Waters.................................................................. 7-7
Water Quality Standards or Water Discharge Requirements .................................................... 7-9
Changes in Stormwater Runoff............................................................................................... 7-11
Groundwater Depletion/Recharge........................................................................................... 7-12
Otherwise Substantially Degrade Water Quality .................................................................... 7-13
Housing Within a 100-Year Flood Hazard Area..................................................................... 7-13
Significant Risk Involving Flooding ....................................................................................... 7-13
Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami or Mudflow........................................................................... 7-13
Cumulative Hydrology Impact Analysis.................................................................................7-14
PAGE ii
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CONTENTS
Chapter 8: Land Use .........................................................................................................................8-1
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 8-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 8-1
History ....................................................................................................................................... 8-1
Existing Uses............................................................................................................................. 8-2
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 8-3
Impact Analysis...................................................................................................................... ..........8-5
Standards of Significance.......................................................................................................... 8-5
Dividing Established Community.............................................................................................. 8-5
Conflict with Plans and Policies ................................................................................................8-5
Conflict with Conservation Plan................................................................................................ 8-9
Cha pter 9 : Noise................................................................................................................................ 9-1
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 9-1
Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 9-1
Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise.................................................................... 9-1
Existing Noise Environment...................................................................................................... 9-3
Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................................... 9-4
Impact Analysis...................................................................................................................... ..........9-5
Standards of Significance.......................................................................................................... 9-5
Permanent Noise Increases........................................................................................................ 9-5
Temporary Noise Increases....................................................................................................... 9-6
Groundbome Vibration.............................................................................................................. 9-7
Airports...................................................................................................................................... 9-7
Cumulative Noise Impacts......................................................................................................... 9- 7
Chapter 10: Transportation and Circulation ...............................................................................10-1
Introducti on............................................................................................................................ ........ 10-1
Setting............................................................................................................................................ 10-1
Roadways................................................................................................................................. 10-1
Intersection Operation............................................................................................................. 10-4
Level of Service Calculations ..................................................................................................10-5
Existing Operating Conditions................................................................................................ 10-8
Transit, Pedestrians & Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................10-9
Existing Parking.................................................................................................................... 10-10
Transportation Demand Management Program..................................................................... 1 0-11
Impact Analysis........................................................................................................................... 10-12
Significance Criteria.............................................................................................................. 10-12
Project Trip Generation......................................................................................................... 10-13
Existing Plus Project Intersection Impacts ............................................................................10-16
Existing Plus Project Roadway Impacts ................................................................................10-17
Cumulative (Year 2020) Intersection Impacts....................................................................... 10-18
Cumulative (Year 2020) Roadway Impacts ..........................................................................10-20
Cumulative (Year 2030) Intersection Impacts.......................................................................10-21
Cumulative (Year 2030) Roadway Impacts ..........................................................................10-24
Transit, Pedestrian & Bicycle Operations .............................................................................10-24
Site Plan and Area Circulation Analysis ...............................................................................10-26
Parking....................................................................................................................... ............ 10-27
Chapter 11: Utilities ........................................................................................................................ 11-1
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 11-1
Setting............................................................................................................................................ 11-1
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE iii
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Water Supply........................................................................................................................... 11-1
Wastewater.............................................................................................................................. 11-2
Storm Drainage Facilities ........................................................................................................ 11-3
Solid Waste............................................................................................................................. 11-4
Regulatory Setting................................................................................................................... 11-4
Impact Analysis............................................................................................................................. 11-6
Standards of Significance........................................................................................................ 11-6
Increase in Wastewater Flows ................................................................................................. 11-6
Wastewater Treatment............................................................................................................ 11-8
Water Supply & Infrastructure................................................................................................ 11-9
Storm Drainage Infrastructure................................................................................................. 11-9
Landfill Capacity..................................................................................................................... 11-9
Energy................................................................................................................................... 11-10
Cumulative Utilities Impacts................................................................................................. 11-10
Chapter 12: Climate Change ......................................................................................................... 12-1
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 12-1
Setting............................................................................................................................................ 12-1
Regulatory Setting......................................................................................................................... 12-3
Impact Analysis................................................................................................................................ 12-8
Standards of Significance.............................................................................................................. 12-8
Chapter 13: Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 13-1
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 13-1
Project Objectives.......................................................................................................................... 13-2
Alternatives Analysis..................................................................................................................... 13-3
No Project Alternative............................................................................................................. 13-4
Reduced Intensity Alternative................................................................................................. 13-5
Environmentally Superior Alternative......................................................................................... 13-10
Chapter 14: References .................................................................................................................. 14-1
Report Preparers ............................................................................................................................ 14-1
References..................................................................................................................................... 14-1
Appendices
Appendix A - Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Comments
Appendix B - Initial Study
Appendix C - Air Quality Analysis
Appendix D - Traffic Analysis
Appendix E - Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan
Appendix F - Wet Utility Study
Figu res
3-1: Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................................... 3-2
3-2: Street Map.............................................................................................................................. 3-3
3-3: Proposed Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 3-11
3-4: Existing Building 1 Floor Plan ............................................................................................ 3-13
3-5: Building 1 Floor Plan........................................................................................................... 3-14
3-6: Buildings 2 & 5 Floor Plan.................................................................................................. 3-15
PAGE iv CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CONTENTS
3-7: Buildings 3 & 4 Floor Plan................................................................................................... 3-16
3-8: Building 6 Floor Plan ........................................................................................................... 3-17
3-9: Building 1 Roof Plan............................................................................................................ 3-18
3-10: Buildings 2 & 5 RoofPlan...................................................................................................3-19
3-11: Buildings 3 & 4 Roof Plan ................................................................................................... 3-20
3-12: Building 6 Room Plan .......................................................................................................... 3-21
3-13: Building 1 Elevation Plans ................................................................................................... 3-22
3-14: Building 1 Elevation Plans ................................................................................................... 3-23
3-15: Building 1 Elevation Plans ................................................................................................... 3-24
3-16: Building 1 Elevation Plans ................................................................................................... 3-25
3-17: Buildings 2 & 5 Elevation Plans ..........................................................................................3-26
3-18: Building 6 Elevation Plans ................................................................................................... 3-27
3-19: Landscape Plan..................................................................................................................... 3-28
5-1: Major Faults and Earthquake Epicenters................................................................................ 5-2
Tables
4-1: Summary of Criteria Air Pollution Monitoring Data .............................................................4-5
5-1: Mean Characteristic Moment Magnitude of Nearby Faults ................................................... 5-3
5-2: Modified Mercalli Earthquake Intensity Scale....................................................................... 5-8
5-3: Seismic Design Criteria per CBC......................................................................................... 5-14
6-1: Select General Plan Policies Regarding Hazardous Materials ...............................................6-4
6-2: Current Shallow Soils Contamination Levels ........................................................................6-7
7-1: Potential Pollutants from Industrial Activities .......................................................................7-9
7-2: Change in Peak Flow Rates.................................................................................................. 7-12
9-1: Definition of Acoustical Terms .............................................................................................. 9-2
9-2: Typical Sound Levels Measured in the Environment and Industry .......................................9-3
10-1: Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds .................................................10-5
10-2: Levels of Service Criteria for Arterials ................................................................................10-7
10-3: Levels of Service Criteria for Freeways Based on V-C Ratios ............................................10-8
10-4: Trip Generation Rate Correlation.......................................................................................10-14
10-5: Proposed Project Trip Generation With a 15% TDM Reduction....................................... 10-15
10-6: Proposed Project Trip Distribution.....................................................................................10-16
12-1: Global Warming Potentials (100-Year Time Horizon) ........................................................12-1
12-2: Recommended AB32 Greenhouse Gas Measures ................................................................12-6
13-1: Trip Generation - No Project Alternative ............................................................................13-4
13-2: Trip Generation - Reduced Intensity Alternative................................................................. 13-8
13-4: Summary Comparison ofImpacts, Proposed Project and Alternatives.............................. 13-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE v
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
PAGE vi
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
1
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The California Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder
(together "CEQA") require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be prepared for any
project which may have a significant impact on the environment. An EIR is an informational
document, the purposes of which, according to CEQA are ".. .to provide public agencies and
the public in general with detailed information about the effect which a proposed project is
likely to have on the environment; to list ways in which the significant effects of such a
project might be minimized; and to indicate alternatives to such a project." The information
contained in this EIR is intended to be objective and impartial, and to enable the reader to
arrive at an independent judgment regarding the significance of the impacts resulting from
the proposed project.
This EIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the
Centrum Logistics Project in the City of South San Francisco, California (the "Project"). The
Project applicant is AG/Centrum SSF, LLC and the Lead Agency is the City of South San
Francisco. The applicant is seeking a Use Permit, Variance, Design Review, Tentative Parcel
Map and a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to enable the renovation of an
existing warehouse building and the construction of five new buildings including parking lot
and landscape improvements. Approval must be given by the City of South San Francisco
before construction may begin.
EIR REVIEW PROCESS
This EIR is intended to enable City decision makers, public agencies and interested citizens
to evaluate the environmental consequences associated with the proposed Proj ect. An EIR
does not control the lead agency's ultimate decision on the Project, however, the City of
South San Francisco, as lead agency will consider the information contained in the EIR prior
to making a decision on the Project. As required under CEQA, the agency must also respond
to each significant effect identified in the EIR by making findings and if necessary, by
making a statement of overriding considerations. In accordance with California law, the EIR
on the Project must be certified before any action on the Project can be taken. EIR
certification does not constitute Project approval.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Together, this Draft EIR (DEIR) and a subsequent Final EIR (FEIR) will constitute the EIR
for the Project. During the review period for this Draft EIR, interested individuals,
organizations and agencies may offer their comments on its evaluation of Proj ect impacts and
alternatives. The comments received during this public review period will be compiled and
presented together with responses to these comments in the Final EIR. The South San
Francisco Planning Commission will review the EIR documents and will determine whether
or not the EIR provides a full and adequate appraisal ofthe Project and its alternatives.
In reviewing the Draft EIR, readers should focus on the sufficiency of the document in
identifying and analyzing the possible environmental impacts associated with the Project.
Readers are also encouraged to review and comment on ways in which significant impacts
associated with this Project might be avoided or mitigated. Comments are most helpful when
they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better
ways to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts. Reviewers should explain the
basis for their comments and, whenever possible, should submit data or references in support
oftheir comments.
This Draft EIR will be circulated for a 45 day public review period. During that public
review period, comments on this Draft should be submitted in writing to:
Steve Carlson, Senior Planner
Department of Economic and Community Development
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94083
Please contact Steve Carlson at 650-877-8535 or web-ecd@ssf.net if you have any questions.
After reviewing the Draft EIR and the Final EIR and following action to certify the EIR as
adequate and complete, the South San Francisco Planning Commission will be in a position
to approve the Project as currently proposed, revised, or rejected. This determination will be
based upon information presented on the entirety of the Project, its impacts and probable
consequences, and the possible alternatives and mitigation measures available.
CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE EIR
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was issued in January 14, 2009 to solicit comments from
public agencies and the public regarding the scope of the environmental evaluation for the
Project (see Appendix A). The NOP and all written responses, as well as the Initial Study are
presented in Appendix A. The responses were taken into consideration during Draft EIR
preparation.
Pursuant to CEQA, the Initial Study (Appendix B) prepared for the Project identified effects
determined not to be significant and, in doing so, focused the EIR on the effects determined
to be potentially significant. Project-related impacts to the following CEQA topics were
PAGE 1-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
determined not to be significant and no additional analysis is included in this Draft EIR:
Aesthetics, Agriculture Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Mineral
Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, and Recreation. For analysis of these
topics, please refer to the Initial Study included in Appendix B. As reflected in the content of
this Draft EIR, the following CEQA topics were determined to have impacts that were
potentially significant and, thus, required further analysis in this Draft EIR: Air Quality,
Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology, Land Use, Noise,
Transportation and Circulation, and Utilities and Service Systems.
Following this brief introduction to the EIR, the document's ensuing chapters include the
following:
Chapter 2: Executive Summary and Impact Overview
Chapter 3: Proj ect Description
Chapter 4: Air Quality (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Air")
Chapter 5: Geology and Soils (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Geo")
Chapter 6: Hazardous Materials (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Haz")
Chapter 7: Hydrology (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Hydro")
Chapter 8: Land Use
Chapter 9: Noise (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Noise")
Chapter I 0: Transportation and Circulation (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Traf')
Chapter II: Utilities and Service Systems (Impacts/Mitigation Measures Labeled "Util")
Chapter 12: Climate Change
Chapter 13: Alternatives
Chapter 14: References
Appendices
In Chapters 4 through 12, existing conditions are discussed in the Setting, followed by an
evaluation of environmental impacts that may be associated with the Project and the
mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate these impacts.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 1-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
PROPOSED PROJECT
PROJECT LOCATION
The 25.02-acre Project site is located at 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue in the City of
South San Francisco, approximately 450 feet north of Interstate 380 and approximately 650
feet west of Interstate 101. The Project site has Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) of 015-
163-230 and 015-163-120.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project would merge the existing two parcels (i.e., 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue)
into a single parcel via a Tentative Parcel Map.
Existing paved off-street parking areas and one small approximately 975 square feet structure
would be demolished. The existing 571,748 square foot, single-story warehouse and
distribution building (Building I) at 1070 San Mateo would be remodeled for multi-tenant
use. Most of the remodeling would occur within the interior of the building with the
exception of three (3) new truck trailer loading docks wells, relocating one truck trailer
loading dock well, 29 new loading dock doors, new pedestrian door openings and new
architectural details (i.e., metal canopies and color change) added to the exterior. Five new
single-story buildings would be constructed. The proposed new buildings would have
individual floor areas ranging from 9,100 square feet to 12,000 square feet, with a total new
proposed building floor area of 52,300 square feet. The proposed maximum building heights
ofthese new buildings range between 25 feet 10 inches to 28 feet 4 inches.
Future tenants of these buildings would include land use types permissible under the site's
Industrial District zoning designation. The proposed use of Building 6, fronting San Mateo
Avenue at 1070 would be for business and professional services, eating and drinking
establishments, convenience and limited service, and/or convenience sales.
The Project would also include re-grade both the 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue parcels
in order to achieve one, interconnected site that facilitates vehicular and pedestrian
circulation, as well as parking, access, circulation, landscape and lighting improvements.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The analyses in Chapters 4 through 12 of this document provide a description of the existing
setting, potential impacts of Project implementation, and recommended mitigation measures
to reduce or avoid potentially significant impacts that could occur as a result of Proj ect
implementation. Table 2.1 at the end of this chapter lists a summary statement of each impact
and corresponding mitigation measures, as well as the level of significance after mitigation.
Significant impacts require the implementation of mitigation measures, or alternatives, or a
finding by the Lead Agency that the measures are infeasible for specific reasons. For some
of the significant impacts, mitigation measures may not be effective in reducing the impacts
to a less than significant level. These impacts are designated significant and unavoidable.
SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED TO A
LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The following Project related impact has been identified as significant and unavoidable:
Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed Project would contribute to
regional air quality emissions and exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds for NOx.
Impact Traf-2: Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection Impacts. Under
cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would
result in a significant and unavoidnble impact to the San Bruno Avenue /
US 101 SB Ramps interchange in the PM peak hour condition. This
interchange is located within the City of San Bruno. The City of South San
Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that
a mitigation measure will actually be implemented; therefore, this impact
would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2030)
conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and
unavoidnble impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps
interchange intersection in the AM peak hour condition. This interchange
is located within the City of San Bruno. The City of South San Francisco,
as lead agency for the Proj ect, cannot require or guarantee that a
mitigation measure will actually be implemented; therefore, this impact
would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project's circulation plan would contribute
additional large commercial vehicular turn movements to the San Bruno
Avenue and San Mateo Avenue intersection which has insufficient turning
radius. Taking into account the economic, jurisdictional and technological
factors required to facilitate the truck turning movement, there is no
feasible mitigation that would reduce this impact to a less than significant-
PAGE 2-2 CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
level. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
These impacts are more fully discussed in Chapter 4: Air Quality and Chapter 10:
Transportation and Circulation.
IMPACTS DETERMINED NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
The following impact topic areas related to the Centrum Logistics Project would be
considered to have no impact or a less than significant impact with no mitigation required,
and were scoped out in the Initial Study (attached as Appendix A) with no additional analysis
included in this Draft EIR:
. Aesthetics,
. Biological Resources,
. Cultural Resources,
. Mineral Resources,
. Population and Housing,
. Public Services, and
. Recreation.
The following impact topic areas were analyzed in this Draft EIR and determined to have no
impact, a less than significant impact, or to be less than significant after mitigation:
. Geology and Soils,
. Hazardous Materials,
. Hydrology,
. Land Use,
. Noise,
. Utilities and Service Systems, and
. Global Climate Change.
The only CEQA topic areas not listed above are Transportation and Circulation, and Air
Quality which each include one significant and unavoidable impact, respectively, that cannot
be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Impact analysis is included in Chapters 4 through 12 of this Draft EIR. Impacts and
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
mitigation measures are summarized in Table 2-1 at the end ofthis chapter.
SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
An EIR must identify any significant irreversible environmental changes that could be caused
by the proposed Project. These may include current or future uses of non-renewable
resources, and secondary or growth-inducing impacts that commit future generations to
similar uses. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such
current consumption is justified. The CEQA Guidelines describe three distinct categories of
significant irreversible changes: I) changes in land use which would commit future
generations to specific uses; 2) irreversible changes from environmental actions; and 3)
consumption of non-renewable resources.
Changes in Land Use Which Would Commit Future Generations
The Project would not change the land use at the Project site, but would remain a commercial
and industrial use.
Irreversible Changes from Environmental Actions
Irreversible changes to the physical environment could stem from the accidental release of
hazardous materials associated with development and/or on-going use of the site as a
research facility. However, compliance with hazardous materials regulations and policies as
outlined in Chapter 6 of this document, Hazardous Materials, is expected to maintain this
potential impact at a less than significant level.
Consumption of Nonrenewable Resources
Consumption of nonrenewable resources includes increased energy consumption, conversion
of agricultural lands, and lost access to mining reserves. No agricultural lands would be
converted and no access to mining reserves would be lost with implementation ofthe Project.
The Project would result in the consumption of some nonrenewable resources during
construction and operation, such as electricity and construction materials. While this would
require additional energy of several types for construction and on-going use, it would not
require the construction of major new lines to deliver energy, and it is anticipated service
providers can provide the capacity to serve this Proj ect.
GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
The proposed Project would not be expected to result in a direct increase in the local
population, since it would not result in the construction of any new housing units. The
proposed Project would not require any major increases in the capacity of local infrastructure
which might later be used to support new housing development, and would not result in the
extension of infrastructure into areas which might ultimately support new housing.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
PAGE 2-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
As defined in Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, a cumulative impact consists of an
impact that is created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR
together with other projects causing related impacts. "Cumulative impacts" refer to two or
more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which
compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several
projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the
Project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonable foreseeable
probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but
collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. Cumulative impacts were
analyzed within each topic area in Chapters 4 through 12 of this document and found to be
less than significant with the following exceptions:
. The development of the Project site, as proposed, would contribute NOx emissions III
excess of thresholds established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District,
thereby, resulting in a significant and unavoidable cumulative air quality impact.
. The development of the Project site, as proposed, would contribute traffic to one
intersection in excess of significance criteria adopted from the 2007 San Mateo County
Congestion Management Program (CMP), thereby resulting in a significant and
unavoidnble cumulative transportation and circulation impact.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Chapter 13 includes an analysis of the ability of two alternatives to meet most of the basic
objectives of the proposed Project and also identifies how each alternative would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. The two Project alternatives
analyzed are summarized as follows:
. No Project Alternative - Retention of the Project site in its current state, as articulated in
the existing setting discussion of Chapter 3 (Project Description). In summary, this
includes: (a) private, off-site parking facility serving patrons of the San Francisco
International Airport; and (b) 77,477 sq. ft. of floor area, within an existing 571,748 sq.ft.
single-story building, occupied by the United States Postal Service (USPS) year round.
. Reduced Intensity Alternative - Remodel of existing Building I including use of its entire
approximate 571,748 square feet of floor area, elimination of proposed new Building
Nos. I through 5, and construction of proposed new Building No.6 including 9,100
square feet of floor area.
These two alternatives would all have the same or only slightly lessened impacts on Traffic
and Circulation and Air Quality than the proposed Project. Impacts in the other topic areas of
Aesthetics, Geology and Soils, Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Utilities would be the same
or minimally reduced by these alternatives.
The No Project Alternative would not change the existing condition of the site, and so would
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
not meet any of the Project's basic objectives to the same degree as the proposed Project. The
Reduced Intensity Alternative would produce only slightly fewer vehicle trips and less air
pollutant emissions. However, the Alternative's traffic levels would not be sufficiently
reduced reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Rather, like the proposed Project, the
Reduced Intensity Alternative would also result in significant and unavoidnble impacts
relative to cumulative air quality and transportation and circulations. However, overall, the
Reduced Intensity Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed Project.
PAGE 2-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
.i
Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Air-3a: Tractor-Trailer Idling. Pursuant to Significant
Impacts. The proposed Project would California Code of Regulations Title 13, Chapter 10, and
contribute to regional air quality emissions and Section 2485 - Mobile Source Operational Controls, Unavoidable
exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds for Article 1 - Motor Vehicles, Division 3, the Applicant
NOx. This would be considered a significant shall prohibit all diesel trucks and other delivery
impact. vehicles from idling their engines for more than five
minutes when making deliveries to or from the Project
site. Signage shall be posted throughout the facility
displaying the requirement that engines shall not idle
for more than five minutes.
Air-3b: Transportation Demand Management
Program. Implementation of a Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Program is required, as
described in Mitigation Measure Traf-l of the
Transportation and Circulation chapter. This Program
would reduce the mnnber of vehicle trips to and from
the Project site. The following components shall be
included in the TDM Program to further reduce
Project impacts to air quality:
. Provide bicycle amenities so that employees
could bicycle to the Project. Such amenities could
include safe onsite bicycle access and convenient
storage (bike racks). Amenities for employees
could include secure bicycle parking, lockers, and
shower facilities.
. For all buildings, provide outdoor electrical
outlets and encourage the use of electrical
landscape maintenance equipment.
. Provide electrical outlets for recharging electrical
vehicles in conunercial and industrial parking
lots/structures.
. Provide 110 and 220 Volt outlets at al110ading
docks and prohibit trucks from using their
auxiliary equipment powered by diesel engines
for more than 5 minutes.
. Provide new trees that would shade buildings and
walkways in SlllTImer to reduce the cooling loads
on buildings.
Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Traf-2c: San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Significant
Intersection Impacts. Under clllTIulative (Year Ramps (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, and
2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic the Project applicant shall be responsible for re- Unavoidable
would result in a significant and mavoidable striping the existing SOUthbOlllld-through lane to
impact to the San Brmo Avenue / US 101 SB acconunodate a southbound through-right lane.
Ramps interchange in the PM peak hour With this improvement, the delay at the intersection
condition. This interchange is located within the
City of San Bruno. The City of South San would be reduced to 28.7 seconds, such that the 'with
project" delay would be reduced to below the "without
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, project" condition. This improvement would
cannot require or guarantee that a mitigation effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this
measure will actually be implemented; intersection to a less than significant level. However,
therefore, this impact would remain significant because the intersection is within the city limits of the
and unavoidable. City of San Ermo, adoption of the measure is not
within the responsibility or jurisdiction of the City of
South San Francisco. \Vhile San Bnmo could
implement the mitigation measure to ensure that this
impact is reduced to a less than significant level, the
City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the
Project, call1lot require or guarantee that the measure
will actually be implemented; therefore, this impact
would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Traf-3b: San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Significant
Intersection Impacts. Under clllTIulative (Year Ramps (2030 AM). In order to mitigate this impact, and
2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic the Project applicant shall be responsible for re- Unavoidable
would result in a significant and llllavoidable striping the existing southbolllld-through lane to
impact to the San Brllllo A venue I US 101 SB acconunodate a southbolllld through-right lane.
Ramps interchange intersection in the AM peak With this improvement, the delay at the intersection
hour condition. This interchange is located
within the City of San Bruno. The City of South would be reduced to 28.7 seconds during the AM and
San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, 41.8 during the PM, thereby restoring the level of
cannot require or guarantee that a mitigation service to a level below the 'Without project"
measure will actually be implemented; condition. This improvement would effectively
therefore, this impact would remain significant mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a
and unavoidable. less than significant level, however, because the
intersection is within the city limits of the City of San
Bnmo, adoption of the measure is not within the
responsibility or jurisdiction of the City of South San
Francisco. \Vhile San Bnmo could implement the
mitigation measure to ensure that this impact is
reduced to a less than significant level, the City of
South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project,
cannot require or guarantee that the measure will
actually be implemented; therefore, this impact would
remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project's Mitigation measures infeasible. Significant
circulation plan would contribute additional and
large conunercial vehicular turn movements to Unavoidable
the San Brllllo Avenue and San Mateo Avenue
intersection which has insufficient turning
radius. Taking into accollllt the economic,
jurisdictional and teclmological factors required
to facilitate the truck turning movement, there
is no feasible mitigation that would reduce this
impact to a less than significant-level.
Therefore, this impact is considered significant
and unavoidable.
PAGE 2-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Aft"..
Impact Air-I: Construction Dust and Air-I: Dust Suppression and Exhaust Reduction Less than
Exhaust. Construction activity involves a high Procedures. The following basic, enhanced and Significant
potential for the emission of air pollutants. additional measures are recommended for inclusion in
Construction activities would generate exhaust construction contracts to control fugitive dust
emissions from vehicles/equipment and fugitive emissions during construction. Measures to reduce
particulate matter emissions that would affect construction exhaust will additionally reduce
local air quality. This would be a potentially particulate matter from the exhaust of diesel-powered
significant impact. construction vehicles.
Basic Measures
. Water all active construction areas at least twice
daily.
. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply
(non-toxic) soil stabilizers on allllllpaved access
roads, parking areas and staging areas at
construction site.
. Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or
other materials that can be blown by the wind.
. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other
loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at
least two feet of freeboard.
. Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all
paved access road, parking areas and staging
areas at construction sites.
. Sweep streets daily (preferably with water
sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent public streets.
. Limit construction equipment idling time.
. Properly tune construction equipment engines,
and install particulate traps on diesel equipment.
Enhanced Measures
. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to
inactive construction areas (previously graded
areas inactive for ten days or more).
. Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-
toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt,
sand, etc.).
. Limit traffic speeds on llllpavedroads to 15 mph.
. Install sandbags or other erosion control
measures to prevent silt nmoffto public
roadways.
. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly
as possible.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Additional Measures
. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or
wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and
equipment leaving the site.
. Suspend excavation and grading activity when
winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 rnph.
Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust
The measures listed below should be implemented to
reduce diesel particulate matter and NOx emissions
from on-site construction equipment:
. Atleast 50 percent of the heavy-duty, off-road
equipment used for construction shall be CARB-
certified off-road engines or equivalent, or use
alternative fuels (such as biodiesel or water
emulsion fuel) that result in lower emissions.
. Use add-on control devices such as diesel
oxidation catalysts or particulate filters.
. Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate
emissions from off-road diesel powered
equipment. The Project shall ensure that
emissions from all construction diesel powered
equipment used on the Project site do not exceed
40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in
anyone hour. Any equipment fOlllld to exceed 40
percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be
prohibited from use on the site lllltil repaired.
. The contractor shall install temporary electrical
service whenever possible to avoid the need for
independently powered equipment (e.g.,
compressors).
. Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two
minutes shall be turned off. This would include
trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil,
aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum
concrete trucks could keep their engines nmning
continuously as long as they were on site.
. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low
emISSIOns.
Issues of toxic air contaminants related to construction
activities are further addressed with mitigation
measures Haz-3b and Haz-4a.
Operational-Related Objectionable Odors. No mitigation required. However, the following Less than
\Vhile it is not known at this time what specific mitigation measure is reconunended to further reduce Significant
businesses will occupy the completed Project, this less than significant impact:
these businesses will be required to conform to
applicable air quality regulations in order to Air-3a: Odor Control. Prior to the issuance ofa
ensure that any odors resulting from operations Building Permit for a food preparation use the owner
PAGE 2-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
will remain at a less than significant level. shall provide an Odor Control Program which includes
measures to eliminate odors associated with the food
use. Such measures may include, but are not limited
to, frequent trash pickup, indoor trash enclosure and
state of the art odor and filtration controls. The
program shall be subject to the review and approval of
the City's Chief Planner in consultation with the
Building Official.
Impact Geo-l: Geologic Hazards. According Geo-la: Completion of and compliance with Less than
to CEQA guidelines, exposure of people or recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation Significant
structures to major geological hazards is a and in conformance with Structural Design Plans.
significant adverse impact. The primary seismic Completion of and compliance with reconunendations
hazards affecting the Project are strong seismic of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance
ground shaking and potentially liquefiable fill with Structural Design Plans. A design level
soils, each of which are considered a potentially geotechnical investigation shall be completed that
significant impact. includes subsurface investigation in areas to be
occupied by structures (currently a paved parking lot).
The design level geotechnical report shall include
recommendations for site preparation and grading,
fOlllldation design, concrete slabs-on-grade, pavement
section design, surface and subsurface drainage
measures and site-specific seismic response criteria
(shown in Table Geo-3 below). The design level
geotechnical investigation shall be reviewed and
approved by the City's Geotechnical Consultant and
the City Engineer.
The design level geotechnical investigation shall
evaluate liquefaction potential ofllllderlying fill and
native soil. Should liquefiable or densifiable materials
be encolllltered in the fill, mitigation measures to
reduce their impact shall be formulated. These
strategies may include excavation and replacement as
engineered fill, reduced fOlllldation loading, and
grolllld improvement by methods such as stone
collnnns or pressure grouting.
Grading recommendations shall include specifications
for engineered fill, including moisture conditioning,
relative percent compaction, and suitability of
materials as engineered or structural fill.
Recommendations shall also establish maximlllTI
steepness of cut and fill slopes. Any cuts to be made
adjacent to the property line shall be evaluated for
potential adverse impact to neighboring properties.
Drainage reconunendations shall include provisions to
prevent the ponding of water, prevent seepage llllder
structures, including pavements, and generally direct
flow away from structural fOlllldations. Drainage
recommendations shall incorporate proposed
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE2-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
landscaping elements. Permanent subsurface drains
will to be necessary for any proposed retaining walls
to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the
walls.
Recommendations for fOlllldatiOns shall include soil
bearing capacity or skin friction values, and lateral
pressures. The design plans shall identify specific
mitigation measures to reduce or otherwise mitigate
the liquefaction potential of surface soils. Mitigation
measures may include excavation and replacement as
engineered fill, reduced fOlllldation loading, and
grOlllld improvement by methods such as stone
cohnnns or pressure grouting. Geotechnical
recommendations shall also provide the depth of
footings or pile fOlllldations necessary for the plaIllled
structures. During construction, a Registered
Geotechnical Engineer, Civil Engineer experienced in
Geotechnical Engineering, or authorized
representative shall observe all fOlllldation excavations
and pier drilling. A letter indicating that all foundation
construction meets with the intent of the geotechnical
recommendations shall be provided to the Building
Official prior to concrete pouring.
Recommendations for concrete slab construction shall
identify measures to mitigate expansive soils and
minimize shrink/swell potential, such as moisture
conditioning or replacement with select non-expansive
fill, as well as concrete thickness and reinforcement.
The feasibility report reconunended that where
moisture through the floor slabs is a concern, a
capillary moisture break consisting of at least four
inches of cleaIl, free-draining gravel or crushed rock,
and a water vapor retarder should be installed beneath
floors to reduce water vapor transmission thorough
floor slabs. The design level report shall either
corroborate this reconunendation or identify an
alternative to be implemented.
Reconunendations for pavement areas shall include
compaction and moisture conditioning requirements,
as well as pavement section thickness and construction
design based upon a Resistance-value (R-value)
determined for sub-grade soils in the areas to be
paved.
The design report shall include specific drainage
criteria behind any retaining walls, and identify
retaining wall foundation design and design
parameters.
PAGE 2-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
In general, the design report shall either corroborate or
provide alternative reconunendations to the feasibility
report based upon actual soil and rock conditions in
the areas where structures are proposed.
Measure Geo-lb: Compliance with 2007 California
Building Code (CBC). Project development shall
meet requirements of the California Building Code
Vol. I and 2, 2007 Edition, including the California
Building Standards, 2007 Edition, published by the
International Conference of Building Officials, and as
modified by the amendments, additions and deletions
as adopted by the City of South San Francisco,
California. Incorporation of seismic construction
standards would reduce the potential for catastrophic
effects of grOlllld shaking, such as complete structural
failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of
seismically induced grOlllld shaking.
Measure Geo-lc: Obtain a building permit and
complete final plan review. The Project applicant
shall obtain a building permit throngh the City of
South San Francisco Building Division. Final Plan
Review of planned buildings and structures shall be
completed by a licensed structural engineer for
adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned
conunercial and industrial sites in City of South San
Francisco.
Impact Geo-2: Soil Erosion. The Project Geo-2a: Erosion Control Plan. The Project applicant Less than
would involve mass grading in a location that shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be Significant
could facilitate stormwater-related soil transfer submitted to the City in conjllllction with the Grading
to the San Francisco Bay. This could potentially Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall
impact vicinity drainages such as Colma Creek include winterization, dust, erosion and pollution
and the San Francisco Bay. This would be a control measures conforming to the ABAG Manual of
potentially significant impact during and Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control
following site construction activities. Measures, with sediment basin design calculations.
The Erosion Control Plan shall describe the "best
management practices" (BMPs) to be used during and
after construction to control pollution resulting from
both stormwater and construction water rlllloff. The
Erosion Control Plan shall include locations of vehicle
and equipment staging, portable restrooms,
mobilization areas, and planned access routes.
Recommended soil stabilization techniques include
placement of straw wattles, silt fences, berms, and
gravel construction entrance areas or other control to
prevent tracking sediment onto city streets and into
storm drains.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Public works staff or its 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
inunediately.
Geo-2b: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). In accordance with the Clean Water Act
and the requirements of the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a
s\vppp prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP
shall include specific best management practices to
reduce soil erosion. This is required to obtain coverage
llllder the General Permit for Discharges of Storm
Water Associated with Construction Activity
(Construction General Permit 99-08-DWQ).
Impact Geo-3: Unstable Soils. The Project site Geo-3: Compliance with Mitigation Measures Geo-2 Less than
is potentially llllderlain by fill soils of unknown for Seismically Induced Grolllld Failure and Geo-5 for Significant
quality, which may be expansive, prone to Expansive Soils. Compliance with these mitigation
settlement, or susceptible to seismically measures will reduce the impact of unstable geologic
induced liquefaction or dynamic densification. unit to a level ofless than significant.
This is a potentially significant impact.
Geo-4: Potentially Expansive and Geo-4: Completion of and Construction in Less than
Compressible Soils. The Project site is Accordance with a Design Level Geotechnical significant
potentially llllderlain by fill soils of unknown Investigation. The design level geotechnical report
quality. These materials may contain expansive shall investigate the presence of expansive clay soils
clay minerals subject to shrinking and swelling and, should they be identified, recommend appropriate
in response to changes in water content. These mitigation measures. Potential measures for control of
expansive soils could cause damage to expansive clay soils include the following:
fOlllldations, concrete slabs, and pavements.
The impact due to expansive soils is potentially a) Placing and compacting potentially expansive soils
significant. at high moisture contents (at least 5 percent above
optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM
D1557) and compaction within selected ranges of 88
to 92 percent.
b) Using thickened concrete slabs with increased steel
reinforcement.
c) Replacing clayey soils llllderlying fOlllldations and
concrete slabs with select structural fill that is non-
expansive or has a low expansion index.
d) Treating site soils with lime to reduce the expansion
potential and increase the strength.
e) Utilize pier-and-grade-beam fOlllldation systems
where appropriate;
PAGE 2-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
f.) Grade arOlllld structures to assure positive drainage
away from structures.
Impact Haz-l: Routine transportation, use, Haz-la: Plan Review for Adherence to Fire and Less than
or disposal of hazardous materials. The risk Safety Codes. All building spaces must be designed to Significant
of accidental upset and environmental handle the intended warehouse, conunercial, and retail
contamination from routine transport, storage, lise, with sprinklers, alarms, vents, and secondary
use and disposal of hazardous and potentially containment structures, where applicable. Prior to
hazardous materials to the public and occupancy, these systems must pass plan review
environment is a potentially significantirnpact. through the City of South San Francisco Planning,
Building and Fire Departments.
Haz-lb: Construction Inspection and Final
Inspection Prior to Occupancy. During construction,
the utilities, including sprinkler systems, shall pass
pressure and flush tests to make sure they perform as
designed. At the end of construction, occupancy shall
not be allowed lllltil a final inspection is made by the
Fire Department for conformance of all building
systems with the Fire Code and National Fire
Protection Agency Requirements. The inspection shall
include testing of sprinkler systems, alarm systems,
ventilation and airflow systems, and secondary
containment systems. The inspection shall include a
review of the emergency evacuation plans. These
plans shall be modified as deemed necessary.
Haz-lc: Hazardous Materials Business Plan
Program. Businesses occupying the development and
intending to store, use, or dispose of hazardous
materials must complete a Hazardous Materials
Business Plan for the safe storage and use of
chemicals. The Business Plan must include the type
and quantity of hazardous materials, a site map
showing storage locations of hazardous materials and
where they may be used and transported from, risks of
using these materials, material safety data sheets for
each material, a spill prevention plan, an emergency
response plan, employee training consistent with
OSHA guidelines, and emergency contact
information. Businesses qualify for the program if
they store a hazardous material equal to or greater than
the minimum reportable quantities. These quantities
are 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pOllllds for solids and
200 cubic feet (at standard temperature and pressure)
for compressed gases.
Exemptions include businesses selling only pre-
packaged consumer goods; medical professionals who
store oxygen, nitrogen, and/or nitrous oxide in
quantities not more than 1,000 cubic feet for each
material, and who store or use no other hazardous
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-15
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
materials; or facilities that store no more than 55
gallons of a specific type oflubricating oil, and for
which the total quantity oflubricating oil does not
exceed 275 gallons for all types oflubricating oil.
Businesses occupying and/or operating at the proposed
development must submit a business plan prior to the
start of operations, and must review and update the
entire Business Plan at least once every two years, or
within 30 days of any significant change including,
without limitation, changes to emergency contact
information, major increases or decreases in hazardous
materials storage and/or changes in location of
hazardous materials. Plans shall be submitted to the
San Mateo COllllty Enviromnental Health Business
Plan Program, which may be contacted at (650) 363-
4305 for more information. The San Mateo COlmty
Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD) shall
inspect the business at least once a year to make sure
that the Business Plan is complete and accurate.
Haz-ld: Hazardous Waste Generator Program All
applicable businesses shall register and comply with
the hazardous waste generator program. The State of
California Department ofT oxic Substances Control
authorized the SMCEHD to inspect and regulate nOTI-
permitted hazardous waste generators in San Mateo
COllllty based on the Hazardous Waste Control Law
fOlmd in the California Health and Safety Code
Division 20, Chapter 6.5 and regulations fOlmd in the
California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5.
Regulations require businesses generating anyamOlmt
of hazardous waste as defined by regulation to
properly store, manage and dispose of such waste.
Division staff also conducts surveillance and
enforcement activities in conjllllction with the COllllty
District Attorney's Office for businesses or individuals
that significantly violate the above referenced law and
regulations.
Haz-le: Compliance with Applicable Laws and
Regulations. All transportation of hazardous materials
and hazardous waste to and from the site shall be in
accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, US Department ofTransportation (DOT),
State of California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), and local laws, ordinances and procedures
including placards, signs and other identifying
information.
Haz-1f: Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous
PAGE 2-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Waste. For businesses not requiring registration in the
San Mateo COllllty Hazardous Material Business Plan
Program, batteries, as well as fuel and lubricant oils,
cleaning products, and other conunonly used
household hazardous materials shall be properly stored
so as to reduce the chance of spillage. These
businesses shall also participate in the San Mateo
COllllty Very Small Quantity Generator Program to
dispose of household hazardous wastes through the
San Mateo COllllty Enviromnental Health Division.
Impact Haz-2: Accidental Hazardous Haz-2a: Demolition Plan and Permitting. A Less than
Materials Release. According to previous Demolition Plan with permit applications shall be Significant
investigations, petrolelllTI products and volatile submitted to the City of South San Francisco Building
organic compOllllds (VOCs) are present in site Department for approval prior to demolition of the
soils. During demolition operations hazardous paved parking lot. The Demolition Plan for shall
materials could be released from structures at provide for safe demolition shall include, but not
the site or from the llllderlying soils. Following limited to, dust control for potentially contaminated
construction, operations at the proposed subsurface soils. The Demolition Plan shall also
facilities are expected to represent a continuing address both on-site Worker Protection and off-site
threat to the enviromnent through accidental resident protection from both chemical and physical
release of hazardous materials since the site is hazards. All removed soil shall be tested for
proposed for industrial uses, where use, storage contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed ofto
and disposal of hazardous materials may occur. appropriate licensed landfill facilities. The Demolition
This represents a potentially significant impact. Plan shall include a program of air monitoring for dust
particulates and attached contaminants. Dust control
and suspension of work during dry windy days shall
be addressed in the plan.
Haz-2b: California Accidental Release Prevention
Program (CaIARP). Future businesses at the
development shall check the state and federal lists of
regulated substances available from the San Mateo
COllllty Enviromnental Health Department
(SMCEHD). Chemicals on the hst are chemicals that
pose a major threat to public health and safety or the
enviromnent because they are highly toxic, flammable,
or explosive. Businesses shall determine which list to
use in consultation with the SMCEHD.
Should businesses qualify for the program, they shall
complete a CalARP registration form and submit it to
Enviromnental Health. Following registration, they
shall submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP). RMPs
are designed to handle accidental releases and ensure
that businesses have the proper information to provide
to emergency response teams if an accidental release
occurs. All businesses that store or handle more than a
threshold quantity (TQ) of a regulated substance must
develop a RMP and follow it.
Risk Management Plans describe impacts to public
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-1 7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Potential Environmental Impacts
Impact Haz-3: Exposure to contaminated
soil and groundwater. During demolition and
construction, workers could be exposed to
contaminated soil and grOlllldwater.
Disturbance of the subsurface also increases the
potential for contamination to spread through
surface water flmoff, creation of seepage
pathways, and through wind blown dust. These
impacts are potentially significant.
Recommended Mitigation Measures
health and the environment if a regulated substance is
released near schools, residential areas, hospitals and
childcare facilities. RMPs must include procedures
for: keeping employees and customers safe, handling
regulated substances, training staff, maintaining
equipment, checking that substances are stored safely,
and responding to an accidental release.
Haz-2c: Notify San Mateo County Health Services
Agency of Proposed Re-Development. As part of the
case closure agreement for the removal of the
lllldergrOlllld storage tank leaking gasoline, dated
October 8, 1998, SMCHSA shall be informed of any
development or proposed change in land use. New
buildings will be constructed over the area in question,
currently a paved parking lot, and approval of
SMCHSA is a prerequisite for construction.
Development and Implementation of Site
Management Plans. The Site Management Plans
shall build upon any existing draft Site Management
Plan and shall address the exposure risk to people and
the enviromnent resulting from future demolition,
construction, occupancy, and maintenance activities
on the property. The plans shall be in accordance with
recommendations of the Enviromnental Consultant,
and shall be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Toxic Substances Control, the San
Mateo COllllty Enviromnental Health Department
Grolllldwater Protection Program and the City of
South San Francisco Public Works Department,
Planning Division and Fire Department. In accordance
with DTSC recommendations there should be two
separate plans: (1) ongoing Operations and
Maintenance Activities, and (2) a specific plan
addressing the future proposed site development based
on actual proposed grading, excavation and
construction. The plans are required to be more
specific than the draft plan.
Specific mitigation measures designed to protect
hlllTIan health and the enviromnent shall be provided
in the plan. At a rninimlllTI, the plan shall include the
following:
1) Requirements for site specific Health and
Safety Plans (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance
with OSHA regulations by all contractors at the
Project site. This includes a HASP for all demolition,
grading and excavation on the site, as well as for
future subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall
include appropriate training, any required personal
Resulting
Level of
Significance
Less than
Significant
PAGE 2-18
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Potential Environmental Impacts
Recommended Mitigation Measures
protective equipment, and monitoring of contaminants
to determine exposure. The HASP will be reviewed
and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The
plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker
entry and exposure and shall show locations and type
of protective fencing to prevent public exposure to any
hazards during demolition, site grading, and
construction activities.
2) Standards for treatment of impacted soil
excavated from beneath the site shall be established.
Depending upon the extent and depth of fOlllldation
and utility excavations, a significant vohnne of
contaminated soils may be generated during
construction; and to a lesser extent during future
maintenance work. These soils must be characterized
for reuse as fill, reburial, or disposal off-site. Only soil
with contaminant levels approved by the DTSC shall
be allowed for reuse as fill. All other soil must be
disposed of off-site.
To avoid the spread of contamination, on-site soils
excavated from below the pavement in the vicinity of
Building Six shall be segregated from any imported
clean fIll. Soils shall be placed on a plastic tarp,
covered and bermed to reduce the risk from
windblown dust or surface water fllllOff spreading
contamination. Then soil must be tested to determine
the levels of remaining contamination and suitability
for re-use. Contaminated soils unable to be placed
llllder buildings or pavement, or re-buried llllder at
least one- foot of clean soil must be off-hauled and
disposed of by a licensed hazardous materials
contractor llllder the proper manifesting documents. A
report shall document the volume, concentration and
nature of contaminants in the off-hauled material.
3) Requirements for site-specific construction
techniques that would minimize exposure to any
subsurface contamination shall be developed. This
shall include treatment and disposal measures for any
contaminated grolllldwater removed from excavations,
trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with
local and Regional Water Quality Control Board
guidelines. Grolllldwater encolllltered in trenches and
other excavations shall not be discharged into the
neighboring storm drain, but into a closed containment
facility, unless proven to have concentrations of
contaminants below established regulatory guidelines.
Contaminated grolllldwater will be required to be
stored in Baker tanks lllltil tested. Iftesting determines
that the water can be discharged into the sanitary
Resulting
Level of
Significance
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-19
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
sewer system, then the applicant must acquire a
grOlllld water discharge permit from the City of South
San Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local
discharge limits before being allowed to discharge into
the sanitary sewer. Water must be analyzed for the
chemicals of concern at the site, which include
petroleum hydrocarbons and VQCs.
4) General sampling and testing plan for
excavated soils shall determine suitability for reuse or
acceptability for disposal at a state licensed landfill
facility. Testing shall include the California Title 22
Hazardous Metals (CAM 17 metals), TPH as gasoline,
TPH as diesel, and TPH as motor oil. Testing results
shall be compared to DTSC California Hurnan Health
Screening Levels and RWQCB Enviromnental
Screening Levels to determine suitability to remain
on-site as engineered fill or landscape fill. Any soils
determined to exceed DTSC criteria for site cap
material shall be deemed as llllsuitable for re-use as
fill.
S) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall
document procedures for future subsurface
landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc., with
proper DTSC notification, where applicable. The plan
shall include a general health and safety plan for each
expected type of work, with appropriate personal
protective equipment, where applicable.
Impact Hydro-I: Erosion and Sedimentation Hydro-Ia: Preparation and Implementation of Less than
On- or Off-site. Construction operations Project SWPPP. Preparation and Implementation of Significant
associated with the Project would present a Project S\VPPP. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the
threat of soil erosion from soil disturbance by applicant shall develop a Storm Water Pollution
subjecting llllprotected bare soil areas to the Prevention Plan (S\VPPP) to protect water quality
erosion forces of rlllloff. This is a potentially during and after construction. The Project SWPPP
significant impact. shall include a description of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to be applied to minimize the
discharge of pollutants from the site during
construction. These construction-period BMPs shall
include, but are not limited to the following:
1) No grading work exceeding 200 cubic
yards shall be performed between November 1 and
May 1 (the wet season) unless authorized in writing by
the City Engineer.
2) 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
PAGE 2-20
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
"Erosion & Sediment Control Measures" manual. Silt
fences shall be installed down slope of all graded
slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the flow path of
graded areas receiving concentrated flows and arOlmd
storm drain inlets.
3) BMPs shall be used for preventing the
discharge or other construction-related NPDES
pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint, concrete, trash
etc) to downstream waters.
4) After construction is completed, all
drainage facilities shall be inspected for acclllTIulated
sediment and these drainage structures shall be cleared
of debris and sediment.
5) Trash management measures shall be
incorporated to prevent trash from entering storm
drainage facilities and downstream water courses.
Hydro-lb: NPDES General Construction Permit
Requirements. The Project applicant is required to
submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the State Water
Resource Control Board's (SVVRCB) Division of
Water Quality to obtain coverage llllder a NPDES
General Construction Permit. The General
Construction Permit includes general information on
the types of construction activities that will occur on
the site as well as specific requirements that will apply
to clearing, grading, and disturbances to the grolllld
such as excavation. It is the responsibility of the
property owner to obtain coverage llllder the permit
prior to site construction.
Impact Hydro-2: Non-Point Source Hydro-2a: Compliance with NPDES General Less than
Pollutants. The project will involve an Industrial Permit Requirements. The NPDES Significant
intensification ofland-use by increasing floor General Industrial Permit Requirements apply to the
area and mnnber of occupants, and will add discharge of storm water associated with industrial
potential new sources of non-point source sites. The permit requires the implementation of
pollutants to the area. This may increase non- management measures that will achieve the
point source pollution to receiving waters. This performance standard of best available teclmology
is a potentially significant impact. (BAT) economically achievable, and best
conventional pollutant control teclmology (BCT).
Under the statute, operators of new facilities must
implement industrial BMPs in the Project SWPPP, and
perform monitoring of storm water discharges and
unauthorized non-storm water discharges. An annual
report must be submitted to the RWQCB each July 1.
Operators of new facilities must file an NOI at least 14
days prior to the beginning of operations.
Hydro-2b: Long- Term Requirements under the
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-21
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
SWPPP. The Project SWPPP to accompany the NO!
filing will outline erosion control and storm water
quality management measures to be implemented both
during and following construction. The SWPPP will
also provide the schedule for monitoring performance.
Long-term mitigation measures to be included in the
Project SWPPP shall include, but are not limited to,
the following:
. Description of potential sources of erosion and
sediment at the Project site. Industrial activities
and significant materials and chemicals that could
be used at the proposed Project site should be
described. This will include a thorough
assessment of existing and potential pollutant
sources.
. Identification of BMPs 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 used as needed.
. 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,
vegetationllandscape 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 should be budgeted to include disposal at a
proper site.
. The monitoring and maintenance program 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 to the SWRCB. The
S\VPPP shall be adjusted, as necessary, to
address any inadequacies of the BMPs.
. The applicant shall prepare informational
literature and guidance on industrial and
conunercial BMPs to minimize pollutant
contributions from the proposed development.
This information shall be distributed to all
employees at the Project site. At a minimlllTI, the
information shall cover: a) proper disposal of
conunercial cleaning chemicals; b) proper use of
landscaping chemicals; c) clean-up and
appropriate disposal of hazardous materials and
chemicals; and d) prohibition of any washing and
dlllTIping of materials and chemicals into storm
drains.
ImpactNoise-l: Construction Related Noise. Noise-I: Noise Abatement. The Project applicant Less than
PAGE 2-22
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Potential Environmental Impacts
Project construction could result in temporary
short-term noise increases due to the operation
of heavy equipment. This would be a
potentially significant impact associated with
Project development.
Impact Traf-l: Project Trip Generation
Exceeds 100 Trips During Peak Hours. The
Project would generate more than 100 net new
trips during the AM and PM peak hams. The
San Mateo City/COllllty Association of
Governments (CICAG) Agency Guidelines for
the implementation of the 2003 Draft
Congestion Management Program ("CICAG
Guidelines") specifies that local jurisdictions
must ensure that the developer and/or tenants
will mitigate all new peak hour trips (including
the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by
the development. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020)
Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year
2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic
would result in significant impacts to three
study intersections during the PM peak hour: a)
East Grand Avenue I Airport Boulevard; b) San
Bruno Avenue I US 101 SB Ramps; and c) San
Mateo Avenue I Airport Boulevard. This would
be a potentially significant impact.
Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030)
Intersection Impacts. Under curnulative (Year
2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic
Recommended Mitigation Measures
shall require by contract specification that construction
best management practices be implemented by
contractors to reduce construction noise levels to the
noise limit specified in the City Noise Ordinance (90-
dBA at 25 feet). Best management practices include:
. Ensuring that construction equipment is properly
muffled according to industry standards,
. Implementing noise attenuation measures which
may include but are not limited to noise barriers
or noise blankets.
. Requiring heavily loaded trucks used during
construction to be routed away from noise and
vibration sensitive uses such as Scott Street
(South San Francisco) and Walnut Street (San
Bruno).
Transportation Demand Management Program
The Project sponsors shall implement a Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with
the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance
Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management,
and acceptable to CICAG. These programs, once
implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of
the development.
East Grand Avenue I Airport Boulevard (2020
PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall
be responsible for re-striping one northbOlllld through
lane to a through-right lane, and re-striping one
westbOlllld left lane to a left-through lane.
San Mateo Avenue I Airport Boulevard (2020 PM).
In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be
responsible for re-striping one of the eastbound left-
through lanes to a through-right lane.
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps
(2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the
Project shall be responsible for re-striping the existing
southbound-through lane to acconunodate a
southbound through-right lane.
East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030
AM and P:M). In order to mitigate this impact, the
Project applicant shall be responsible for re-striping
Resulting
Level of
Significance
Significant
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-23
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
would result in significant impacts to three and modifications to both intersection geometry and
study intersections: a) East Grand Avenue I traffic signals, to change the westbOlllld approach from
Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM); b) San a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a
Bnmo Avenue I US 101 SOUthbOlllld ramps left-only lane and a shared through-right lane would
(2030 AM); and c) San Mateo Avenue I Airport need to OCCllI.
Boulevard.
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps
(2030 AM). In order to mitigate this impact, the
Project applicant shall be responsible for fe-striping
the existing SOUthbOlllld-through lane to acconunodate
a SOUthbOlllld through-right lane.
San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030
PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project
applicant shall be responsible for re-striping one of the
eastbOlllld left-through lanes to a through-right lane.
Impact Util-l: Wastewater Generation and Util-l: Sewer Line Repair and/or Replacement. In Less than
Infrastructure Capacity. The Project would the event that the City of San Bnmo Public Works Significant
contribute wastewater which the WQCP has Director, in consultation with the City of South San
adequate capacity to treat, and line and facilities Francisco Public Works Director, reasonably
conveying Project wastewater are adequate size determines the Project's wastewater may degrade or
to acconunodate increased flows. However, the further degrade the condition of the existing sanitary
Project would utilize an existing 24-inch sewer sewer line, the Project applicant, in consultation with
line currently impeded. Therefore, the Project the City of San Bruno and the City of South San
would have a potentially significant impact Francisco, shall participate in any necessary repairs
relative to increased wastewater flows and/or replacement of the exiting 24-inch sanitary
sewer line to acconunodate the Project's wastewater.
The City of San Bnmo Public Works Director shall
determine the extent to which such repairs or
replacement is required.
ii,. :,.'''Niri
mmr
Conflict with Air Quality Plan. The Projects No mitigation required Less than
is required to implement a Transportation Significant
Demand Management (TD M) program to
reduce project trips. This is identified as part of
the Project Description on Page 3-2 and
discussed within Chapter 10 (Transportation
and Circulation). The TDM program, along
with General Plan policies and Mitigation
Measures identified in Chapter 10
(Transportation and Circulation), would
reasonably implement TCMs consistent with
those contained in the latest approved Clean Air
Plan. There would, therefore, be no impact
related to a conflict with the applicable air
quality plan
PAGE 2-24
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Carbon Monoxide. Mobile emissions No mitigation required Less than
generated by Project traffic would increase Significant
carbon monoxide concentrations at
intersections in the Project vicinity. However,
these increases would be below significance
thresholds of the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District so would be considered a
less than significant impact.
Future Emissions Near Sensitive Receptors. No mitigation required Less than
Although not proposed at this time, the Project Significant
could include stationary combustion equipment
or laboratory facilities that emit air pollution.
These sources could emit small amOlmts of
toxic air contaminants with the potential to
affect sensitive receptors. This impact,
however, would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level with standard BAAQMD
permitting requirements.
Construction-Related Diesel Odors. During No mitigation required Less than
construction, the various diesel-powered Significant
vehicles and equipment in use on the site would
create odors. These odors would be temporary
and not likely to be noticeable much beyond the
Project site's bOlllldaries. As the potential for
diesel odor impacts would not affect a
substantial amount of people, this impact is less
than significant and is further reduced by
Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust in
Mitigation Measure Air-I.
Septic Systems. No impact would occur, No mitigation required No Impact
because a sewer system is present in the area
and septic systems are not required at the site.
Hazardous Materials near Schools. Belle Air No mitigation required Less than
Elementary School, located at 450 3rd Avenue Significant
in San Bruno is the nearest school or childcare
facility to the project. This school is located
approximately 0.8 miles southeast of the site,
therefore hazardous materials within 1/4 mile of
a school is a less than significant impact.
Airport Land Use Plan. No buildings in the No mitigation required Less than
Project would exceed 150 feet in height; Significant
therefore, the structures would be in compliance
with the Airport Land Use Plan. The impact of
the Project on the Airport Land Use Plan is less
than significant with no mitigation warranted.
The Project site is not located within the
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-25
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
vicinity of a private airstrip. Private aircraft are
sometimes granted air space in the South San
Francisco area, but buildings and structures are
expected to conform to design guidelines for
visibility and meet aviation requirements.
Therefore, the Project would have no impact
relating to a private airstrip.
Adopted Emergency Response Plan. No No mitigation required Less than
changes to the major access and evacuation Significant
routes along San Mateo Avenue and Shaw
Road are plaIllled since the Project calls for
redevelopment rather than reconstruction or
new development of an entire area. Therefore,
the Project would have a less than significant
impact relating to an adopted emergency
response plan.
Wildland Fires. The Project area is urbanized No mitigation required No Impact
and is not in an area adjacent to wildland
subject to wildfires. Therefore the Project
would have no impact from wildland fires.
Changes in Storm Water Runoff. No mitigation required Less than
Development of the proposed Project would Significant
result in an approximate 10 percent decrease in
impervious surfaces at the Project site. A
decrease in impervious surface area, with a
corresponding decrease in peak discharge and
related polluted nmofffrom the Project site.
However, storm flows will be re-directed so
that there will be a net increase in flows to the
San Mateo Avenue stormdrain. These increased
flows to the San Mateo Ave Stormdrain would
be acconunodated by on-site storage, resulting
in a less than significant impact.
Groundwater Depletion I Recharge. The No mitigation required Less than
proposed Project will not draw on, or otherwise Significant
reduce grOlllldwater resources. The impact of
groundwater depletion/recharge would be less
than significant and no mitigation is required.
Flooding. The Project does not include housing No mitigation required Less than
and is located outside of the lOa-year flood Significant
hazard zone of Colma Creek as delineated by
the current Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insmance Rate Maps
(FIRMs). The Project site is not located in an
area that would expose persons to immdation by
seiche, tSllllami, or mudflow. Consequently,
this impact would be less than significant with
PAGE 2-26
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
no mitigation required.
Dividing Established Community. The No mitigation required No Impact
Project would involve renovation of an existing
building and construction of five new buildings
within an existing developed area substantially
utilized for industrial land use. All properties
adjoining the Project site are developed and
utilized for commercial and/or industrial
purposes. The nearest residential neighborhood
is approximately 550 feet to the west (beyond
existing railroad tracks) or 1,350 feet to the
south (past Interstate 380) Therefore, the
Project would have no impact related to the
division of an established conununity.
Conflict with Plans and Policies. The No mitigation required No Impact
proposed Project would be consistent with and
would not conflict with or impede achievement
of applicable City of South San Francisco
General Plan land use policies, thereby
constituting no impact.
Conflict with Conservation Plan. The Project No mitigation required Less than
would be consistent with the requirements of Significant
the Tree Protection Ordinance and would
mitigate any adverse impacts to "protected"
trees. Accordingly, the Project would have a
less than significant impact regarding conflicts
with conservation policies, ordinances or plans
protecting biological resources.
Permanent Noise Increases. Project-generated No mitigation required Less than
traffic noise and other operational noise sources Significant
such as HV AC equipment would not exceed
noise standards and would not significantly
increase ambient noise levels nor substantially
impact noise-sensitive receptors. This would be
a less-than-significant impact with no
mitigation warranted.
Groundborne Vibration. It is not expected No mitigation required No Impact
that future land uses at the Project site would
generate excessive grOlllldbome vibration or
grOlllldbome noise. It is expected that the
Project would have no impact related to
excessive grOlllldbome vibration or excessive
groundbome noise.
Airport Noise. Based on the City's land use No mitigation required No Impact
criteria, the proposed Project's industrial land
use would be compatible with future noise level
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-27
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
projections in the Project vicinity of 70 dBA
(CNEL) or less, thereby representing no
impact.
Wastewater Treatment. There is sufficient No mitigation required Less than
capacity in the treatment plant for the additional Significant
flows from the Project, the Project would have
a less than significant impact relative to
wastewater treatment capacity.
Water Supply and Infrastructure. The No mitigation required Less than
Project's increase in demand for potable water Significant
resulting from the Project can be fulfilled by the
California Water Service Company and City of
San Bnmo. The new demand can be
acconunodated with existing facilities or
plaIllled upgrades. The Project would, therefore,
have a less than significant impact on water
supplies and infrastructure with no mitigation
warranted.
Storm Drainage Infrastructure. The Project No mitigation required Less than
will not result in an increase peak stormwater Significant
nmoff from the site. Therefore, the Project will
have a less than significant impact on storm
drainage infrastructure.
Landfill Capacity. The Project would be No mitigation required Less than
served by a landfill with sufficient permitted Significant
capacity to acconunodate the Project's solid
waste disposal needs, and would not require or
result in construction oflandfill facilities or
expansion of existing facilities nor would it
impede the ability of the City to meet the
applicable federal, state and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. The Project
would have a less-than-significant impact with
no mitigation warranted
Energy. The Project is expected to be served No mitigation required Less than
with existing capacity and would not require or Significant
result in construction of new energy facilities or
expansion of existing off-site facilities and
would not violate applicable federal, state and
local statutes and regulations relating to energy
standards. The Project would have a less than
significant impact relating to energy
conslllTIption with no mitigation warranted.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The Project No mitigation required Less than
would not conflict or obstruct implementation Significant
of any of the early actions for reducing
PAGE 2-28
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND IMPACT OVERVIEW
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Resulting
Potential Environmental Impacts Recommended Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
greenhouse gas emissions llllder the California
Global Warming Solutions Act of2006 CAB
32). The projected vohnne of Project emissions
would not trigger the need to report greenhouse
gas emissions to the state. There are elements of
the Project, recommended mitigation measures,
and required City policies and requirements that
contribute to the efficiency of the Project and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The TDM
Plan for the Project as required by City
Ordinance would serve to reduce emissions The
enhanced measures to reduce construction
exhaust (see Mitigated Measure Air-I) would
also reduce greenhouse gas emissions resulting
from the use of alternative fuels, electrical
service for powered equipment and reduced
diesel engine idling times frames.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 2-29
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 2-30
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT LOCATION
The 25.02-acre Project site is located at 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue in the City of
South San Francisco, approximately 450 feet north of Interstate 380 and approximately 650
feet west of Interstate 101. The Project site has Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) of 015-
163-230 and 015-163-120. The Project site location is shown in Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2
below.
The Project site is situated within the City's Lindenville planning sub-area. Lindenville was
an area of Government-built housing for military personnel and shipyard workers developed
during World War II on the former marshland between Railroad Avenue, South Spruce
Avenue, and San Mateo Avenue. These military housing units were demolished in the late
1950s and the area was redeveloped with warehouses, light industry, and single-family
housing. Today, warehousing and distribution and light industrial uses are dominant; storage,
automobile repair, manufacturing, airport parking, and small business parks are also present.
EXISTING SETTING
Two land uses currently occur at the Project site, each on a separate parcel.
The first land use, which occurs on a 5.23-acre parcel, includes off-site parking intended for
patrons of the San Francisco International Airport. This private facility, with an address of
1080 San Mateo Avenue, includes an approximate 975 square foot (sq.ft.), single-story
building, entry canopy, several attendant stations and an open surface parking lot with 670
parking spaces.
The second land use, which occurs on a 19.79-acre parcel, consists of warehouse and
distribution within an existing 571,748 sq. ft. single-story building located at 1070 San Mateo
Avenue. This building interior has been divided into ten (l0) units with three (3) office
spaces. Concrete and paved parking and driveway areas surround the building. Current
building occupants include the General Services Administration (GSA), U.S. Postal Service
(USPS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), who use the facility for the
storage of office equipment and seized property, and the processing and shipment of mail.
These uses occur within five of the ten mentioned tenant spaces and account for
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Figure 3-1: Vicinity Map.
PAGE 3-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 3-2: Street Map.
P..
. I
. .......!
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
approximately 237,477 sq.ft of the buildings floor area. Of this utilized space, approximately
77,477 sq.ft is occupied and used by the USPS year round. The remainder of this building
space, approximately 160,000 sq. ft., is used by the USPS for only five (5) months out of
each year.
The existing setting within the Project's vicinity and outside of its boundary is summarized
as follows:
North: Areas immediately adjacent to the north of the Project site include several
multi-tenant industrial buildings with Shaw Road addresses.
South: Areas immediately adjacent to the south include the Sky Park Indoor Airport
Parking facility, with Interstate Highway 380 directly beyond and overhead.
East: Areas immediately adjacent to the east include numerous multi-tenant
industrial buildings with Shaw Road addresses.
West: Areas immediately adjacent to the west of the Project site include the frontage
street, San Mateo Avenue, and a number of industrial buildings with addresses
ranging from 1090-1220 San Mateo Avenue, including auto repair facilities
and a dry-cleaning plant (McNevin) facility. Beyond San Mateo Avenue are
more industrial, auto repair and servicing facilities.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
LOT LINE MERGER
The Project would merge the existing two parcels (i.e., 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue)
into a single parcel via a Tentative Parcel Map.
STRUCTURES
The existing 571,748 sq.ft. single-story building (Building I) at 1070 San Mateo would be
remodeled for multi-tenant use (as described below). Most of the remodeling would occur
within the interior of the building with the exception of three (3) new truck trailer loading
docks wells, relocating one truck trailer loading dock well, 29 new loading dock doors, new
pedestrian door openings and new architectural details (i.e., metal canopies and color change)
added to the exterior.
The existing entry canopy and approximate 975 sq.ft. building at 1080 San Mateo Avenue
would be demolished and five, new single-story buildings would be constructed. The
proposed new buildings would have floor areas as follows: (Building 2) 9,600 sq.ft.;
(Building 3) 12,000 sq.ft.; (Building 4) 12,000 sq.ft.; (Building 5) 9,600 sq.ft.; and (Building
6) 9,100 sq.ft which is located on the 1070 San Mateo parcel. This total new proposed
PAGE 3-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
building floor area equals 52,300 sq.ft. The proposed maximum building heights of these
new buildings range between 25 feet 10 inches to 28 feet 4 inches.
The Project site plan is shown in Figure 3-3 and building elevations are illustrated III
Figures 3-4 and 3-5. Each is located below.
LAN D USES
Proposed uses of Buildings I through 6 include eight (8) use types permissible under the
site's Industrial District zoning designation ("M-I") (Section 20.30.020). Each proposed land
use type is defined as follows:
Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light - The Wholesaling, Storage, and
Distribution use type refers to establishments or places of business primarily engaged in
wholesaling, storage, and bulk sale distribution, including, but not limited to open-air
handling of materials and equipment other than live animals and plants. The following
are Wholesaling, Storage, and Distribution use types: (I) Light. Wholesaling, storage
and warehousing services within enclosed structures. Typical uses include wholesale
distributors, storage warehouses, moving and storage firms, freight forwarding and
customs brokerage (Municipal Code Section 20.06.270(d)(I)).
Custom Manufacturing - The Custom Manufacturing use type refers to establishments
primarily engaged in on-site production of goods by hand manufacturing which involves
only the use of hand tools or domestic mechanical equipment not exceeding two
horsepower or a single kiln not exceeding eight kilowatts, and the incidental direct sale to
consumers of only those goods produced on-site. Typical uses include ceramic studios,
candle making shops, or custom jewelry manufacturers (Municipal Code Section
20.06.070(t)).
General Industrial - The General Industrial use type refers to industrial plants primarily
engaged in manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment,
or fabrication of materials and products (Municipal Code Section 20.06.IIO(c)).
Light Manufacturing - The Light Manufacturing use type refers to the manufacture,
predominantly from previously prepared materials, of finished products or parts,
including processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment and packaging of such products
and incidental storage, sales and distribution of such products. A typical use is
commercial printing (Municipal Code Section 20.06.160(f)).
Food Preparation - The Food Preparation use type refers to establishments primarily
engaged in the preparation of food products only for off-site sales. Typical uses include
wholesale bakeries (Municipal Code Section 20.06.100(j)).
Laundry Services - The Laundry Services use type refers to establishments primarily
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
engaged in the provision of laundering, dry cleaning, or dyeing services other than those
classified as Linen Supply Services or Personal Services. Typical uses include laundry
agencies and diaper services (Municipal Code Section 20.06.160(d)).
Personal Storage - The Personal Storage use type refers to storage services primarily for
personal effects and household goods within enclosed storage areas having individual
access, but excludes uses such as workshops, hobby shops, manufacturing, or commercial
activity. Typical uses include mini-warehouses (Municipal Code Section 20.06.200(e)).
Business and Professional Services - The Business and Professional Services use type
refers to establishments or places of business primarily engaged in the sale, rental, or
repair of office equipment and the provision of services to offices of other businesses and
organizations, rather than to individuals. Typical uses include office supply stores,
photocopying centers, secretarial services, and office machine sales and repair stores
(Municipal Code Section 20.06.200(j)).
The proposed use of Building 6, fronting San Mateo Avenue at 1070 and totaling 9,100 sq.ft.,
would be utilized for Business and Professional Services (Municipal Section 20.06.060(j)),
Eating and Drinking Establishments: Convenience and Limited Service (Municipal Code
Section 20.06.090 (a)(l) and (a)(2)) and Convenience Sales (Municipal Section
20.06.220(h)) space, except drive-through windows would not be provided.
Full development under the proposed Project is referred to as "buildout." Although the
Project intends to accommodate up to potentially eight (8) different land use types (within
Buildings I through 5), as permitted in the M-I zone, the actual mix of tenants is unknown.
Therefore, in order to describe the Project in a manner that can be adequately assessed in
subsequent chapters of this EIR, a Reasonable Occupancy Scenario is defined in terms of
floor area per land use type. The Reasonable Occupancy Scenario is defined as follows:
.
368,969 sq. ft. of General Light Industrial;
.
245,979 sq. ft. of Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light;
.
1,500 sq.ft. of Eating and Drinking Establishments (Convenience and Limited);
.
1,000 sq.ft. of Convenience Sales; and
.
6,600 sq.ft. of Business and Professional Services.
For purposes of CEQA, this scenario has been developed as a conservative (i.e., "worst
case") assumption, particularly as related to vehicle trip generation and traffic impacts.
None of the Project's land use types described above would include stationary sources of air
emission, such as fuels combustion, burning of waste material, petroleum refining facilities,
PAGE 3-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
chemical manufacturing facilities, fuels distribution, metallurgical & minerals
manufacturing, semiconductor manufacturing, fiberglass manufacturing, and rubber and
plastics manufacturing. The Project would include mobile and area source emission
generators common to industrial and commercial areas, such as combustion engine powered
vehicles (e.g., passenger vehicles, trucks), indoor heating, and a wide range of consumer
products, such as paints, solvents, and cleaners.
PARKING, ACCESS & CIRCULATION
Vehicle access to the Project site would occur from San Mateo Avenue through one of two
curb-cuts. The southerly curb-cut is designed to facilitate passenger vehicle only access
through a curved drive aisle. The northerly curb-cut leads to a drive aisle split by a new
landscape median, which separates the driveway for ingress and egress for both passenger
vehicles and trucks. Once on the Project site, vehicles would circulate through and to various
parking areas and loading dock wells located westerly ofthe existing Building I.
The existing parking areas then would be reconfigured into a single, interconnected, at-grade
parking lot with spaces for approximately 641 passenger vehicles and trucks.
Pedestrians would enter the Project site from the sidewalk at San Mateo Avenue, which
would connect to proposed paved walkways (located outside of drive aisles) leading to all
existing and new buildings. The paved walkways also lead to paved sitting areas interspersed
throughout the Project site. Pedestrian access would be restricted along the northern, eastern
and southern portions of Building I.
LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING
Areas not devoted to buildings, off-street parking, and drive aisles would be landscaped with
a variety of trees, shrubs, perennials, ornamental grasses, and groundcover. A minimum
landscape strip often (10) feet in width would be provided between parking lots and abutting
public streets. Landscape strips and islands accommodating trees and groundcover are
provided within each surface parking lot.
Lighting would include pole-mounted street lighting and wall-mounted building lighting.
Pole-mounted lighting has a maximum height of 25 feet and is largely confined to the surface
parking lots. All lighting would be designed to direct light downward to reduce glare and
overspill onto surrounding properties.
GRADING
A fairly substantial grade differential separates the 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue parcels
on the Project site (i.e., at the property line the parcels are not contiguous at grade). The 1080
San Mateo Avenue parcel is higher in grade and separated by small landscaped cut slopes. At
most, the greatest difference in grade between the parcels is approximately six (6) feet, with
an average difference of 4.5 to 5 feet along the property line. From San Mateo Avenue, both
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
the 1080 San Mateo parcel and street frontage portion of the 1070 San Mateo parcel
generally trend downward in slope in an easterly direction, away from San Mateo Avenue.
For example, the slab on-grade foundation of Building I is more than five (5) feet lower than
the existing sidewalk at San Mateo Avenue.
The Project would re-grade both the 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue parcels in order to
achieve one, interconnected site that facilitates vehicular and pedestrian circulation. This
includes, most noticeably, the removal of the existing grade break along the property line that
slopes from San Mateo Avenue easterly towards Building I. In doing so, the Project would
maintain an existing low point between the parcels by grading the 1080 San Mateo site so
that any difference in elevation is eliminated. All grading activities will balance "cut" and
"fill" on-site, consequently, no importing or exporting of existing material would occur. All
"cut" soil would be moved towards the east side of the Project site, adjacent to the eastern
elevation of Building I.
UTILITIES
The Project site currently directs stormwater runoff in two general directions. The
approximate 5.23-acre 1080 San Mateo parcel flows to the southeast corner to a pump which
discharges to a stormdrain in San Mateo Avenue. The approximate 19.79-acre 1070 San
Mateo Avenue parcel drains by gravity to Shaw Road at two points along the eastern
boundary. Flows from the base of the loading dock well at the southwest corner of the
existing building are pumped into the southern gravity storm drain to Shaw Road.
The Project will maintain the pumped outflow to San Mateo Avenue and the existing gravity
outflows to Shaw Road. Storage will be provided for the pumped outflow to San Mateo
Avenue such that runoff from the design storm in excess of the existing pump capacity will
be retained on site. This on-site storage would take the form of oversized pumps leading to
the sump pump and/or an underground concrete chamber. The Project will install new
stormdrains connecting into the existing pipes though some of the existing pipes will be
abandoned. The Project also would introduce vegetated drainage swales and rain gardens to
store and treat the storm water runoff. Drainage directed in an easterly direction to Shaw
Road would convey run-off to an outfall channel that flows into Colma Creek.
The Project also intends to use existing utilities presently servicing the site, including
electrical conduits, sanitary sewer services, all water services, and other dry utilities. The
Project proposes no off-site utility improvements.
CONSTRUCTION
The Project includes the demolition of existing paved off-street parking areas and one small
approximately 975 square feet structure with adjoining canopy. Demolition is anticipated to
begin as early as the fall of 2009.
PAGE 3-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Existing asphalt paving will be ground and stockpiled on site for re-use as base-rock in
construction of new development. Construction debris will be sorted and sent off-site to
recycling and landfill facilities.
The construction to modify the off-street parking areas, remodel Building I, and develop new
buildings is proposed to occur in two (2) phases. The start of Phase I for the off-street
parking areas and the renovation of Building I will commence upon approval of the Project.
Phase 2, the construction of the five (5) new buildings, will be determined by the real-estate
market, but is anticipated to begin shortly after completion of Phase I.
Location( s) of construction staging will be determined by the General Contractor. It is
anticipated that staging would be confined to the off-street parking areas adj acent to San
Mateo Avenue.
Phase I construction is estimated take approximately nine (9) months. Phase 2 construction is
estimated to take approximately the same amount of time. On a daily basis, the construction
crew will range from ten (l0) to forty (40) individuals.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Development of the site is intended to fulfill the following objectives defined by the Project
sponsor:
I. Upgrade the existing outdated warehouse/distribution site for use as a modernized
warehouse/distribution and light industrial site that can serve the San Francisco
Peninsula.
2. Generate an option for non-conforming uses in other South San Francisco locations to
relocate, freeing up valuable Bio- Tech development potential elsewhere.
3. Develop a modernized Project that provides for continued operation of an older
industrial building with warehousing/distribution services and light industrial uses
consistent with the M-I Zoning and Mixed Industrial General Plan designation for the
site.
4. Create a Project that generates long-term employment opportunities for residents of
the City of South San Francisco, as well as short-term construction jobs.
5. Enhance the appearance of an existing property with high quality design that will
improve the streetscape and visual quality along San Mateo Boulevard.
6. Generate revenue that will contribute to the City's fiscal health.
7. Attract new small businesses to the area by providing modern small space in the new
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
buildings.
8. Improve existing storm water management through landscaping to Improve water
quality.
9. Create a pedestrian-friendly environment throughout the site with landscape buffers,
trees, and seating areas.
INTENDED USES OF THIS EIR
As discussed in Chapter I, the City of South San Francisco is the Lead Agency responsible
for preparation of this EIR (pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15051). This EIR is
intended to be used to provide CEQA review for all required discretionary actions for the
Project. The EIR provides City of South San Francisco decision makers, reviewing agencies,
and the general public with relevant environmental information to use in considering the
required discretionary actions for approval of the Project. The following approvals would be
required:
. Certification of Final EIR
. Use Permit
. Variance
. Tentative Parcel Map
. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan
. Design Review
. Administrative approval of subsequent demolition, grading and building permits.
PAGE 3-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
z
o
~
"
N
o
e
~
~
-;J
~i~~l.~,___
W~_
"
~
.!O
V3
~
~
g.
<l:
~
'"
Q) ~
!;
~ ~
lZ: ~
"m:'~!JI 0
!'l~ f =~ -="',"""" , ~.,-~ -~' - l ~
s
::
c
~
z
U
ul! u! 11!
~,
I
I
I
II
~
ti
~
~
co
"
"
""'
.2:c
'@
"
o
iJ
"
:s
"
gp
"
~
.E
f-<
e
~
~
~
~
G
S
::
~
z
U
e
2
~
e
~
~
~
z
~
z
2
5
~
e
"'
~
N
~
ti
~
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
-....--
~
~_~liI:!II!!i-
I
II
.
"
I Figure 3-4: Existing Building 1 Floor Plan.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
1lIll ~
~
'I!Ii'lII'liIiI~IIISi~_
,.
PO
a .1111
f
QllSEI
I Figure 3-5: Building 1 Floor Plan.
-. "-~---~~_..'" .....-,- :~
PAGE 3-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~1
1IIII!''IWilIIl
~
~!!I~lr~s;l1lll 1__
QIlSE]
,
':.11 ill
\
! Figure 3-6: Buildings 2 & 5 Floor Plan.
~-~
->~~ -
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-15
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
~-
'I'I1'I1I'IiI~frV""'_
~
IIS;E]
----'
\
I Figure 3-7: Buildings 3 & 4 Floor Plan.
DIll .llN'
1mI!I~
~
,.....::Rll>....~ MOO"
:1
,
P.
PAGE 3-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
[-11
1 I
___. ._n.__ -
~~ .
I~~-i
I J
I~ _0
I Figure 3-8: Building 6 Floor Plan.
---
-- ~.~ -
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-17
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
.-; ~
-.
~~I~-
I I ,
I
II'
I"
~
'I
,I'
I r
I Figure 3-9: Building 1 Roof Plan.
-
-~~- ~ ~
PAGE 3-18
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I Figure 3-10: Buildings 2 & 5 Roof Plan.
~1
--
ll!i'ii'14i6iDuUUII__
~~I!!!fII"_
I
l
I
I
-
_~a_ av on
1
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-19
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
-------
~--
~1UI!~11!!!fI~_
..
I
...
I Figure 3-11: Buildings 3 & 4 Roof Plan.
-
"""'.,,,.,,~"" .....
PAGE 3-20
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~1
f.Ii
~
-------
~~~
~i!JI!~!~_
~-
I==~
I Figure 3-12: Building 6 Roof Plan.
-
-"""",...., --
1
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-21
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
! Figure 3-13: Building 1 Elevation Plans.
~1
..
I
...
I
I
-------
~,--.
~!
-
--.....,.."" .....
PAGE 3-22
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~
, r
-------
~~~
'E!:Il!~I~_
" r.
..
I
...
I
I'"~
d!
! Figure 3-14: Building 1 Elevation Plans.
-
"""'.,,,.,,~"" .....
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-23
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
..
I
...
I
rq
IH~L m;m!'lH!:
~!'!~
1!l1iWll~I!I!ili~_
U!
-
--.....,.."" .....
! Figure 3-15: Building 1 Elevation Plans.
PAGE 3-24
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~1
,
.
I
...
I
ll!i'ii'14i6iDuuu__k
~~I!!!till"_
I Figure 3-16: Building 1 Elevation Plans.
"
:~!
I. '
H_
-
_~a_ av on
1
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-25
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
~1
I - .- . -...... .
~.~_...
~"I1I'III"1Il1li1m"~d I
I Figure 3-17: Buildings 2 & 5 Elevation Plans.
,
'1
-
~- ~~ -
PAGE 3-26
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I II ~ . ---
f:iiIr4'ftj~
~~-
I Figure 3-18: Building 6 Elevation Plans.
III
OOlllll>
f
-
_U_Mn n
1
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 3-27
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
,
.,
I
.....~.a~,,~~
1
~
I
1M
Figure 3-19: Landscape Plan.
PAGE 3-28
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
4
AI R QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the Project's potential impacts on the local and regional air quality.
Development projects of this type in the Bay Area are most likely to violate an air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation through
vehicle trip generation.
SETTING
METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY
Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients
interact with the physical features of the landscape to determine the movement and dispersal
of air pollutants.
The climate of the San Francisco Bay Area is classified as Mediterranean, and has mild, wet
winters and warm, dry summers. The regional climate is controlled primarily by the Pacific
high-pressure system over the eastern Pacific Ocean and by local topography. Local climate
is strongly influenced by topography and proximity to the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco
Bay. Cool, onshore winds blowing from the Pacific have a moderating effect, especially west
of the Diablo Mountain Range where the study area is located. These mountains act as a
barrier to onshore winds, resulting in the channeling of airflow along canyons, valleys, and
through straits in the Bay, as well as strong west-to-east temperature differences. The
resulting overall air flow patterns are complex, exhibiting much local variation. Large-scale
winds, which are the wind patterns influenced by general geographical and topographical
features of the San Francisco Bay Area on a roughly 50-mile scale, are predominantly from
the west from the Golden Gate toward the Delta.
While air quality is largely a regional issue, the protection of air quality is vital to the overall
health of the environment and the attractiveness of any locality. 1 South San Francisco enjoys
generally good air quality due largely to the presence of the San Bruno Gap, a break in the
Santa Cruz Mountains that allows onshore winds to flow easily into San Francisco Bay and
1 City of South San Francisco, prepared by Dyett and Bhatia, South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, p. 233.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
quickly disperse air pollutants.
Within South San Francisco, certain areas of the city are more likely to result in pollutant
exposure for residents and workers. These areas include the Highway 101, Interstate 280, and
El Camino Real corridors, which experience relatively high pollutant concentrations due to
heavy traffic volumes, particularly during peak periods. In addition, wind blowing out of the
south and southeast exposes the city to emissions from the San Francisco International
Airport.
REGULATORY SETTING
South San Francisco is located within the nine county San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Air
quality in the basin is monitored by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD), which operates a regional network of air pollution monitoring stations to
determine if the national and State standards for criteria air pollutants and emission limits of
toxic air contaminants are being achieved.
Federal Regulations
The Bay Area Air Basin is subject to major air quality planning programs required by the
federal Clean Air Act (CAA) (1977, last amended in 1990, 42 United States Code [USC]
7401 et seq.). The CAA requires that regional planning and air pollution control agencies
prepare a regional Air Quality Plan to outline the measures by which both stationary and
mobile sources of pollutants can be controlled in order to achieve all standards within the
deadlines specified in the Clean Air Act. For the Bay Area Air Basin, the Association of Bay
Area Governments (ABAG), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), and the
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) jointly prepared a Bay Area Air
Quality Plan in 1982.
State and Regional Regulations
In 1988, California passed the California Clean Air Act (CCAA, California Health and
Safety Code S 39600 et seq.). Under the CCAA, the Bay Area Air Basin is required to have a
Clean Air Plan (CAP) to achieve and maintain ozone standards. The most recent draft
revision to the CAP was completed in 2000. The 2000 CAP applies control measures to
stationary sources, mobile sources, and transportation control measures (TCMs). Although
the 2000 CAP is an ozone plan, it includes PM10 attainment planning as an informational
item. In January 2006, BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy to update and
build upon the 2000 CAP. Recently, the Air District has begun the process to prepare the
2009 Bay Area Clean Air Plan.
Both the federal Air Quality Plan and the state CAP rely on the combined emission control
programs of the EPA, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD).
PAGE 4-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
Criteria Air Pollutants
Ambient air quality standards have been established by state and federal environmental
agencies for specific air pollutants most pervasive in urban environments. These pollutants
are referred to as criteria air pollutants because the standards established for them were
developed to meet specific health and welfare criteria set forth in the enabling legislation.
The criteria air pollutants emitted by the proposed Project include ozone (03) precursors
(NOx and RaG), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (N02), and suspended particulate
matter (PMlO and PM2s). Other criteria pollutants, such as lead (Pb) and sulfur dioxide (S02),
would not be substantially emitted by the proposed Project or Project traffic, and air quality
standards for them are being met throughout the Bay Area.
Ozone (0])
While 03 serves a beneficial purpose in the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) by reducing
ultraviolet radiation potentially harmful to humans, when it reaches elevated concentrations
in the lower atmosphere it can be harmful to the human respiratory system and to sensitive
species of plants. 03 concentrations build to peak levels during periods of light winds, bright
sunshine, and high temperatures. Short-term 03 exposure can reduce lung function in
children, make persons susceptible to respiratory infection, and produce symptoms that cause
people to seek medical treatment for respiratory distress. Long-term exposure can impair
lung defense mechanisms and lead to emphysema and chronic bronchitis. Sensitivity to 03
varies among individuals, but about 20 percent of the population is sensitive to 03, with
exercising children being particularly vulnerable. 03 is formed in the atmosphere by a
complex series of photochemical reactions that involve "ozone precursors" that are two large
families of pollutants: oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and reactive organic gases (RaG). NOx and
RaG are emitted from a variety of stationary and mobile sources. While N02, an oxide of
nitrogen, is another criteria pollutant itself, RaGs are not in that category, but are included in
this discussion as 03 precursors.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Exposure to high concentrations of co reduces the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood
and can cause dizziness and fatigue, impair central nervous system function, and induce
angina in persons with serious heart disease. Primary sources of co in ambient air are
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and residential wood burning.
Nitrogen Dioxide (H02)
The major health effect from exposure to high levels of N02 is the risk of acute and chronic
respiratory disease. N02 is a combustion by-product, but it can also form in the atmosphere
by chemical reaction. N02 is a reddish-brown colored gas often observed during the same
conditions that produce high levels of 03 and can affect regional visibility. N02 is one
compound in a group of compounds consisting of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). As described
above, NOx is an 03 precursor compound.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Particulate Matter (PM)
Particulate matter consists of particles of various sizes which can be inhaled into the lungs
and cause adverse health effects. Particulate matter is regulated by the fraction of course
particulates 10 microns (a micron is one one-millionth of a meter) or less in diameter (PMlO)
and by the fraction of fine particulates 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2s). The health
effects from long-term exposure to high concentrations of particulate matter are increased
risk of chronic respiratory disease like asthma, and altered lung function in children. Short-
term exposure to high levels of particulate matter has been shown to increase the number of
people seeking medical treatment for respiratory distress, and to increase mortality among
those with severe respiratory problems. Particulate matter also results in reduced visibility.
Ambient particulate matter has many sources. It is emitted directly by combustion sources
like motor vehicles, industrial facilities, and residential wood burning, and in the form of dust
from ground-disturbing activities such as construction and farming. It also forms in the
atmosphere from the chemical reaction of precursor gases.
National and State Ambient Air Oualitv Standards
The CAA and CCAA promulgate, respectively, national and state ambient air quality
standards for carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), nitrogen dioxide (N02), particulate matter
10 microns or less in diameter (PMlO), and particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter
(PM2s).2 Ambient standards specify the concentration of pollutants to which the public may
be exposed without adverse health effects. Individuals vary widely in their sensitivity to air
pollutants, and standards are set to protect more pollution-sensitive populations (e.g.,
children and the elderly). National and state standards are reviewed and updated periodically
based on new health studies. California ambient standards tend to be at least as protective as
national ambient standards and are often more stringent.
For planning purposes, regions like the San Francisco Bay Area are given an air quality status
designation by the federal and state regulatory agencies. Areas with monitored pollutant
concentrations that are lower than ambient air quality standards are designated "attainment"
on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. When monitored concentrations exceed ambient standards
within an air basin, it is designated "nonattainment" for that pollutant.
EXISTING AIR QUALITY
In general, the Bay Area experiences low concentrations of most pollutants when compared
to federal and state standards. The Bay Area is considered "attainment" for all of the national
standards, with the exception of ozone3. The U.S EP A lowered the 24-hour PM2.5 standard
from 65 /lg/m3 to 35 /lg/m3 in 2006 and issued attainment status designations for the 35
2 Other pollutants (e.g., lead, sulfur dioxide) also have ambient standards, but they are not discussed in this
document because emissions of these pollutants from the Project are expected to be negligible.
3 Bay Area Air Quality Management District website, accessed February 13, 2009.
PAGE 4-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
/lg/m3 standard on December 22, 2008. While the EP A has designated the Bay Area as
nonattainment for the 35 /lg/m3 PM2.5 standard, President Obama has ordered a freeze on all
pending federal rules. Therefore, the effective date of the nonattainment designation is
unknown at this time. If or when published, the EP A designation would be effective 90 days
after publication of the regulation in the Federal Register. For State air quality standards, the
Bay Area is considered "nonattainment" for ozone and particulate matter.
The BAAQMD monitors air quality at several locations within the San Francisco Air Basin,
although none are located in South San Francisco. The monitoring sites closest to the Project
site are located in San Francisco and Redwood City. Table 4-1 summarizes exceedances of
the state and federal standards at these two sites. The table shows that most of the ambient air
quality standards are met in the Project area with the exception of the state standards for
PMlO.
TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF CRITERIA AIR POLLUTION MONITORING DATA
Pollutant Standard Monitoring Days Standard Exceeded
Site
2005 2006 2007
Ozone Federal I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
Ozone State I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
Ozone Federal8-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
PMIO Federal 24-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
PMIO State 24-Hour San Francisco 0 3 2
Redwood City 2 2 I
Carbon StatefF ederal San Francisco 0 0 0
Monoxide 8-Hour Redwood City 0 0 0
Nitrogen State I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Dioxide Redwood City 0 0
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (http://www.baaqrnd.gov/pio/a~smrnnarieslindex.htrn)
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a Project's environmental impacts are based on
CEQA Guidelines thresholds:
I. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan? The criteria are further defined as follows:
- Ifthe Project shows an estimated population greater than assumed in the Clean Air Plan
(as defined in ABAG projections), then it would be inconsistent with air quality
planning, and would be deemed to have a significant air quality impact.
- If the Project shows a growth rate in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) higher than the
population growth rate, it would be considered to be hindering progress toward
achieving a substantial reduction in passenger vehicle trips and miles traveled.
Therefore, it would be considered inconsistent with regional air quality planning, and
deemed to have a significant air quality impact.
- The consistency of the Project with Clean Air Plan Transportation Control Measures
(TCMs) must also be considered in evaluating air quality effects associated with
implementation of the Project. Ifthe Project does not demonstrate reasonable efforts to
implement the TCMs identified in the Clean Air Plan, then it would be considered to be
inconsistent with the CAP and deemed to have a significant air quality impact.
2. Would the Project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
3. Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
4. Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
5. Would the Project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
CONFLICT WITH AIR QUALITY PLAN
The City's General Plan designations and future land use types and intensities would have
been taken into account during preparation of the BAAQMD's 2000 Clean Air Plan and the
most recent Clean Air Plan update (Bay Area Ozone Strategy), released in early 2006.
Because the Project is consistent with the site's General Plan designation, the Project would
therefore be consistent with population projections used to develop the latest Clean Air Plan.
Projects should reasonably implement applicable Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)
PAGE 4-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
to be considered consistent with regional clean air planning efforts. Most of the TCMs listed
in the latest Clean Air Plans are not directly applicable to the Project since they pertain to
programmatic and system-wide capital improvements largely assigned to regional agencies
such as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Bay Area Air Quality Management
District and local transit operators4
Under the General Plan policies, projects such as this are required to implement a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to reduce project trips. This is
identified as part of the Project Description on Page 3-2 and discussed within Chapter 10
(Transportation and Circulation). The TDM program, along with General Plan policies and
Mitigation Measures identified in Chapter 10 (Transportation and Circulation), would
reasonably implement TCMs consistent with those contained in the latest approved Clean Air
Plan. There would, therefore, be no impact related to a conflict with the applicable air quality
plan
AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Project-related air quality impacts fall into two categories: short-term impacts due to
construction, and long-term impacts due to Project operation. During Project construction,
the Project would affect local particulate concentrations primarily due to fugitive dust
sources. Over the long-term, the Project would result in an increase in emissions primarily
due to increased motor vehicle trips.
Constructi on
Impact Air-I:
Construction Dust and Exhaust. Construction activity involves a high
potential for the emission of air pollutants. Construction activities would
generate exhaust emissions from vehicles/equipment and fugitive
particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. This would
be a potentially significant impact.
Construction activities would temporarily affect local air quality, causing a temporary
increase in particulate dust and other pollutants. Dust emission during periods of construction
would increase particulate concentrations at neighboring properties. This impact is
potentially significant, but normally mitigable.
BAAQMD CEQA GUidelines5 provide thresholds of significance for air quality impacts. The
BAAQMD significance thresholds for construction dust impacts are based on the
appropriateness of construction dust controls. The BAAQMD guidelines provide feasible
control measures for construction emission of PMlO. If the appropriate construction controls
are to be implemented, then air pollutant emissions for construction activities would be
4 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy, Page 61 to 72.
5 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, 1996 (Revised 1999).
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
considered less than significant.
Construction activities from on-site equipment and truck deliveries would emit toxic air
contaminants and air pollutants that are not regulated by the BAAQMD. These emissions,
although temporary, could affect nearby land uses including residences. However, it is
unlikely that significant health risks would occur due to: I) the temporary nature of
construction activity, 2) the separation distances between sensitive receptors and the Project,
and 3) the implementation of BAAQMD recommended control measures that significantly
reduce PMlO emissions from construction.
Therefore, in order to be protective of the health of nearby residences, as well as reduce
emissions that could affect regional air quality, the Project should implement BAAQMD
recommended construction period mitigation measures. This would include "enhanced"
measures for the Project since its size exceeds 4 acres. Implementation of the following
BAAQMD construction period control measures would ensure air pollutant emissions for
construction activities would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
Air-I:
Dust Suppression and Exhaust Reduction Procedures. The following
basic, enhanced and additional measures are recommended for inclusion in
construction contracts to control fugitive dust emissions during
construction. Measures to reduce construction exhaust will additionally
reduce particulate matter from the exhaust of diesel-powered construction
vehicles.
Basic Measures
. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil
stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas
at construction site.
. Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that
can be blown by the wind.
. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require
all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
. Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road,
parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
. Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil
material is carried onto adjacent public streets.
. Limit construction equipment idling time.
. Properly tune construction equipment engines, and install particulate
PAGE 4-8 CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
traps on diesel equipment.
Enhanced Measures
. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction
areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more ).
. Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to
exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.).
. 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.
Additional Measures
. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off the tires or
tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site.
. Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous
gusts) exceed 25 mph.
Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust
The measures listed below should be implemented to reduce diesel
particulate matter and NOx emissions from on-site construction
equipment:
. At least 50 percent of the heavy-duty, off-road equipment used for
construction shall be CARB-certified off-road engines or equivalent,
or use alternative fuels (such as biodiesel or water emulsion fuel) that
result in lower emissions.
. Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or
particulate filters.
. Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off-road
diesel powered equipment. The Project shall ensure that emissions
from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the Project
site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in
anyone hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or
Ringelmann 2.0) shall be prohibited from use on the site until repaired.
. The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever
possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g.,
compressors ).
. Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil,
aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks could
keep their engines running continuously as long as they were on site.
. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.
With the implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts related to construction dust and
exhaust would be reduced to a less than significant level since, according to the BAAQMD6,
the implementation of these control measures has been shown to significantly reduce PMlO
emissions from construction.
Issues of toxic air contaminants related to construction activIties are further addressed in
Chapter 6 (Hazards) of this document, specifically with regard to mitigation measures Haz-
2a, Haz-3a and Haz-3b.
Operation
Carbon Monoxide
Impact Air-2:
Carbon Monoxide. Mobile emissions generated by Project traffic would
increase carbon monoxide concentrations at intersections in the Project
vicinity. However, these increases would be below significance thresholds
of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District so would be considered
a less than significant impact.
Development projects of this type in the Bay Area are most likely to violate an air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation through
vehicle trip generation. New vehicle trips add to ozone precursor concentrations and to
carbon monoxide concentrations near streets that provide access to the site.
Emissions and ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide have decreased greatly in recent
years. These improvements are due largely to the introduction of cleaner burning motor
vehicles and motor vehicle fuels. No exceedances of the State or national CO standard have
been recorded at any of the Bay Area's monitoring stations since 1991. The Bay Area has
attained the State and National CO standard7
However, despite this progress, localized CO concentrations still warrant concern in the Bay
Area and should be addressed, particularly where localized high concentrations of CO may
not be recorded at monitoring sites. Because elevated CO concentrations are generally fairly
6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), BAAQMD CEQA GUIDEliNES - Assessing the Air
Quality of Projects and Plans, Pages 13 and 14 (http://www.baaqmd.gov/pln/ceqa/index.htm).
7 California Air Resources Board, 2006 Area Designationsfor State Ambient Air Quality Standards - Carbon
Monoxide, Figure 4 (http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/2006/state_co.pdt) and February 2009 Area
Designations for National Ambient Air Quality Standards - Carbon Monoxide
(http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/2008/fed08_co.pdt).
PAGE 4-1 0
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
localized, heavy traffic volumes and congestion can lead to high levels of CO, or "hotspots",
while concentrations at the closest air quality monitoring station may be below State and
National standards.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines recommends
estimation of carbon monoxide concentrations for projects where project traffic would: (I)
result in carbon monoxide emissions exceeding 550 lb./day, (2) impact intersections or
roadway links operating at Level of Service (LOS) D, E, or F or would cause Level of
Service to decline to D, E, or F; or (3) where project traffic would increase traffic volumes
on nearby roadways by 10% or more (unless the increase is less than 100 vehicles per hour).
The Project would result in carbon monoxide emissions exceeding over 550 lb/day,
contribute traffic to intersections and roadway segments currently operating at an LOS of D,
and cause certain intersections and roadway segments to decline to an LOS of D, E or F.
Therefore, consistent with BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the Project's carbon monoxide
emissions have been estimated.
Future carbon monoxide levels were manually estimated based on the procedures outlined in
the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. 8 These estimates were conducted for five intersections
both with and without the Project in place using project traffic projections for local streets
and adjacent roadways provided by DKS Associates. As shown in Appendix C, the
screening analysis indicates that both the with and without Project scenarios for I-hour and
8-hour Carbon Monoxide Levels are currently below national and California ambient air
quality standards. As a result, the impact on local air quality resulting from the Project is
considered to be less than significant.
CUMULATIVE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
Impact Air-3:
Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed Project would contribute
to regional air quality emissions and exceed BAAQMD emissions
thresholds for NOx. This would be considered a potentially significant
impact.
The Project would generate new regional emissions through new vehicle trips. The
BAAQMD has developed criteria to determine if a development project could result in
potentially significant regional emissions. The District has recommended that 2,000 daily
vehicle trips be used as a threshold for identifying those projects that may generate regional
impacts. Since the Project would generate 3,430 daily vehicles trips, quantified regional
impact analysis is required.
The Project size (as defined under the Reasonable Occupancy Scenario) and the
corresponding trip generation as forecast by DKS for the traffic analysis in this EIR
8 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), BAAQMD CEQA GUIDEliNES - Assessing the Air
Quality a/Projects and Plans, Pages 37 and 46 (http://www.baaqmd.gov/pln/ceqa/index.htm).
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE4-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(including a 15% trip reduction to account for South San Francisco's mandatory
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) requirements of Municipal Code Chapter
20.120) were input into the URBEMIS 2007 (version 9.2.4) model. The model assumed that
the Project would be fully constructed and occupied by 20 I O. Default assumptions for the
San Francisco Bay Area were used for all other input values.
The URBEMIS 2007 (version 9.2.4) calculations were performed to determine whether the
Project would exceed air emissions thresholds for Reactive Organic Gases (RaG), Nitrogen
Oxides (NOx) and Fine Particulate Matter (PMlO). Emissions thresholds are 80 pounds per
day for RaG, NOx and PMlO, and 15 tons per year for RaG, NOx and PMlO. The Project's
maximum total daily emissions would occur during the winter are estimated at 40.66 pounds
per day (lbs/day) for RaG, 112.43 lbs/day for NOx, and 52.87 lbs/day for PMlO. The Project
maximum total yearly emissions are estimated at 7.11 pounds per day (lbs/day) for RaG,
17.22 lbs/day for NOx, and 9.64Ibs/day for PMlO.
The Project's worst case daily and yearly emissions would exceed the emission thresholds.
The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the Project's contribution to
cumulative, regional air quality impacts.
Mitigation Measure
Air-3a: Tractor-Trailer Idling. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title
13, Chapter 10, Section 2485 - Mobile Source Operational Controls,
Article 1 - Motor Vehicles, Division 3, the Applicant shall prohibit all
diesel trucks and other delivery vehicles from idling their engines for more
than five minutes when making deliveries to or from the Project site.
Signage shall be posted throughout the facility displaying the requirement
that engines shall not idle for more than five minutes.
Mitigation Measure
Air-3b: Transportation Demand Management Program. Implementation of a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program is required, as
described in Mitigation Measure Traf-I of the Transportation and
Circulation chapter. This Program would reduce the number of vehicle
trips to and from the Project site. The following components shall be
included in the TDM Program to further reduce Project impacts to air
quality:
. Provide bicycle amemties so that employees could bicycle to the
Project. Such amenities could include safe onsite bicycle access and
convenient storage (bike racks). Amenities for employees could
include secure bicycle parking, lockers, and shower facilities.
. For all buildings, provide outdoor electrical outlets and encourage the
use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment.
PAGE 4-12 CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
. Provide electrical outlets for recharging electrical vehicles III
commercial and industrial parking lots/structures.
. Provide II 0 and 220 Volt outlets at all loading docks and prohibit
trucks from using their auxiliary equipment powered by diesel engines
for more than 5 minutes.
. Provide new trees that would shade buildings and walkways III
summer to reduce the cooling loads on buildings.
While implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce Project emissions, it is not
possible to quantitatively evaluate their effectiveness in reducing emissions. The BAAQMD
directs that, while a certain degree of professional judgment is usually involved in estimating
the effectiveness of mitigation measures, overly speculative estimates should be avoided. 9
The BAAQMD further directs that, if the Lead Agency cannot quantify mitigation
effectiveness with a reasonable degree of certainty, the environmental document should at
least address effectiveness qualitatively. However, given the uncertain nature of the final
building occupants, this EIR can not qualitatively evaluate the effectiveness of Mitigation
Measures Air-3a and Air-3b. Therefore, with regard to cumulative air quality impacts, the
Project would result in a significant and unavoidnble impact.
SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Impact Air-4:
Future Emissions Near Sensitive Receptors. Although not proposed at
this time, the Project could include stationary combustion equipment or
laboratory facilities that emit air pollution. These sources could emit small
amounts of toxic air contaminants with the potential to affect sensitive
receptors. This impact, however, would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level with standard BAAQMD permitting requirements.
The BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as facilities where sensitive receptor population
groups (children, the elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill) are likely to be located.
These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, retirement
homes, convalescent homes, hospitals and medical clinics. A pocket of residential
development exists approximately 550 feet to the west of the Project site between Huntington
Avenue and Herman Street. The nearest schools are located approximately 0.74-miles to the
south (i.e., Decmina M Allen School, 875 Agnus Avenue W, San Bruno and Bell Air School,
450 3rd Ave, San Bruno); others are one-mile or more away.
The proposed Project could expose these sensitive receptors to on-site emissions during
operation of the Project. Any Project occupant who would potentially release toxic air
9 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), BAAQMD CEQA GUIDEliNES - Assessing the Air
Quality a/Projects and Plans, Pages 58.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
contaminant emissions would be subject to rules, regulations and procedures of the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District. As part of its program to control toxic air contaminant
emissions, the District has established procedures for estimating the risk associated with
exposure. The methods used are conservative, meaning that the real risks from the source
may be lower than the calculations, but it is unlikely they will be higher.
In the first step of a two-step process, the District estimates how much of a contaminant
would be found in the air at a specific location. The estimate depends upon the type of
source, its rate of production and its location. The second step involves determining if the
estimated amount of contaminant is hazardous to those exposed to it. This determination
includes an evaluation of both carcinogenicity (tendency to cause cancer) and non-cancer
health effects. Chemical toxicity is based on animal study results and in some instances, on
the results of human exposure.
The BAAQMD requires permits for stationary combustion equipment and large laboratory
facilities. Small laboratories are exempt since their emissions would not likely pose an
adverse impact to the public. Stationary equipment or laboratories that are subject to
permitting requirements must show that impacts to the public would be negligible (e.g.,
cancer risks would be less than 10 in one million). As a result, these facilities would pose a
less than significant impact with respect to criteria pollutants.
ODORS
Impact Air-5:
Construction-Related Diesel Odors. During construction, the various
diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site would create
odors. These odors would be temporary and not likely to be noticeable
much beyond the Project site's boundaries. As the potential for diesel odor
impacts would not affect a substantial amount of people, this impact is less
than significant and is further reduced by Measures to Reduce
Construction Exhaust in Mitigation Measure Air-I. Therefore, no
mitigation is required.
Many construction vehicles run on diesel gasoline, the exhaust of which has a distinct smell
generally considered an objectionable odor. However, these odors would be temporary as
they are only associated with construction and would not be expected to reach much past the
boundary of the Project site. Measures to reduce construction exhaust, as presented in
Mitigation Measure Air-I in this EIR, are targeted at reduction of diesel particulates
associated with construction, but would also act to further reduce diesel odor emissions.
Impact Air-6:
Operational-Related Objectionable Odors. While it is not known at this
time what specific businesses will occupy the completed Project, these
businesses will be required to conform to applicable air quality regulations
in order to ensure that any odors resulting from operations will remain at a
less than significant level. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
PAGE 4-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 4: AIR QUALITY
Because it is not now known what specific businesses (beyond those described in Chapter 2,
Project Description) would occupy the Project site, it is difficult to determine if the Project
would have an adverse impact. However, the Project does include the potential for a Food
Processing land use type which is a known producer of odors. While any future tenant would
be required to conform to applicable air quality regulations to ensure that no significant odors
are generated, including requirements of BAAQMD Regulation 7 - Odorous Substances,
odors may still be discharged from site and remain odorous after dilution with odor-free air.
Mitigation Measure
Air-3a: Odor Control. Prior to the issuance of a Building or Tenant Improvement
Permit for a food preparation use the owner shall provide an Odor Control
Program which includes measures to eliminate odors associated with the
food use. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, frequent trash
pickup, indoor trash enclosure and state of the art odor and filtration
controls. The program shall be subject to the review and approval of the
City's Chief Planner in consultation with the Building Official.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 4-1 5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE4-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
5
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
INTRODUCTION
The information presented below was drawn from several sources of data including: (I)
Geotechnical Feasibility Study for the project site completed by Treadwell and Rollo, Inc,
dated January 23, 2009; (2) Review of USGS Open File Reports (OFR) of the area, including
a map of bedrock geology (USGS OFR 98-354, 1998), and a Quaternary Geologic Map,
including liquefaction susceptibility (USGS OFR 97-715, 1997); (3) Review of Official
California Geologic Survey (CGS) (formerly the California Division of Mines and Geology
(CDMG)) Maps, including the South San Francisco Alquist-Priolo (A-P) Earthquake Fault
Zone Map (1982), and Fault Activity Map of California (1994); (4) Review of government
websites, including the Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG) website
(www.abag.gov) for a summary of hazards ranging from seismic shaking to liquefaction
susceptibility; and (5) Review of the General Plan for the City of South San Francisco, as
well as all other applicable ordinances and regulations.
EXISTING SETTING
REGIONAL SEISMICITY
The site lies in the tectonically active Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province of northern
California, on the east side of the San Francisco Peninsula. Development of the northwest
trending ridges and valleys in the vicinity, including the Santa Cruz Mountains and San
Francisco Bay, is controlled by active tectonism along the boundary between the North
American and Pacific Tectonic Plates, the San Andreas Fault System.
Area faults have predominantly right-lateral strike-slip (horizontal) movement, with lesser
dip-slip (vertical) components of displacement. Horizontal and vertical movement is
distributed on the various fault strands within a fault zone. Throughout geologic time the
fault strands experiencing active deformation change in response to regional shifts in stress
and strain from plate motions. Within sixteen miles of the Project site there are three major
active faults that display large right-lateral strike-slip offsets, the San Andreas Fault, the San
Gregorio Fault, and the Hayward Fault.
Seismicity of the Project region has resulted in several major earthquakes during the historic
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
period, including the 1868 Hayward Earthquake, the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, and
most recently, the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Small, non-damaging earthquakes occur
frequently in the Project vicinity. Larger potentially damaging earthquakes are expected to
occur periodically, and are considered likely during the design life of the proposed Project.
The Project site location relative to major faults and earthquake epicenters in the San
Francisco Bay Area is shown in Figure 5-1 below.!
.
.
\!;I
iil!
(!Ii
.
~
(!ill
,.
,
l
.
,.-~J
- -"
-
..
Figure 5 -1. Major Faults and Earthquake Epicenters.
1 Modified from Earthquake Planning Scenario for a 7.5 Magnitude Earthquake on the Hayward Fault in the
San Francisco Bay Area California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 78, 1987.
PAGE 5-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The nearest active or potentially active fault zones to the Project site are the San Andreas
Fault, located 1.9 miles southwest of the site, the San Gregorio Fault (Seal Cove fault),
located approximately 10.0 miles to the southwest, and the Hayward Fault, located
approximately 16.0 miles to the northeast. The nearest potentially active fault (showing
evidence of Quaternary movement, or movement within the past 1.6 million years) is the
Serra Fault, located approximately 1.3 miles west-southwest of the site2 The nearest
geologic fault of any kind is the San Bruno Fault, located approximately 0.3 miles southwest
of the Project site. This fault is not considered active or potentially active. Fault locations
relative to the Project site, status, date of most recent motion and mean characteristic moment
magnitude of nearby faults are presented in Table 5-1 below.
TABLE 5-1: MEAN CHARACTERISTIC MOMENT MAGNITUDE OF NEARBY FAULTS
Fault Name Distance (mi) Direction Last Surface Activity Mean Characteristic Moment
Rupture Magnitude3
Serra 1.3 WSW Late Quaternary Potentially Active
San Andreas 2 WSW Historic Active 7.90
Seal Cove 8 S Holocene Active
Hayward 16 NE Historic Active 6.91
Monte Vista 20 SE Late Quaternary Potentially Active 6.80
San Gregorio 26 S Holocene Active 7.44
Calaveras 26 ENE Holocene Active 6.93
Pleasanton 27 ENE Holocene Active
Concord 31 NE Historic Active 6.71
Williams 33 E Late Quaternary Potentially Active
Clayton 35 NE Holocene Active
Green Valley 36 NNE Holocene Active 6.71
Marsh Creek 36 ENE Holocene Active
Rogers Creek 36 N Holocene Active 6.98
Las Positas 38 E Historic Active
Napa 38 NNE Holocene Active 6.70
Greenville 39 NNE Historic Active 6.94
Source: Modified from Earthquake Planning Scenario for a 7.5 Magnitude Earthquake on the Hayward Fault in the San Francisco
Bay Area California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 78, 1987.
2 Fault Evaluation Reports Prepared under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act #119, California
Geological Survey, 2002.
3 Uniform California Earthquake Forecast Version 2, 2007 Working Group on California Eartliquake
Probabilities, USGS Open-File Report 2007-1437, cGS Special Report 203,2008.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT PAGE 5-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The Project site is located near the western edge of the San Francisco Bay, a submerged
valley in the Central Coast Ranges of California. This area is characterized by northwest
trending mountain ranges and valleys oriented sub-parallel to faults of the San Andreas Fault
System.
In the San Francisco Bay Area, Tertiary strata commonly rest in angular unconformity on
rocks of the Franciscan complex, which is composed of weakly to strongly metamorphosed
greywacke (sandstone), argillite, limestone, basalt, serpentinite, and chert. The rocks of the
Franciscan complex are ancient Jurassic oceanic crust and deep marine (pelagic) deposits
accreted onto the edge of the North American Continent and metamorphosed as a result of
accretion and partial subduction. These deposits are overlain by Late Jurassic to Late
Cretaceous sedimentary deposits. Deposits of these rocks may be found at outcropping along
San Bruno Mountain in the project vicinity.
Little metamorphosed, high-pressure, low-temperature metamorphic minerals are common in
the Franciscan complex, but there are also high grade metamorphic blocks in sheared but
relatively un-metamorphosed argillite matrix which reflect the complicated tectonic and
structural history ofthe Franciscan Complex.
The bedrock of the Project site's larger environs has been offset by movement along the San
Andreas Fault, which traverses the Santa Cruz Mountains prior to heading offshore in
southern Daly City, on the other side of the San Francisco Peninsula. Several northwest
trending and structurally controlled valleys dissect the Peninsula, including the valley of
Colma Creek, which contains the Project site.
During the Quaternary Period of rising and falling sea level in response to patterns of global
glaciation, these valleys were incised and then backfilled with sediment to form the suite of
alluvial deposits that can be found today, including the Pleistocene-age Colma Formation.
Along the bay margin, Holocene "Bay Mud" deposited within the past 1l,000 years, during
which time the Bay has filled with seawater, can be found, as well as marsh deposits, and
other fine grained sediment accumulated by currents along the shore.
SITE SOILS AND GEOLOGY
According to a recent map of bedrock geology (1998), the majority of the site is underlain by
the Pleistocene age Colma Formation4 The Colma Formation is described as friable, well
sorted, fine to medium grained sand containing a few beds of sandy silt, clay, and gravel
4 Bonila, M.G., Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Francisco South 7.5 Minute Quadrangle and Part of the
Hunter's Point 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, San Francisco Bay Area, California, USGS Open-File Report 98-354,
1998.
PAGE 5-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
throughout most of the area, but also as sandy clay and silty sand in the Project vicinity. The
far easternmost portion of the Project site coincides with the westernmost extent of historical
marshes. These former drainages of Colma Creek are now covered by artificial fill. The
artificial fill consists of clay, silt, sand, rock fragments, organic matter, and man-made
debris.5 The Project site is likely underlain at depth by Franciscan Rocks similar to those
exposed in nearby San Bruno Mountain.
Treadwell and Rollo prepared a geotechnical feasibility study for the Project site dated
January 23, 2009. No geologic map or boreholes were completed as part ofthis investigation
and subsurface information was inferred from investigations performed in the site vicinity.
The Treadwell and Rollo report indicates that a thin layer of fill (less than 10 feet thick)
consisting of clay, silt, and sand may be covering the site. The fill, if present, likely varies in
thickness and may be absent in some areas. Native soils east of the historical margins of
marsh deposits, likely consist of soft to medium stiff, compressible, marine clay deposits of
Holocene Bay Mud. Bay Mud may underlie the easternmost portions of the project site.
Material underlying the fill (or Bay Mud, if present) are likely alluvial deposits consisting of
stiff to very stiff silty and sandy clay and clayey and sandy silts, and dense to very dense
sand and clayey sand. While no boreholes were drilled at the site, groundwater levels
measured in boreholes in the vicinity were between four and fourteen feet below ground
surface. 6
LANDSLlDING AND SLOPE INSTABILITY
Slope steepness is generally the dominant factor governing slope stability, depending upon
soil and bedrock conditions. Steep slopes greater than 50 percent are especially prone to
landslides in areas of weak soil and/or bedrock. The Project site is nearly level; however
there is currently a grade difference of approximately 4 to 6 feet between the 1070 and 1080
San Mateo Ave sites, separated by small landscaped cuts. According to ABAG landslide
maps the Project site is not at risk of slope instability.
PRIMARY SEISMIC HAZARDS
A number of active and potentially active faults are present in the region. According to
criteria of the State of California Geological Survey, active faults have experienced surface
rupture within the last 11,000 years (Holocene Period). The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Act of 1972 initiated a program of mapping active and potentially active faults (faults
with displacement within Quaternary time - the last 1.6 million years). According to the
5 Bonilla, M.G., Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Francisco Soutli 7.5' Quadrangle and part of the Hunter's
Point 7.5' Quadrangle, San Francisco Bay Area, California. USGS, 1998.
6 Treadwell and Rollo, Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Study, 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Ave, Soutli San
Francisco, 23 January 2009.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
program, active faults must be zoned and development projects within the Earthquake Fault
Zones investigated to establish the location and age of any faulting across the development
site.
Active and potentially active faults along the San Francisco Peninsula have undergone
extensive investigation in the past. ABAG has summarized results from many of these
studies to quantify the potential impact to certain areas, while the California Geological
Survey has established Earthquake Fault Zone (EFZ) boundaries. According to these maps,
the Project site is not located within an EFZ.
The nearest EFZ is for the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 2 miles southwest of the
site. Since no faults are mapped across the project site on any published maps, ground
rupture at the site as a result of an earthquake is unlikely and the risk of ground rupture
within the project boundaries is considered very low.
SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS
Ground Shaking
The San Francisco Bay Area is a seismically active region. The Project site and region will
likely be subjected to strong to violent seismically induced ground shaking within the design
life ofthe proposed Project. The Project site is located in an area of active regional seismicity
near active seismic sources.
According to a recent study completed by the Working Group on California Earthquake
Probabilities (WGCEP), which assesses the probability of earthquakes in the San Francisco
Bay Area, there is a 63 percent probability that an earthquake of Richter Magnitude 6.7 or
greater will strike the region between 2007 and 2037.7
The intensity of ground shaking at a particular site will vary with the distance and magnitude
of the earthquake causing the ground shaking. The maximum intensity ground shaking
expected to occur at the Project site would be a modified Mercalli intensity level of IX
(violent) in response to an earthquake of equivalent magnitude to the 1906 earthquake (7.9)
on the San Andreas Fault. An earthquake of magnitude 6.8 on the Hayward Fault would be
expected to produce strong ground shaking equivalent to Modified Mercalli intensity level
VII. 8 The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale is included as Table 5-2 below.
Peak ground accelerations for the Project site with a 10 percent probability of being exceeded
7 The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2, 2007 Working Group on California
Earthquake Probabilities, 2008. obtained from http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1437/
8 Association of Bay Area Governments, www.abag.ca.gov. 2005.
PAGE 5-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
in a 50-year period, are approximately 68 percent of the acceleration due to gravity9 Actual
ground motions resulting from ground acceleration may be amplified or dampened
depending on the underlying geologic materials. Deep soft soils tend to amplify waves
whereas shallow soils overlying hard bedrock tends to dampen shaking intensity. With
relatively dense soils at the Project site, no amplification of seismic waves is anticipated.
Seismically Induced Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of saturated, cohesionless soil into a viscous
liquid as a result of seismically induced ground shaking. The Project site is located just to the
west of artificially filled former drainage channels of Colma Creek's alluvial fan. As such,
liquefaction potential at the Project site may vary from very low in the western part of the
site to much higher at the eastern edge. According to ABAG, soils over the majority of the
Project site have a very low susceptibility to liquefaction, whereas soils in the far eastern
portion of the site (under the eastern part of the existing warehouse building) have a very
high susceptibility.loThese ABAG maps show a sharp demarcation at the line separating
artificial fill and native ground, from very high risk to very low risk.
A USGS map showing liquefaction susceptibility in the San Francisco Bay Area shows the
Project site as having a very low susceptibility to liquefaction. However, the same map
showed a very high susceptibility to liquefaction approximately 300 feet east of the rear of
the existing building.11 The Treadwell and Rollo geotechnical feasibility study concluded
that the risk of liquefaction is low unless liquefiable material is found in the fill.
Seismically Induced Densification
Dynamic densification or ground subsidence can occur when dry, cohesionless soils collapse
as a result of seismic shaking. This may be particularly true of unconsolidated sandy fill, or
ground overlying hollow areas due to caves, mines, or areas with excessive groundwater
removal. Fill materials may be subject to the effects of seismically induced densification.
Seismically Induced Lurch Cracking
Lurching is the sudden swaying, rolling, or spreading of the ground during a strong
earthquake. Lurch cracking is the development of fissures or cracks on slopes overlain by
weak soils. The Project site is nearly level and lurch cracking is not considered a hazard.
9 California Geologic Survey, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cGS/rghm/pshamap/pshamain.html .
10 ABAG website, www.abag.ca.gov
11 Knudsen, K, et al. Quaternary Geology and Liquefaction Susceptibility San Francisco 1 :100,000 Quadrangle,
Plate 2, Liquefaction Susceptibility, 1997, USGS Open-File Report 97-715.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 5-2: MODIFIED MERCALLI EARTHQUAKE INTENSITY SCALE
Scale
Intensity
Effects
Notfe!t.
II
III
IV
Felt by persons at rest, on upper floors, or favorably placed.
Felt indoors. Hanging objects swing. Vibration like passing of light trucks.
Hanging objects SlNing. Vibration like passing of heavy trucks. Standing motorcars rock. Windows,
dishes, doors rattle. Glasses clink. Crockery clashes. In the upper range anv, wooden walls and
frame creak.
V Light Felt outdoors; direction estimated. Sleepers wakened. Liquids disturbed, some spilled. Small
unstable objects displaced or upset. Doors SlNing, close, open. Shutters, pictures move. Pendulum
clocks stop, start, change rate.
VI Moderate Felt by all. Many frightened and run outdoors. Persons walk unsteadily. Windows, dishes, glasSlNare
broken. Objects fall off shelves. Pictures off walls. Furniture moved or overturned. Weak plaster
and poorly constructed or weak masonry cracked. Trees, bushes shaken (visibly, or heard to rustle).
VII Strong Difficult to stand. Noticed by drivers of motorcars. Hanging objects quiver. Furniture broken.
Damage to poorly constructed or weak masonry. Weak chirrmeys broken at roofline. Fall of plaster,
loose bricks, stones, tiles, and cornices. Some cracks in average unreinforced masonry. Waves on
ponds; water turbid with mud. Small slides and caving in along sand or gravel banks. Large bells
ring. Concrete irrigation ditches damaged
VIII Very Strong Steering of motorcars affected. Damage to average masonry and partial collapse. Some damage to
reinforced masonry, but not to that specially designed for seismic loading. Fall of stucco and some
masonry walls. Collapse of chimneys, factory stacks, monuments, towers, and elevated tanks. Frame
houses moved on foundations if not bolted down; loose panel walls thrown out. Decayed piling
broken off. Branches broken from trees. Changes in flow or temperature of springs and wells.
Cracks in wet ground and on steep slopes.
IX Violent General panic. Poorly built or weak masonry destroyed; average unreinforced masonry heavily
damaged, sometimes with complete collapse; reinforced masonry seriously damaged. (General
damage to foundations.) Frame structures, if not bolted, shifted off foundations. Frames racked.
Serious damage to reservoirs. Underground pipes broken. Conspicuous cracks in ground. In alluvial
areas sand and mud ejected, earthquake fountains, sand craters.
X Very Violent Most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foundations. Some well-built wooden
structures and bridges destroyed. Serious damage to dams, dikes, embankments. Large landslides.
Water thrown on banks of canals, rivers, lakes, etc. Sand and mud shifted horizontally on beaches
and flat land. Rails bent slightly.
XII Very Violent Rails bent greatly. Underground pipelines completely out of service.
XII Very Violent Damage nearly total. Large rock masses displaced. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects
thrown into the air.
Source: Wood and Neumann, (1931), Modified Mercalli scale of 1931, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 21, 277-283.
Seismically Induced Landslides
Seismically induced landslides and slope failure is another secondary seismic hazard. During
earthquake induced ground shaking, unstable slopes can fail, causing landslides and debris
flows. Due to the nearly level topography of the Project site, seismically induced landslides
are not considered a hazard.
PAGE 5-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
REGULATORY SETTING
STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The California Legislature passed the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1972 to
mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy.12 The Act's main
purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface
trace of active faults. The Act addresses only the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not
directed toward other earthquake hazards. Local agencies must regulate most development in
fault zones established by the State Geologist. Before a project can be permitted in a
designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the city or county with jurisdiction must
require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings would not be
constructed across active or potentially active faults.
California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (California Public Resources Code
Sections 2690-2699.6) addresses seismic hazards other than surface rupture, such as
liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act specifies
that the lead agency for a project may withhold development permits until geologic or soils
investigations are conducted for specific sites and mitigation measures are incorporated into
plans to reduce hazards associated with seismicity and unstable soils. Seismic hazard zone
maps for San Mateo County are in the planning stage and have yet to be completed.
California Building Code
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building
Standards Code, sets minimum requirements for building design and construction. The 2007
version of the California Building Standards Code are effective as of January I, 2008. The
California Building Standards Code is a compilation of three types of building standards
from three different origins:
. Building standards that have been adopted by state agencIes without change from
building standards contained in national model codes;
. Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the national model code
standards to meet California conditions; and
12 California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997 revision, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, DMG
Special Publication 42.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
. Building standards, authorized by the California legislature, that constitute extensive
additions not covered by the model codes that have been adopted to address particular
California concerns. 13
In the context of earthquake hazards, the California Building Standards Code's design
standards have a primary objective of assuring public safety and a secondary goal of
minimizing property damage and maintaining function during and following seismic events.
The 2007 version of the California Building Standards Code differs significantly from the
previous versions of the code. The 2007 code assigns a seismic design category (SDC) to
each structure. The SDC is assigned as a means of capturing both the seismic hazard, in
terms of mapped acceleration parameters (spectral values), site class (defining the soil
profile), and the occupancy category (based on its importance or hazardous material
contents). The SDC affects design and detailing requirements as well as the structural system
that may be used and its height. The previous versions of the code captured these
requirements simply based on the location's seismic zone.14
LOCAL REGULATIONS AND POLICIES
City of South San Francisco Hazard Mitigation Plan
The City of South San Francisco has adopted the Association of Bay Area Governments
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as the Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the City by
Resolution No. 65-2006, on August 16, 2006. The HMP has been designed to identify the
areas where people or structures may have higher vulnerability to earthquakes, flood,
wildland fires, and other natural hazards. The plan identifies policies and actions that may be
implemented by the City to reduce the potential for loss of life and property damage in these
areas based on an analysis of the frequency of earthquakes, floods, wildland fires and
landslides in terms of frequency, intensity, location, history, and damage effects. The Plan
also serves as a guide for decision-makers as they commit resources to reduce the effects of
natural hazards.
City of South San Francisco General Plan
The Health and Safety Element of the City's General Plan includes a section on Geological
and Seismic Hazards. This section identifies geotechnical and geologic impacts to the general
City of South San Francisco area. The most recent General Plan update was completed in
October 1999.
13 California Building Standards Commission website at http://www.bsc.ca.gov/title_24/default.htm
14 Bonneville, David New Building Code Provisions and Their Implications for Design and Construction in
California (abstract), 2007, obtained from
htlp:/ /www.consrv.ca.gov /cgs/smip/ docs/seminar/SMIP07 /Pages/Paper 12_ Bonneville. aspx.
PAGE 5-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
City of South San Francisco Municipal Code
The City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 15 includes information on the
Construction Codes and Amendments adopted by the City of South San Francisco. This
includes the California Building Code, among other codes used in construction in the City of
South San Francisco. The California Building Code Vol. I and 2, 2007 Edition, including the
California Building Standards, 2007 Edition, published by the International Conference of
Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in
Title 15 was adopted by reference as the building code of the City of South San Francisco on
January 1,2008.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring the Project's impacts are based upon CEQA
Guidelines thresholds:
I. Would the Proj ect expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
2. Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss oftopsoil?
3. Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
4. Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
5. Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water?
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SEISMIC IMPACTS
Impact Geo-l
Geologic Hazards. According to CEQA guidelines, exposure of
people or structures to major geological hazards is a significant
adverse impact. The primary seismic hazards affecting the Project are
strong seismic ground shaking and potentially liquefiable fill soils,
each of which are considered a potentially significant impact.
The basic criterion applied to the analysis of impacts is whether construction of the Project
will create, or be founded on, unstable geologic conditions that would last beyond the short-
term construction period. The analysis of geological hazards is primarily based on the degree
to which the site geology could produce hazards to people, structures, and the environment
from earthquakes, fault rupture, landslides, soil creep, expansion and settlement or other
geologic events.
Exposure to Strong Seismic Ground-Shaking
There is a high probability that the proposed development would be subjected to strong to
violent ground shaking from an earthquake during its design life. Therefore, this could be
considered a potentially significant impact.
Surface Fault Rupture
According to the latest available maps, the site is not contained within an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone boundary. Published geologic maps show no faults across the site,
and there is no other indication of an active fault, and therefore no impact to the Project.
Seismically Induced Ground Failure
According to Association of Bay Area Governments liquefaction hazard maps, the rear (east)
portions of the site are located in areas with a very high susceptibility to liquefaction. The
Geotechnical Investigation by Treadwell & Rollo concluded that fill soils may be susceptible
to liquefaction and/or densification. Seismically induced ground failure is a potentially
significant impact.
Exposure to Seismically-Induced Landslides
The site is nearly level and no landslides are mapped across the property. Consequently, there
would be no impact. The Project would re-grade the parcels in order to create one
interconnected site to facilitate pedestrian and vehicular circulation. After re-grading the site
will be nearly level and slope stability is not expected to be an issue.
Mitigation
Measure Geo-la
Completion of and compliance with recommendations of a
Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design
PAGE 5-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Plans. A design level geotechnical investigation shall be completed
that includes subsurface investigation in areas to be occupied by
structures (currently a paved parking lot). The design level
geotechnical report shall include recommendations for site preparation
and grading, foundation design, concrete slabs-on-grade, pavement
section design, surface and subsurface drainage measures and site-
specific seismic response criteria (shown in Table Geo-3 below). The
design level geotechnical investigation shall be reviewed and approved
by the City's Geotechnical Consultant and the City Engineer.
The design level geotechnical investigation shall evaluate liquefaction
potential of underlying fill and native soil. Should liquefiable or
densifiable materials be encountered in the fill, mitigation measures to
reduce their impact shall be formulated. These strategies may include
excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced foundation
loading, and ground improvement by methods such as stone colunms
or pressure grouting.
Grading recommendations shall include specifications for engineered
fill, including moisture conditioning, relative percent compaction, and
suitability of materials as engineered or structural fill.
Recommendations shall also establish maximum steepness of cut and
fill slopes. Any cuts to be made adjacent to the property line shall be
evaluated for potential adverse impact to neighboring properties.
Drainage recommendations shall include provisions to prevent the
ponding of water, prevent seepage under structures, including
pavements, and generally direct flow away from structural
foundations. Drainage recommendations shall incorporate proposed
landscaping elements. Permanent subsurface drains will to be
necessary for any proposed retaining walls to prevent buildup of
hydrostatic pressure behind the walls.
Recommendations for foundations shall include soil bearing capacity
or skin friction values, and lateral pressures. The design plans shall
identify specific mitigation measures to reduce or otherwise mitigate
the liquefaction potential of surface soils. Mitigation measures may
include excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced
foundation loading, and ground improvement by methods such as
stone columns or pressure grouting. Geotechnical recommendations
shall also provide the depth of footings or pile foundations necessary
for the planned structures. During construction, a Registered
Geotechnical Engineer, Civil Engineer experienced in Geotechnical
Engineering, or authorized representative shall observe all foundation
excavations and pier drilling. A letter indicating that all foundation
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
construction meets with the intent of the geotechnical
recommendations shall be provided to the Building Official prior to
concrete pouring.
Recommendations for concrete slab construction shall identify
measures to mitigate expansive soils and minimize shrink/swell
potential, such as moisture conditioning or replacement with select
non-expansive fill, as well as concrete thickness and reinforcement.
The feasibility report recommended that where moisture through the
floor slabs is a concern, a capillary moisture break consisting of at
least four inches of clean, free-draining gravel or crushed rock, and a
water vapor retarder should be installed beneath floors to reduce water
vapor transmission thorough floor slabs. The design level report shall
either corroborate this recommendation or identify an alternative to be
implemented.
TABLE 5-3: SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA PER CBC
Site Class
D
Soil Profile Name
Stiff Soil Profile
Occupancy Category
Seismic Design Category
Mapped Spectral Response for Short Periods- 0.2 Sec
(S,)
II
E
2031 g
Mapped Spectral Response for Long Periods- 1 Sec (S,)
Site Coefficient- Fa, based on the mapped spectral
response for short periods
1091 g
10
Site Coefficient- Fv, based on the mapped spectral
response for long periods
1.5
Adjusted Maximum Considered EQ Spectral Response
for Short Periods (SMS)
Adjusted Maximum Considered EQ Spectral Response
for Long Periods (SM')
Design (5-percent damped) Spectral Response
Acceleration Parameters at short periods (SDS)
Design (5-percent damped) Spectral Response
Acceleration Parameters at long periods (Sm)
2031
1637
1.354
1091
Recommendations for pavement areas shall include compaction and
moisture conditioning requirements, as well as pavement section
thickness and construction design based upon a Resistance-value (R-
PAGE 5-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation
Measure Geo-l b
Mitigation
Measure Geo-Ic
value) determined for sub-grade soils in the areas to be paved.
The design report shall include specific drainage criteria behind any
retaining walls, and identify retaining wall foundation design and
design parameters.
In general, the design report shall either corroborate or provide
alternative recommendations to the feasibility report based upon actual
soil and rock conditions in the areas where structures are proposed.
Compliance with 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Project
development shall meet requirements of the California Building Code
Vol. I and 2, 2007 Edition, including the California Building
Standards, 2007 Edition, published by the International Conference of
Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and
deletions as adopted by the City of South San Francisco, California.
Incorporation of seismic construction standards would reduce the
potential for catastrophic effects of ground shaking, such as complete
structural failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of
seismically induced ground shaking.
Obtain a building permit and complete final plan review. The
Project applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of
South San Francisco Building Division. Final Plan Review of planned
buildings and structures shall be completed by a licensed structural
engineer for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned
commercial and industrial sites in City of South San Francisco.
Conformity with these mitigation measures would ensure proper foundation and structural
design, thereby reducing the Project's impact related to seismic ground shaking and
seismically induced ground failure to a level of less than significant.
SOIL EROSION
Impact Geo-2
Mitigation
Measure Geo-2a
Soil Erosion. The Project would involve mass grading in a location
that could facilitate stormwater-related soil transfer to the San
Francisco Bay. This could potentially impact vicinity drainages such
as Colma Creek and the San Francisco Bay. This would be a
potentially significant impact during and following site construction
activities.
Erosion Control Plan. The Project applicant shall complete an
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 5-1 5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City in conjunction with
the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall
include winterization, dust, erosion and pollution control measures
conforming to the ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and
Sediment Control Measures, with sediment basin design calculations.
The Erosion Control Plan shall describe the "best management
practices" (BMPs) to be used during and after construction to control
pollution resulting from both stormwater and construction water
runoff. The Erosion Control Plan shall include locations of vehicle and
equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and
planned access routes.
Recommended soil stabilization techniques include placement of straw
wattles, silt fences, berms, and gravel construction entrance areas or
other control to prevent tracking sediment onto city streets and into
storm drains.
Public works staff or its 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.
Mitigation
Measure Geo-2b
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In accordance
with the Clean Water Act and the requirements of the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a SWPPP
prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP shall include specific
best management practices to reduce soil erosion. This is required to
obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm
Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General
Permit, 99-08-DWQ).
Implementation of these mitigation measures ensure that any soils disturbed during
construction activities would not be mobilized by storm- or construction-runoff and would
reduce the Project's impact to a level of less than significant.
UNSTABLE GEOLOGIC UNIT
Impact Geo-3
Unstable Soils. The Project site is potentially underlain by fill soils of
unknown quality, which may be expansive, prone to settlement, or
susceptible to seismically induced liquefaction or dynamic
densification. This is a potentially significant impact.
PAGE 5-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation
Measure Geo-3
EXPANSIVE SOILS
Impact Geo-4
Mitigation
Measure Geo-4
Compliance with Mitigation Measures Geo-2 for Seismically Induced
Ground Failure and Geo-5 for Expansive Soils. Compliance with these
mitigation measures will reduce the impact of unstable geologic unit to
a level of less than significant.
Potentially Expansive and Compressible Soils. The Project site is
potentially underlain by fill soils of unknown quality. These materials
may contain expansive clay minerals subject to shrinking and swelling
in response to changes in water content. These expansive soils could
cause damage to foundations, concrete slabs, and pavements. The
impact due to expansive soils is potentially significant.
Completion of and Construction in Accordance with a Design
Level Geotechnical Investigation. The design level geotechnical
report shall investigate the presence of expansive clay soils and,
should they be identified, recommend appropriate mitigation
measures. Potential measures for control of expansive clay soils
include the following:
a) Placing and compacting potentially expansive soils at high
moisture contents (at least 5 percent above optimum moisture
content in accordance with ASTM D1557) and compaction within
selected ranges of 88 to 92 percent.
b) Using thickened concrete slabs with increased steel reinforcement.
c) Replacing clayey soils underlying foundations and concrete slabs
with select structural fill that is non-expansive or has a low
expansion index.
d) Treating site soils with lime to reduce the expansion potential and
increase the strength.
e) Utilize pier-and-grade-beam foundation
appropriate;
f.) Grade around structures to assure positive drainage away from
systems
where
structures.
Implementation of the above mitigation measures will reduce the impact of potentially
expansive soils to less than significant.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT PAGE 5-17
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SEPTIC SYSTEMS
No impact would occur, because a sewer system is present in the area and septic systems are
not required at the site.
PAGE 5-18
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
6
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
INTRODUCTION
A hazardous material is a substance or combination of substances which, because of its
quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may either I)
cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious,
irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness; or 2) pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and safety, or the environment when improperly treated, stored,
transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Hazardous waste (a subset of hazardous
materials) refers to hazardous material that is abandoned, discarded or recycled.
The following section describes the history of hazardous materials use at the site, and the
potential threat to future site users and the surrounding environment resulting from the
proposed development. Development plans call for the conversion of a 571,748sf General
Services Administration warehouse building at 1080 San Mateo Ave and the construction of
five new one story buildings containing a total of 52,500sf at 1070 San Mateo Ave. The two
abutting properties would be merged as part of the project. Plans also show that an open air,
at grade parking lot containing 670 parking spaces and 30+ loading docks would be
constructed.
The information presented below was drawn from several sources of data including: (l)
Centrum Logistics Project Description; (2) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for SFO
Logistics 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue South, South San Francisco, CA, Land America
Assessment Corporation, July 20008; (3) Review of the Department of Toxic Substances and
Control (DTSC) Database (www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov); (4) Review of the State Water
Resources Control Board Geotracker Database (geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov); (5) Review of the
City of South San Francisco General Plan as well as all other applicable ordinances and
regulations; (6) Review of Site Plan Sheets (June 30, 2006) by Ware Malcolb; (7) Review of
the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department website; and (8) Personal
Communication with CA Department of Toxic Substance Control Staff (Dan Murphy,
4/8/2009)
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SETTING
REGULATORY SETTING
Jurisdictional Authoritv
At the federal level, the chief regulator is the u.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EP A),
Region IX for Northern California. At the State level, the Department of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC) is chiefly responsible for regulation, handling, use, and disposal of toxic
materials. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is involved in regulation and
permitting wherever there is potential discharge of hazardous materials into waterways and
underground aquifers, including regulation of storm water runoff through the general permit
required for construction projects exceeding one acre. The local branch of the Water Board is
the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB).
Regulation of toxic and hazardous substances is locally administered through the San Mateo
County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD), which acts as the Certified Unified
Program Agency (CUPA). A CUPA is certified by the California Environmental Protection
Agency to handle certain hazardous materials and hazards programs. The CUP A program
was established under the amendments to the California Health and Safety Code made by SB
1082 in 1994, which allows for local agencies, such as counties, cities, or joint powers
authorities, to assume responsibility for programs such as the Hazardous Materials Business
Plan/Emergency Response Plan, Hazardous Waste/Tiered Permitting, Underground Storage
Tanks, Aboveground Storage Tanks (SPCC only), California Accidental Release Prevention
Program (CaIARP) and the Uniform Fire Code Hazardous Materials Management Plan.
Regulations, Plans and Programs
The Hazardous Materials Business Plan is used to keep track of the use of hazardous
materials by businesses in accordance with both state and federal laws. The California
Accidental Release Prevention (CaIARP) Program is a merging of the federal and state
programs for the prevention of accidental release of regulated toxic and flammable
substances. The goal is to eliminate the need for two separate and distinct chemical risk
management programs. CalARP is the Federal Risk Management Plan Program with
additional state requirements, including a list of regulated substances and thresholds and
requires preparation of a Risk Management Plan for businesses using regulated substances.
The Hazardous Waste Generator Program was started in 1984 when the State of California
DTSC authorized the Health Department to inspect and regulate non-permitted hazardous
waste generators in San Mateo County based on the Hazardous Waste Control Law found in
the California Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5 and regulations found in the
California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5.
The groundwater protection program is funded wholly or III part, by the United States
PAGE 6-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), under Cooperative Agreement L-009450-1-0 to
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and by Contract 8-014-550 to the
County of San Mateo. In conjunction with these laws the underground storage tank program
was created to regulate the chief source of underground contamination, leaking underground
storage tanks (LUSTs) or fuel tanks (LUFTs).
Many regulatory agencies maintain a database of sites. Currently, both the DTSC
(www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov) and State Water Resources Control Board
(geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov) maintain online searchable databases of hazardous materials sites.
Other databases with information on hazardous materials sites include the Federal Superfund
list started through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Conservation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980 and the USEP A, the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), HAZNET, the leaking
underground storage tank information system (LUST), and the Cortese list. Air pollution is
regulated through the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).
These programs and regulations are intended to restrict environmental contamination,
including hazards to wildlife, provide protection for natural resources, and limit public
exposure to harmful chemicals. Specific programs intended to protect workers from exposure
to hazardous materials and from accidental upset are covered under the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration at both the Federal Level (OSHA) and the state level (CAL-
OSHA). Title 40 of the Federal Code of Regulations covers worker training and safety
regulations pertinent to hazardous materials. OSHA regulations for hazardous waste
operations training in California are found in Title 29 of the California Code, Section
1910.120(e). The law requires General Site Workers receive a minimum of 40 hours of
instruction off the site, and a minimum of three days of actual field experience, while
Occasional Site Workers receive a minimum 24 hours of instruction off the site, and a
minimum of one day actual field experience.
Transportation of hazardous materials on the highways is regulated primarily through the
Federal Department of Transportation (DOT) and the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS). This includes a system of placards, labels, and shipping
papers required to identify the hazards of shipping each class of hazardous materials.
Existing federal and state laws address risks associated with the transport of hazardous
materials. These laws include regulations outlined in the Hazardous Materials Transportation
Act administered by the DOT. Caltrans is mandated to implement the regulations established
by the DOT, which is published as the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, commonly
referred to as 49 CFR. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) enforces these regulations.
Regulations of hazardous materials and wastes include the manufacture of packaging and
transport containers; packing and repacking; labeling; marking or placarding; handling; spill
reporting; routing of transports; training of transport personnel; and registration of highly
hazardous material transport.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
General Plan Policies
The City of South San Francisco General Plan contains several policies that relate to
hazardous materials and waste, mainly contained in Section 8.3, shown in Table 6-1.
Table 6-1: Select General Plan Policies Regarding Hazardous Materials
Policy
Goal
8.3-G-1
Reduce solid and hazardous waste, and recycle to slow the filling of landfills in accord with
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
8.3-G-2
Enforce revised zoning ordinance prohibition of intensive industrial production of hazardous
waste and the permanent storage of hazardous materials. Limit light industrial uses that
produce hazardous waste, such as auto repair and auto painting businesses.
8.3-1-3
Establish a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database of sites included on the Cortese
List. The GIS should assist in the development approval process.
8.3-1-4
Establish an ordinance specifying routes for transporting hazardous materials. Routes should
not pass through residential areas or other sensitive areas and allow specific times for
transport to reduce the impact and accident risk during peak travel periods.
Source: City of South San Francisco General Plan
SITE HISTORY
Land America Commercial Services summarized a history of land use at the project site from
historical sources including topographic maps, aerial photographs, Sanborn fire maps, and
county records (LAC, June 11,2008). The following summary is derived from that report.
The first set of small structures appeared on the 1070 San Mateo address by 1943, apparently
related to a nearby US Navy housing project. The large warehouse at 1070 San Mateo Ave
was constructed in 1951, and the southwest portion of the property appears to have been
converted into a paved parking lot by 1965. The US Government General Services
Administration (GSA) used the large warehouse building until the 1990s. The building has
more recently been used for storage by various government agencies.
The 1080 San Mateo address was vacant until at least 1943, and from 1953 through 1965
appeared to be occupied by several apartment structures and roads, which were part of the
Cape Esperance US Navy Housing Project. By 1968, the property appeared once again to be
vacant until small structures appeared on the property by 1973. By 1993 no structures
remain, however a number of vehicles are seen parked on the property. In the late 1990s, the
1080 parcel had reportedly been converted into its current use as a paved parking lot. By
2005, portions of the property were leased to a tour bus company for bus parking. Over time,
PAGE 6-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
portions of the 1080 property were reportedly used for auto dismantling, storage of wrecked
and impounded vehicles, and possibly auto repair.
PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
Land America Commercial Services (LAC) performed a Phase I environmental site
assessment for the site and present their results in a report dated June 11, 2008. The
assessment included a site history summarized from information collected from historical
sources including an Environmental Data Resources Radius Map Report, historical
topographic maps, historical aerial photos, Sanborn fire maps, county records, Department of
Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) drycleaner and EnviroStor databases, as well as physical
inspection of representative areas ofthe property.
LAC found evidence of Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC) related to
potential soil and groundwater contamination at both the 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Ave
properties. Both properties were previously on the Cortese list for petroleum-related
contamination. The 1070 Property had a leaking underground storage tank removed in 1990.
The 1080 property had a long history of automotive storage and repair activities that resulted
in contamination of soil and groundwater.
Several environmental investigations were performed at the 1070 San Mateo Ave property
between the years of 1990 through 1997, including the installation of three monitoring wells
to evaluate the extent of soil and groundwater impacted by heavy petroleum hydrocarbons
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These impacts were related to a leaking
underground storage tank that resulted in contamination of soil and groundwater with
gasoline and was removed from the western side of the building at 1070 San Mateo Ave in
1990. Remedial excavation of impacted soil and pumping and treating of 23,000 gallons of
groundwater was performed in 1994. The 1070 San Mateo Ave case was granted closure by
the San Mateo County Health Services Agency (SMCHSA) in a letter dated April 28, 1997.
However, it was noted that impacted soil remains at the property beneath the western
building wall of bay door #22. SMCHSA stated that if any change in land use or
development of the property would occur that would impact the soil or groundwater, they
were to be notified for approval.
Additional investigation was performed at the 1080 San Mateo property due to its history of
automotive storage and repair, including the activities by San Bruno Automotive Dismantling
and Don and Jerry's Towing. Based on results of the remedial excavation and subsequent
groundwater monitoring, SMCHSA issued a case closure letter dated October 5, 1998
concluding that soil impacted with heavier petroleum hydrocarbons appeared limited to
shallow soil (within about 2 feet below the ground surface) in the southwestern portion of the
property (generally the area around the proposed "Building 6"). SMCHSA also concluded
that the groundwater plume configuration indicated widespread impacts to groundwater and
the potential for off-site sources of the contamination.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Potential off-site sources may have included the Cycle Shack, Inc. and San Bruno Glass
Center leaking underground storage tank locations discussed in "Vicinity Hazardous Material
Sites" below. According to the Phase I ESA these off-site locations have since received case
closure and are unlikely to result in further impacts to the project site.
VICINITY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES
There are numerous hazardous materials sites throughout the industrial zone of eastern and
southern South San Francisco reflecting the long industrial history of the area. Due to the
density of sites, only those bordering the property are discussed here since contamination
from these sites would have the greatest potential impact during development of the subject
property. Most sites are reported in the various environmental databases as they are
registered hazardous waste generators and members of the hazardous materials business plan
program for San Mateo County.
The Phase I environmental site assessment identified numerous automotive related
businesses along San Mateo Ave. Based on identified chemical use, proximity, and/or
hydrogeologic position relative to the site, these facilities have the potential to have impacted
the site should a discharge have occurred. However, based on the absence of listed
discharges or remedial activity, the Phase I ESA did not recommend additional investigation,
and identified regulated facilities did not appear to represent a Recognized Environmental
Condition (REC), based on distance to site, topographic position relative to the site and/or
facility characteristics.
A total of eighty-one (81) Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) facilities were noted,
of which two facilities: Cycle Shack, Inc. at 1104 San Mateo Ave, and San Bruno Glass
Center located at 1160 San Mateo Ave are considered adjacent to the property. Based on
regulatory history (cases closed by the regional water board), there is a low probability of
these sites affecting the subject property. There are six (6) additional LUST sites located
within one-quarter mile of the subject property; all have received case closure from the San
Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Other sites with known soil and
groundwater contamination issues are more than one-quarter mile distant from the site and
the chance of contamination spreading from one of these sites is remote.
CURRENT CONTAMINATION LEVELS AND HEALTH RISKS
Contamination levels in shallow soils below the existing pavement are likely to be very
similar to those measured in 2006, the most recent investigation performed, and perhaps only
slightly diluted from dispersal of the more soluble chemicals and metals through groundwater
seepage. These concentrations are shown in Table Haz-2 with comparison to the Regional
Water Quality Control Board environmental screening levels (ESLs) for
commerciallindustrial sites. As shown, no substances analyzed exceeded the ESLs.
Environmental screening levels are used here for information purposes only and do not
represent an anticipated or required site cleanup goal.
PAGE 6-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Table 6-2: Current Shallow Soils Contamination Levels
Environmental Screening
Levels (ESLs) Commercial
Constituent Units of Measure Concentration / Industrial Sites'
TPH-motor oil mglkg 0-53 2,500
MTBE ug/l 0-43 1,800
Chromium mglkg 28-49 750
Nickel mglkg 14-120 150
Lead mglkg 2.9-16 750
Zinc mglkg 16-52 600
'(SFRWQCB, 2007) Shallow Soil Screening Levels (<3m bgs), Commercial/Industrial Land Use Only (fable B)
Source: Limited Soil and GrOlllldwater Investigation Report, 1070 Associates, LLC Property, 1080 San Mateo Avenue,
South San Francisco, CA, Dated March 21, 2006, prepared by RRM.
Table 6-2 shows that the most significant contaminants found at the subject property in the
most recent site investigation performed in 2006 are petroleum motor oil and MTBE. While
petroleum hydrocarbons are present, their concentrations are low enough to indicate
background contamination or off site sources rather than an active plume, such as would
occur in response to a leaking underground fuel tank. There is no evidence of an active
groundwater plume, but there would be residual contamination from percolation and seepage
of groundwater through remaining contaminated soils. Based on site elevation there may also
be some occasional mixing with brackish water. For these and other reasons groundwater
underlying the site is not considered suitable for drinking water. While South San Francisco
does use groundwater for a portion of their water supply, municipal wells are not located in
the general site vicinity due to the long history of industrial land use and related
contamination.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a Project's environmental impacts are based upon
CEQA Guidelines thresholds:
I. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
2. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
hazardous materials into the environment?
3. Would the Project produce hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
4. Would the Project be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
5. Would the Project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport? Would
the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project
Area?
6. For a Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the Project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project Area?
7. Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
8. Would the Project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS USE, TRANSPORT
Impact Haz-l:
Routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
The risk of accidental upset and environmental contamination from
routine transport, storage, use and disposal of hazardous and
potentially hazardous materials to the public and environment is a
potentially significant impact.
The proposed Project includes renovation of a 571,748 square foot warehouse, and
construction of five (5) additional one-story buildings totaling 52,300 square feet. The project
also includes construction of an open, at grade parking lot with 670 spaces and a loading
dock with upwards of 30 bays. One of the smaller buildings is intended for eating and
drinking establishment/Convenient and Limited Service/ Convenience Sales use, while the
remaining space would be dedicated to light wholesaling, storage and distribution; custom
manufacturing; general industrial; light manufacturing; food preparation; laundry services;
and/or personal storage. Depending upon the exact nature of activity at the proposed
facilities, there are likely to be both hazardous and potentially hazardous materials stored and
used on the site that will eventually require disposal. This includes household hazardous
waste, such as batteries, paint, and cleaning substances, as well as others. There will also
likely be transportation of hazardous materials to and from the site, likely traveling along San
Mateo Avenue, San Bruno Avenue, Interstate Highway 380, and US Highway 101.
PAGE 6-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Mitigation Measure
Haz-Ia:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-Ib:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-Ic:
Plan Review for Adherence to Fire and Safety Codes. All building
spaces must be designed to handle the intended warehouse,
commercial, and retail use, with sprinklers, alarms, vents, and
secondary containment structures, where applicable. Prior to
occupancy, these systems must pass plan review through the City of
South San Francisco Planning, Building and Fire Departments.
Construction Inspection and Final Inspection Prior to Occupancy.
During construction, the utilities, including sprinkler systems, shall
pass pressure and flush tests to make sure they perform as designed. At
the end of construction, occupancy shall not be allowed until a final
inspection is made by the Fire Department for conformance of all
building systems with the Fire Code and National Fire Protection
Agency Requirements. The inspection shall include testing of sprinkler
systems, alarm systems, ventilation and airflow systems, and
secondary containment systems. The inspection shall include a review
of the emergency evacuation plans. These plans shall be modified as
deemed necessary.
Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program. Businesses
occupying the development and intending to store, use, or dispose of
hazardous materials must complete a Hazardous Materials Business
Plan for the safe storage and use of chemicals. The Business Plan must
include the type and quantity of hazardous materials, a site map
showing storage locations of hazardous materials and where they may
be used and transported from, risks of using these materials, material
safety data sheets for each material, a spill prevention plan, an
emergency response plan, employee training consistent with OSHA
guidelines, and emergency contact information. Businesses qualify for
the program if they store a hazardous material equal to or greater than
the minimum reportable quantities. These quantities are 55 gallons for
liquids, 500 pounds for solids and 200 cubic feet (at standard
temperature and pressure) for compressed gases.
Exemptions include businesses selling only pre-packaged consumer
goods; medical professionals who store oxygen, nitrogen, and/or
nitrous oxide in quantities not more than 1,000 cubic feet for each
material, and who store or use no other hazardous materials; or
facilities that store no more than 55 gallons of a specific type of
lubricating oil, and for which the total quantity of lubricating oil does
not exceed 275 gallons for all types oflubricating oil.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Mitigation Measure
Haz-Id:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-Ie:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-lf:
Businesses occupying and/or operating at the proposed development
must submit a business plan prior to the start of operations, and must
review and update the entire Business Plan at least once every two
years, or within 30 days of any significant change including, without
limitation, changes to emergency contact information, major increases
or decreases in hazardous materials storage and/or changes in location
of hazardous materials. Plans shall be submitted to the San Mateo
County Environmental Health Business Plan Program, which may be
contacted at (650) 363-4305 for more information. The San Mateo
County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD) shall inspect
the business at least once a year to make sure that the Business Plan is
complete and accurate.
Hazardous Waste Generator Program. All applicable businesses
shall register and comply with the hazardous waste generator program.
The State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control
authorized the SMCEHD to inspect and regulate non-permitted
hazardous waste generators in San Mateo County based on the
Hazardous Waste Control Law found in the California Health and
Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5 and regulations found in the
California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5. Regulations
require businesses generating any amount of hazardous waste as
defined by regulation to properly store, manage and dispose of such
waste. Division staff also conducts surveillance and enforcement
activities in conjunction with the County District Attorney's Office for
businesses or individuals that significantly violate the above
referenced law and regulations.
Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regnlations. All
transportation of hazardous materials and hazardous waste to and from
the site shall be in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, US Department of Transportation (DOT), State of
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and local laws,
ordinances and procedures including placards, signs and other
identifying information.
Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste. For businesses not
requiring registration in the San Mateo County Hazardous Material
Business Plan Program, batteries, as well as fuel and lubricant oils,
cleaning products, and other commonly used household hazardous
materials shall be properly stored so as to reduce the chance of
spillage. These businesses shall also participate in the San Mateo
PAGE 6-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
County Very Small Quantity Generator Program to dispose of
household hazardous wastes through the San Mateo County
Environmental Health Division.
Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce the impact of routine
transportation, use or disposal of hazardous materials to a level of less than significant
through compliance with existing regulations, plans, and programs as discussed specifically
in mitigation measures Haz-Ia through Haz-lf that act to ensure adequate safety levels are
reached and maintained throughout the life ofthe project.
ACCIDENTAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE
Impact Haz-2:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-2a:
Mitigation Measure
Haz-2b:
Accidental Hazardous Materials Release. According to previous
investigations, petroleum products and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) are present in site soils. During demolition operations
hazardous materials could be released from structures at the site or
from the underlying soils. Following construction, operations at the
proposed facilities are expected to represent a continuing threat to the
environment through accidental release of hazardous materials since
the site is proposed for industrial uses, where use, storage and disposal
of hazardous materials may occur. This represents a potentially
significant impact.
Demolition Plan and Permitting. A Demolition Plan with permit
applications shall be submitted to the City of South San Francisco
Building Department for approval prior to demolition of the paved
parking lot. The Demolition Plan for shall provide for safe demolition
shall include, but not limited to, dust control for potentially
contaminated subsurface soils. The Demolition Plan shall also address
both on-site Worker Protection and off-site resident protection from
both chemical and physical hazards. All removed soil shall be tested
for contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed of to appropriate
licensed landfill facilities. The Demolition Plan shall include a
program of air monitoring for dust particulates and attached
contaminants. Dust control and suspension of work during dry windy
days shall be addressed in the plan.
California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP).
Future businesses at the development shall check the state and federal
lists of regulated substances available from the San Mateo County
Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD). Chemicals on the list
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
are chemicals that pose a major threat to public health and safety or the
environment because they are highly toxic, flammable, or explosive.
Businesses shall determine which list to use in consultation with the
SMCEHD.
Should businesses qualify for the program, they shall complete a
CalARP registration form and submit it to Environmental Health.
Following registration, they shall submit a Risk Management Plan
(RMP). RMPs are designed to handle accidental releases and ensure
that businesses have the proper information to provide to emergency
response teams if an accidental release occurs. All businesses that
store or handle more than a threshold quantity (TQ) of a regulated
substance must develop a RMP and follow it.
Risk Management Plans describe impacts to public health and the
environment if a regulated substance is released near schools,
residential areas, hospitals and childcare facilities. RMPs must include
procedures for: keeping employees and customers safe, handling
regulated substances, training staff, maintaining equipment, checking
that substances are stored safely, and responding to an accidental
release.
Mitigation Measure
Haz-2c:
Notify San Mateo County Health Services Agency of Proposed Re-
Development. As part of the case closure agreement for the removal
of the underground storage tank leaking gasoline, dated October 8,
1998, SMCHSA shall be informed of any development or proposed
change in land use. New buildings will be constructed over the area in
question, currently a paved parking lot, and approval of SMCHSA is a
prerequisite for construction.
Implementation of mitigation measures Haz-2a through Haz-2c would reduce the Project's
impact to a level of less than significant since the potential for accidental release of existing
hazardous materials would lessened through the safe handling and removal of such materials
under the oversight of applicable regulatory agencies. Moreover, future businesses occupying
the Project site would reduce the risk of future accidental release of new hazardous materials
through Rick Management Plan permitting.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITE
Impact Haz-3:
Exposure to contaminated soil and groundwater. During
demolition and construction, workers could be exposed to
contaminated soil and groundwater. Disturbance of the subsurface also
increases the potential for contamination to spread through surface
water runoff, creation of seepage pathways, and through wind blown
PAGE 6-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
dust. These impacts are potentially significant.
The subject property was on the Cortese list due to petroleum-related contamination of soil
and groundwater, related to automotive storage/repair land uses and a leaking 550-gallon
gasoline tank removed from the 1070 building in 1990. Impacted soil and groundwater were
excavated in 1994, the case was granted closure by the San Mateo County Health Services
Agency, thereby removing the site from the Cortese list. However, it was noted that impacted
soil remained beneath bay door #22, and in shallow soils in the southwestern portion of the
property (in the vicinity of proposed "Building 6"); SMCHSA was to be notified for approval
of any land use changes.
Mitigation Measure
Haz-3a:
Notify San Mateo County Health Services Agency of planned re-
development. The applicant shall notify the San Mateo County Health
Services Agency that demolition/construction work at the project site
has the potential to disturb soil impacted by petroleum products. Prior
to demolition or construction permit issuance by the City of South San
Francisco, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide written
evidence of San Mateo County Health Services Agency notification.
Mitigation Measure
Haz-3b:
Development and Implementation of Site Management Plans. The
Site Management Plans shall build upon any existing draft Site
Management Plan and shall address the exposure risk to people and
the environment resulting from future demolition, construction,
occupancy, and maintenance activities on the property. The plans shall
be in accordance with recommendations of the Environmental
Consultant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of
Toxic Substances Control, the San Mateo County Environmental
Health Department Groundwater Protection Program and the City of
South San Francisco Public Works Department, Planning Division and
Fire Department. In accordance with DTSC recommendations there
should be two separate plans: (1) ongoing Operations and Maintenance
Activities, and (2) a specific plan addressing the future proposed site
development based on actual proposed grading, excavation and
construction. The plans are required to be more specific than the draft
plan.
Specific mitigation measures designed to protect human health and the
environment shall be provided in the plan. At a minimum, the plan
shall include the following:
I) Requirements for site specific Health and Safety Plans (HASP)
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
shall be prepared in accordance with OSHA regulations by all
contractors at the Project site. This includes a HASP for all
demolition, grading and excavation on the site, as well as for future
subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall include appropriate
training, any required personal protective equipment, and
monitoring of contaminants to determine exposure. The HASP will
be reviewed and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The
plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker entry and
exposure and shall show locations and type of protective fencing to
prevent public exposure to any hazards during demolition, site
grading, and construction activities.
2) Standards for treatment of impacted soil excavated from beneath
the site shall be established. Depending upon the extent and depth
of foundation and utility excavations, a significant volume of
contaminated soils may be generated during construction; and to a
lesser extent during future maintenance work. These soils must be
characterized for reuse as fill, reburial, or disposal off-site. Only
soil with contaminant levels approved by the DTSC shall be
allowed for reuse as fill. All other soil must be disposed of off-site.
To avoid the spread of contamination, on-site soils excavated from
below the pavement in the vicinity of Building Six shall be
segregated from any imported clean fill. Soils shall be placed on a
plastic tarp, covered and bermed to reduce the risk from
windblown dust or surface water runoff spreading contamination.
Then soil must be tested to determine the levels of remaining
contamination and suitability for re-use. Contaminated soils unable
to be placed under buildings or pavement, or re-buried under at
least one-foot of clean soil must be off-hauled and disposed of by a
licensed hazardous materials contractor under the proper
manifesting documents. A report shall document the volume,
concentration and nature of contaminants in the off-hauled
material.
3) Requirements for site-specific construction techniques that would
minimize exposure to any subsurface contamination shall be
developed. This shall include treatment and disposal measures for
any contaminated groundwater removed from excavations,
trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with local and
Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines. Groundwater
encountered in trenches and other excavations shall not be
discharged into the neighboring storm drain, but into a closed
containment facility, unless proven to have concentrations of
PAGE 6-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
contaminants below established regulatory guidelines.
Contaminated groundwater will be required to be stored in Baker
tanks until tested. If testing determines that the water can be
discharged into the sanitary sewer system, then the applicant must
acquire a ground water discharge permit from the City of South
San Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local discharge
limits before being allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer.
Water must be analyzed for the chemicals of concern at the site,
which include petroleum hydrocarbons and VOCs.
4) General sampling and testing plan for excavated soils shall
determine suitability for reuse or acceptability for disposal at a
state licensed landfill facility. Testing shall include the California
Title 22 Hazardous Metals (CAM 17 metals), TPH as gasoline,
TPH as diesel, and TPH as motor oil. Testing results shall be
compared to DTSC California Human Health Screening Levels
and RWQCB Environmental Screening Levels to determine
suitability to remain on-site as engineered fill or landscape fill.
Any soils determined to exceed DTSC criteria for site cap material
shall be deemed as unsuitable for re-use as fill.
5) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall document procedures
for future subsurface landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc.,
with proper DTSC notification, where applicable. The plan shall
include a general health and safety plan for each expected type of
work, with appropriate personal protective equipment, where
applicable.
Implementation of mitigation measures Haz-3a and Haz-3b would reduce the impact from
exposure of Construction Workers to contaminated soils and groundwater to a level of less
than significant.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NEAR SCHOOLS
Belle Air Elementary School, located at 450 3rd Avenue in San Bruno is the nearest school or
childcare facility to the project. This school is located approximately 0.8 miles southeast of
the site, therefore hazardous materials within V. mile of a school is a less than significant
impact.
AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN
The proposed Project would be located within the jurisdiction of the Airport Land Use Plan
for the San Francisco International Airport. According to the South San Francisco General
Plan (available online through the City of South San Francisco Planning Department
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-1 5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
website), the most stringent height limits in South San Francisco are in the southeastern
portions of the city, including the Project area. At the project location Federal Aviation
Regulations, Part 77, limits building heights to an elevation of 150 feet above mean sea level.
Since the development would consist of redevelopment of an existing one-story warehouse
and the construction of additional one-story buildings, no buildings would exceed 150 feet in
height; therefore, the structures would be in compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan. The
impact of the Proj ect on the Airport Land Use Plan is less than significant with no mitigation
warranted.
The Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Private aircraft are
sometimes granted air space in the South San Francisco area, but buildings and structures are
expected to conform to design guidelines for visibility and meet aviation requirements.
Therefore, the Project would have no impact relating to a private airstrip.
ADOPTED EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
No changes to the major access and evacuation routes along San Mateo Avenue and Shaw
Road are planned since the Project calls for redevelopment rather than reconstruction or new
development of an entire area. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant
impact relating to an adopted emergency response plan.
WILDLAND FIRES
The Project area is urbanized and is not in an area adjacent to wildland subject to wildfires.
Therefore the Project would have no impact from wildland fires.
CUMULATIVE HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IMPACTS
The proposed Project would be one of numerous sites, some of which are also eXlstlllg
hazardous materials sites that are anticipated to undergo development/redevelopment in the
vicinity. Depending upon the specific final use of the property (as yet undetermined) the
Project would likely contribute to a cumulative increase in the number of sites handling
hazardous materials in the vicinity and would result in a cumulative increase in
transportation, use, disposal, and potential for exposure to and/or accidental release of
hazardous materials during both construction and operations. However, the cumulative
impact is expected to be slight and identified project-specific mitigation measures would
reduce this impact to a less than significant level with no additional mitigation required.
Potentially significant impacts of the Project are detailed above under the Impact Analysis
section of this document. The following contributing elements to Impact Haz-6 above are
discussed in more detail below: (a) Hazardous Materials Use, Transport; and (b) Hazardous
Materials Sites.
PAGE 6-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Hazardous Materials Use, Transport
Routine hazardous materials use and transport may have a slight cumulative impact in that
because there would be an increase in the number of sites handling potentially hazardous
materials and an increase in transportation of those materials through the City, there is a
potential for an increased cumulative impact. More releases of hazardous materials could
occur from accident during the transportation of hazardous materials through the City.
However, implementation of the identified mitigation measures Haz-Ia, Haz-Ib, Haz-Ic,
Haz-Id, Haz-Ie, and Haz-lf would reduce the cumulative impact to less than significant
level.
Accidental Hazardous Materials Release
Accidental hazardous materials release during use and transport may have a slight cumulative
impact in that because there would be an increase in the number of sites handling potentially
hazardous materials and an increase in transportation of those materials through the City,
there is a potential for an increased cumulative impact. More releases of hazardous materials
could occur from accident during use or the transportation of hazardous materials through the
City. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measures Haz-2a and Haz-2b
would reduce the cumulative impact to less than significant.
Hazardous Materials Sites
The Project site is an existing hazardous materials site. The proposed Project includes
disturbance of potentially contaminated soil. Releases of hazardous materials could occur
during construction and, if not properly executed; this could have a cumulative effect on the
surrounding area, which contains numerous hazardous materials sites. However,
implementation of the identified mitigation measures Haz-3a and Haz-3b would reduce the
cumulative impact to less than significant.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 6-17
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 6-18
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
7
HYDROLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This section presents an evaluation of potential Project impacts to hydrology and water
quality. The discussion is based on: (1) review of the Preliminary Project Description; (2)
Review of Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plans by Ware & Malcolm (dated April 10,
2008); (3) review of the site hydrology study completed by Hydroconsult Engineers, Inc.
dated April 28, 2009; (4) review of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for South San Francisco; (5) Review of California Department
of Water Resources California Groundwater Bulletin 118 (updated 2003); and (6) Review of
the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by Land America Commercial
Services, dated July II, 2008.
SETTING
CLIMATE AND TOPOGRAPHY
The Project site is located in a relatively flat industrial area at the southern edge of the city of
South San Francisco, nearly adjacent to the City of San Bruno. The San Francisco Bay
shoreline is located approximately one mile east of the site. The regional climate is typical of
the San Francisco Bay Area and is characterized by dry, mild summers and moist, cool
winters. About 80 percent of the total annual precipitation occurs during the months of
November through March with an average annual precipitation of 20.25 inches. Average
yearly temperatures range from a high of 73.4 degrees Fahrenheit in September to a low of
42.4 degrees Fahrenheit in January. 1
The Project site and surrounding area are largely developed with light industrial, auto
servicing, retail/commercial, warehousing, and office land uses. Approximately 95 percent of
the 25.02 acre Project area of work (19.79 acres - 1070 San Mateo Ave and 5.23 acres -
1080 San Mateo Ave) is currently covered by impervious surfaces. A large (571,748 square
feet) warehouse currently occupies the eastern approximately two-thirds of the project site
and a parking lot occupies the western approximately one-third of the project site. Paved
1 Western Regional Climate Center, 2005. Weather Station: San Francisco WSO AP, California (047769).
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
parking and office buildings surround the west, north and south sides of the site, with a
railroad right-of-way running along the eastern boundary of the property. The site generally
slopes gently (less than one percent) to the east and elevations range from approximately 10
feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the northeast corner of the property, to approximately
22 feet above MSL at the southwest corner of the property.
REGIONAL HYDROLOGY
The majority of the site drains to the Colma Creek watershed. The Colma Creek watershed
includes portions of San Bruno Mountain as well as urbanized areas of Daly City, Colma,
and South San Francisco. Most of this urbanized creek is channelized and/or conveyed
underground to allow for urban development. The percent of impervious surface area in
Colma Creek was previously estimated at 63 percent, the highest in the County.2 Colma
Creek is a flood control channel maintained by the San Mateo County Department of Public
Works that discharges into San Francisco Bay just north of San Francisco International
Airport. Improvements to and maintenance of the creek are funded by the Colma Creek
Flood Control Zone, which contains the parcels that must contribute financially to the Zone's
revenue and maintenance of flood control infrastructure. The Project site is within the
designated boundaries ofthe Zone and would be required to contribute to the zone's revenue.
SITE HYDROLOGY
Approximately 95 percent of the 25.02 acre area of work at the Project site is currently
covered by impervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the Project site begins as overland
sheet flow on rooftops and paved surfaces. Runoff from the 1080 San Mateo property flows
to a stormdrain along the eastern property boundary. This stormdrain runs north to south to a
pump in the southeastern corner of the parcel which discharges to San Mateo Avenue.
Runoff from the eastern side of the 1070 San Mateo parcel flows directly to the stormdrain
along Shaw Road. Roof runoff from the southwestern portion of the building, along with
runoff from the parking lot in the southwestern corner of the 1070 parcel flows by gravity in
a stormdrain along the southern project boundary and discharges to the stormdrain along
Shaw Road. Roof runoff from the remainder of the roof, along with most of the runoff from
the driveway encircling the building, flows offsite via the stormdrain running west to east
along the northern project boundary. Several sump pumps within the building discharge to
this stormdrain. There are two existing low points that pond during wet weather. The larger
of the two is in the northwest corner of the site; a second, smaller ponding area is created by
a dip in the entrance drive.
zeity of Daly City Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Program, 1998
PAGE 7-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
GROUNDWATER
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) defines state groundwater basins
based on geologic and hydrogeologic conditions. According to the DWR, the site is located
within the Westside Groundwater Basin. The Westside Groundwater Basin consists of
bedrock and unconsolidated materials. Unconsolidated materials overlying the basin
represent the primary water-bearing strata and comprise dune sands and the Colma
Formation, which are overlain by a relatively impermeable clayey formation of Bay Mud and
fill materials. The Bay Mud layer represents the base of the shallow groundwater layer.
Groundwater is typically encountered within a few feet of the surface with a general flow
direction of northeast and southwest. While groundwater quality in the basin is generally in
compliance with drinking water quality standards, some wells in the basin have experienced
nitrate-nitrogen concentration in excess of the primary maximum contaminant levels.3.4
According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by Land America
Commercial Services, groundwater at the site has been impacted by petroleum.
FLOODING
The Project site is located outside of the 100-year flood hazard zone of Colma Creek as
delineated by the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRMs) Panel 065062008B, dated 9/2/1981.
REGULATORY SETTING
The proposed Project must be constructed in accordance with several regulatory programs,
laws, and regulations that aim to protect surface water resources. In some cases, Federal laws
are administered and enforced by state and local government. In other cases, state and local
regulations in California are stricter than those imposed by Federal law. This section
summarizes relevant regulatory programs, laws, and regulations with respect to hydrology
and water quality and how they relate to the proposed Project.
Federal Laws and Regulations
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CW A) was enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times
since inception. It is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States,
and forms the basis for several state and local laws throughout the country. Its objective is to
reduce or eliminate water pollution in the nation's rivers, streams, lakes, and coastal waters.
3 Phillips, Steven P., Scott N. Hamlin, Eugene B. Yates, 1993, Geohydrology, Water Quality, and Estimation of GrOlllld-
Water Recharge in San Francisco, California 1987-92. US Geological Smvey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-
4019.
4 Department of Water Resources, 2003, California Department of Water Resources, California's GrOlllldwater, Bulletin
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The CW A prescribed the basic federal laws for regulating discharges of pollutants as well as
set minimum water quality standards for all waters of the United States. Several mechanisms
are employed to control domestic, industrial, and agricultural pollution under the CW A. At
the Federal level, the CW A is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EP A). At the state and regional level, the CW A is administered and enforced by the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards
(RWQCBs). The State of California has developed a number of water quality laws, rules, and
regulations, in part to assist in the implementation of the CW A and related Federally
mandated water quality requirements. In many cases, the Federal requirements set minimum
standards and policies and the laws, rules, and regulations adopted by the State and Regional
Boards exceed the Federal requirements.
State Laws and Regulations
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act establishes the SWRCB and the RWQCB as
the principal state agencies having primary responsibility for coordinating and controlling
water quality in California. The Porter-Cologne Act establishes the responsibility of the
RWQCBs for adopting, implementing, and enforcing water quality control plans (Basin
Plans), which set forth the state's water quality standards (i.e. beneficial uses of surface
waters and groundwater) and the objectives or criteria necessary to protect those beneficial
uses. The NPDES permit must be consistent with the Basin Plan for the site region.
NP DES Permit Requirements
The CW A has nationally regulated the discharge of pollutants to the waters of the U.S. from
any point source since 1972. In 1987, amendments to the CW A added section 402(p), which
established a framework for regulating nonpoint source (NPS) storm water discharges under
the National Pollutant Elimination System (NPDES). The Phase I NPDES storm water
program regulates storm water discharges from industrial facilities, large and medium-sized
municipal separate storm sewer systems (those serving more than 100,000 persons), and
construction sites that disturb five or more acres of land. Under the program, the Project
applicant will be required to comply with two NPDES permit requirements.
The NPDES General Construction Permit Requirements apply to clearing, grading, and
disturbances to the ground such as excavation. The Project applicant is required to submit a
Notice ofIntent (NOl) with the State Water Resource Control Board's (SWRCB) Division of
Water Quality. The NOI includes general information on the types of construction activities
that will occur on the site. The applicant will also be required to submit a site-specific plan
called the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activities. The
SWPPP will include a description of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the
discharge of pollutants from the site during construction. It is the responsibility of the
property owner to obtain coverage under the permit prior to site construction.
PAGE 7-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
The NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements apply to the discharge of storm water
associated with industrial sites. The permit requires the implementation of management
measures that will achieve the performance standard of best available technology (BAT)
economically achievable and best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT). Under
the statute, operators of new facilities must implement industrial BMPs in the Project SWPPP
and perform monitoring of storm water discharges and unauthorized non-storm water
discharges. An annual report must be submitted to the RWQCB each July 1. Operators of
new facilities must file an NOI at least 14 days prior to the beginning of operations.
Local Programs and Regulations
San Mateo Countywide Storm water Pollution Prevention Program
To comply with the Clean Water Act, San Mateo County and the 20 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.
San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB is responsible for the development, adoption, and
implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay region. The
Basin Plan is the master policy document that contains descriptions of the legal, technical,
and programmatic bases of water quality regulation in the San Francisco Bay Region. The
Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses of surface waters and groundwater within its region and
specifies water quality objectives to maintain the continued beneficial uses of these waters.
The proposed Project is required to adhere to all water quality objectives identified in the
Basin Plan.
Beneficial Uses of Surface Waters and Groundwaters
The Basin Plan defines beneficial uses for surface waters and groundwater in its
corresponding jurisdiction. The beneficial uses of surface waters in Colma Creek include
wildlife habitat, municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial supply.
The beneficial uses of groundwater in the Westside Groundwater Basin (also referred to as
the Merced Valley North Groundwater Basin) include municipal and domestic supply,
industrial process supply, industrial supply, and agricultural supply.
City of South San Francisco
The City of South San Francisco Water Quality Control Plant requires Source Control
Measures of Stormwater Pollutants for issuance of an NPDES permit, including methods for
managing pollution sources. Applicable control measures include stormwater pollution
prevention devices, management of refuse areas, pesticide/fertilizer application for
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
landscaping, use of treatment devices for interior level parking garage floor drains, and
marking of on-site storm drains. 5
Calma Creek Flood Control District
The Colma Creek Flood Control District (District) is administrated by the San Mateo County
Department of Public Works. The District was created for the purpose of constructing flood
control facilities along the Colma Creek channel and reducing flooding problems in the City
of South San Francisco. The Colma Creek Flood Control Zone (Zone) extends over the entire
watershed and contains the parcels that must contribute financially to the District's revenue
and maintenance of the flood control facilities. Several channel improvements have been
constructed since the District was created in 1964.
The proposed Project is located inside of the Zone boundary. Since the Project is located
within the Zone boundary, the property is subject to flood control improvement and
maintenance assessments by the District. Also, the District requires that drainage
calculations, including outflow locations, be submitted to the District for approval. Per the
Districts requirements, future discharge rates to District facilities may not exceed pre-project
conditions.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a Project's hydrology impacts are based upon CEQA
Guidelines thresholds:
1. Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
2. Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering ofthe local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
3. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
4. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
5 South San Francisco Water Quality Control Plant. July 2005
PAGE 7-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
5. Would the Project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
6. Would the Project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
7. Would the Project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
8. Would the Project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
9. Would the Project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or
dam?
10. Would the Project cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
INCREASED EROSION OR SILTATION TO RECEIVING WATERS DURING
CONSTRUCTION
Impact Hydro-I:
Erosion and Sedimentation On- or Off-site. Construction operations
associated with the Proj ect would present a threat of soil erosion from
soil disturbance by subj ecting unprotected bare soil areas to the
erosion forces of runoff. This is a potentially significant impact.
The project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the site upon completion.
However, soils will be disturbed during construction and may be mobilized by stormwater
runoff, construction related runoff, or wind. Construction of the proposed Project would
involve demolition of existing structural foundations and pavement areas that currently help
to stabilize site soils. Although no cut/fill estimates were available for review, significant site
grading is expected to occur. Additionally, new onsite storm drains may require excavation
of site soils. Without mitigation this could result in increased erosion on-site and the potential
for downstream sedimentation on off-site surface waters.
Mitigation Measure
Hydro-Ia:
Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Pursuant to
NPDES requirements, the applicant shall develop a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to protect water quality during and
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include a description of
Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be applied to minimize the
discharge of pollutants from the site during construction. These
construction-period BMPs shall include, but are not limited to the
following:
I) No grading work exceeding 200 cubic yards shall be performed
between November I and May I (the wet season) unless
authorized in writing by the City Engineer.
2) 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 "Erosion &
Sediment Control Measures" manual. Silt fences shall be installed
down slope of all graded slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the
flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around
storm drain inlets.
3) BMPs shall be used for preventing the discharge or other
construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint,
concrete, trash etc) to downstream waters.
4) After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be
inspected for accumulated sediment and these drainage structures
shall be cleared of debris and sediment.
5) Trash management measures shall be incorporated to prevent trash
from entering storm drainage facilities and downstream water
courses.
Mitigation Measure
Hydro-Ib:
NPDES General Construction Permit Requirements. The Project
applicant is required to submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the State
Water Resource Control Board's (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality
to obtain coverage under a NPDES General Construction Permit. The
General Construction Permit includes general information on the types
of construction activities that will occur on the site as well as specific
requirements that will apply to clearing, grading, and disturbances to
the ground such as excavation. It is the responsibility of the property
owner to obtain coverage under the permit prior to site construction.
Implementation of the SWPPP and other requirements pursuant to a General Construction
Permit and the Grading permit requirements ofthe City of South San Francisco would reduce
PAGE 7-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
erosion and sedimentation impacts on local surface water to a level of less than significant.
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS, POST-
CONSTRUCTION
Impact Hydro-2:
Non-Point Source Pollutants. The project will involve an
intensification of land-use by increasing floor area and number of
occupants, and will add potential new sources of non-point source
pollutants to the area. This may increase non-point source pollution to
receiving waters. This is a potentially significant impact.
Non-point source (NPS) pollutants are washed by rainwater from roofs, landscape areas, and
streets and parking areas into the drainage network. Typical industrial NPS pollutants for
various industrial activities are listed in Table 7-1. Development of the proposed project
would contribute to the levels of NPS pollutants and litter entering downstream waters,
including San Francisco Bay. An increase in NPS pollutants could have adverse effects on
wildlife, vegetation, and human health.
TABLE 7-1: POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS FROM INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES
"d , !!' ~
~ ~ a ~ ~
" " " ~
" ~ ~ ~ 'i3 ~ .~ :s
~ "EI 0
a ~ u :;, a E u
'i3 .~ ~ .~ ~ a ":l u ..,
::E " ~
~ z '" o ~ PO ~
'" ~ Q c5 ~
INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY 0
Vehicle & Equipment Fueling X X X
Vehicle & Equipment Washing X X X X X X
Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance & Repair X X X
Outdoor Loading & Unloading of Materials X X X X X X X
Outdoor Container Storage of Liquids X X X X X X
Outdoor Process Equipment Operations & X X X X
Maintenance
Outdoor Storage of Ray Materials, Products, & X X X X X X X
Byproducts
Waste Handing & Disposal X X X X X X
Contaminated or EroditJe Surface Areas X X X X X X X X
Building & Grounds Maintenance X X X X X X X
Building Repair, RemodEJing, & Construction X X X X
Parking/Storage Area Maintenance X X X X
Source: California Storrnwater Quality Association, 2003. California Stormwater Bl\1P Handbook, Industrial & Commercial.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Mitigation Measure
Hydro-2a:
Mitigation Measure
Hydro-2b:
Compliance with NPDES General Industrial Permit
Requirements. The NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements
apply to the discharge of storm water associated with industrial sites.
The permit requires the implementation of management measures that
will achieve the performance standard of best available technology
(BAT) economically achievable, and best conventional pollutant
control technology (BCT). Under the statute, operators of new
facilities must implement industrial BMPs in the Project SWPPP, and
perform monitoring of storm water discharges and unauthorized non-
storm water discharges. An annual report must be submitted to the
RWQCB each July 1. Operators of new facilities must file an NOI at
least 14 days prior to the beginning of operations.
Long-Term Reqnirements under the SWPPP. The Project SWPPP
to accompany the NOI filing will outline erosion control and storm
water quality management measures to be implemented both during
and following construction. The SWPPP will also provide the schedule
for monitoring performance. Long-term mitigation measures to be
included in the Project SWPPP shall include, but are not limited to, the
following:
I) Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the
Project site. Industrial activities and significant materials and
chemicals that could be used at the proposed Project site should be
described. This will include a thorough assessment of existing and
potential pollutant sources.
2) Identification of BMPs 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 used as needed.
3) 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, vegetation/landscape
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 should be
budgeted to include disposal at a proper site.
4) The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted at
PAGE 7-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
the frequency agreed upon by the RWQCB and/or City of South
San Francisco. Monitoring and maintenance shall be recorded and
submitted annually to the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be adjusted,
as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs.
5) The 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: a) proper disposal of
commercial cleaning chemicals; b) proper use of landscaping
chemicals; c) clean-up and appropriate disposal of hazardous
materials and chemicals; and d) prohibition of any washing and
dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains.
Implementation of Phase I NPDES General Construction Activities permit requirements
would reduce construction-related impacts associated with erosion and/or siltation to less
than significant.
CHANGES IN STORMWATER RUNOFF
The Project would re-direct some of the existing stormwater flows including re-grading the
site to a fairly uniform elevation (eliminating any low points or areas of potential ponding).
The pumped outflow to San Mateo Ave and the gravity outflows to Shaw Road would be
maintained. New stormdrains would be constructed and tied into some of the existing pipes;
some of the existing pipes will be abandoned. The ponding area in the northwest corner will
be replaced by a bioswale that will retain and treat stormwater runoff. Two additional
bioswales will provide stormwater treatment. These changes will impact the proportion of
site runoff conveyed by the two main drainages. Re-direction of stormwater runoff from the
Shaw Road stormdrain to the San Mateo Ave stormdrain would result in an increase in peak
flow to the San Mateo Ave stormdrain. However, flows to San Mateo Ave are pumped and
the pumping rate would not be increased. Rather, storage (in the form of oversized pipes or
an underground chamber) will be provided such that the increase in runoff would be
accommodated on-site. Hydroconsult Engineers calculated pre- and post-development peak
flow rates in cubic feet per second (cfs), shown in Table 7-2.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Table 7-2: Change in Peak Flow Rates
To Shaw Road
To San Mateo Avenue Total
Pre-development
53.92 cfs
14.85 cfs
65.17 cfs
Post-development
37.06 cfs
24.50 cfs
61.03 cfs
Change
31 % decrease
65% increase
10% decrease
Source: Hydrology Study, Centrum Logistics, SSF by Hydroconsult Engineers, dated April 28, 2009.
The Project site currently has a high ratio of impervious surfaces. Replacement of existing
paved parking areas with 5 new one-story buildings totaling 52,300 square feet in the Project
area is not expected to increase runoff from the site. Additionally, impervious areas currently
covered by bare ground will be developed with vegetated bioswales, which will serve to both
improve stormwater quality and increase percolation into soils, thereby decreasing total
stormwater runoff. Development of the proposed Project would result in an approximate 10
percent decrease in impervious surfaces at the Project site. A decrease in impervious surface
area would result in a corresponding decrease in peak discharge and related polluted runoff
from the Project site. While there will be a net decrease in the total stormwater runoff from
the site, some flows will be re-directed from the Shaw Road stormdrain to the San Mateo
Avenue storm drain. As a result, there will be a net increase in flows to the San Mateo Ave
stormdrain and a net decrease in flows to the Shaw Road stormdrain. However, flow to San
Mateo Ave is pumped and the pumping rate would not be increased. Rather, the increase in
flows to the San Mateo Ave Stormdrain would be accommodated by on-site storage. The
quantity of storage required is approximately 3000 cubic feet and would be in the form of
oversized pipes leading to the pump or an underground concrete chamber. As excess runoff
to the San Mateo Ave stormdrain would be detained on-site, change in stormwater runoff is a
less than significant impact.
GROUNDWATER DEPLETION / RECHARGE
The proposed Project will not draw on, or otherwise reduce groundwater resources.
Approximately 95 percent of the Project site is currently covered in impervious surfaces.
Redevelopment of the site would include replacement of areas currently occupied by paved
parking lots with buildings, while incorporating landscaped areas resulting in a net decrease
of approximately 10% in impervious surface areas. Thus, the proposed Project would not
likely have a negative effect on groundwater recharge. The plan also incorporates the use of
vegetated bio-swales in areas currently occupied by bare ground along the eastern edge ofthe
existing warehouse. The impact of groundwater depletion/recharge would be less than
significant and no mitigation is required.
PAGE 7-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY
OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE WATER QUALITY
The Project will reduce the amount of surface area contributing non-point source pollution
runoff. Other previously mentioned impacts, if mitigated, would ameliorate potential short
and long term negative impacts on water quality. Therefore, there will be less than
significant impact on water quality.
HOUSING WITHIN A 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD AREA
The Project does not include housing and is located outside of the 100-year flood hazard
zone of Colma Creek as delineated by the current Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). The Project will have no impact related to
housing and flooding.
The Project site is located outside of the 100-year flood hazard zone of Colma Creek as
delineated by the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance
Rate Maps (FIRMs). In regard to impeding flood or any other flows, the Project will have no
impact.
SIGNIFICANT RISK INVOLVING FLOODING
The Project is not located within the vicinity of a levee, nor in a potential flood path of a dam
failure, and it will have no impact related to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding.
INUNDATION BY SEICHE, TSUNAMI OR MUDFLOW
The Project site is not located in an area that would expose persons to inundation by seiche,
tsunami, or mudflow. The site is nearly level and does not lie in close proximity to a large
lake or the ocean. Although seismically induced waves are a possibility in the Bay, the site
elevations are above those considered to be at risk for tsunami wave run-up. Consequently,
this impact would be less than significant with no mitigation required.
A seiche is a tide-like rise and drop of the surface of a landlocked body of water (e.g., a
lake); its period can vary from a few minutes to several hours. The site is not in close
proximity to a landlocked body of water that could cause inundation by seiche.
Tsunamis, or tidal waves, are huge sea waves that are caused by seismic activity or other
disturbance ofthe ocean floor. Portions of South San Francisco that are near the bay and low-
lying are considered to be at risk for inundation by tsunami wave run-up. Wave run up is
estimated at 6 feet above mean sea level for a 500-year tsunami6 Project site elevations
range from 10 feet to 22 feet above mean sea level. Therefore, the site would not be
6 City of South San Francisco, prepared by Dyett and Bhatia, South San Francisco General Plan: Health and Safety Element,
1999, p. 250.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 7-13
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
considered to be at risk for inundation by tsunami.
CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGY IMPACT ANALYSIS
Cumulative Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality. The increased construction
activity and new development resulting from the Project, in conjunction with other
foreseeable development in the city, would result in less than significant impacts on
hydrology and water quality conditions with no additional mitigation measures necessary.
Assuming concurrent implementation of the Project with other reasonably foreseeable future
projects in the vicinity, adverse cumulative effects on hydrology and water quality could
include construction impacts related to increases in stormwater runoff and pollutant loading
to Colma Creek and San Francisco Bay. The Project and other future projects in the city
would be required to comply with drainage and grading ordinances intended to control runoff
and regulate water quality at each development site. New projects would be required to
demonstrate that stormwater volumes could be managed by downstream conveyance
facilities and would not induce flooding. Therefore, the effect of the Project on water quality
and hydrology, in combination with other foreseeable projects, would be less than
significant.
PAGE 7-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
8
LAND USE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes existing land uses, adopted General Plan land use classifications, and
zoning designations on and around the Project site. This chapter also describes the applicable
plans and policies that guide development in the Project area and evaluates the Project's
consistency with these plans and policies and other existing land use regulations.
SETTING
HISTORY
A development trend that has shaped the arrangement of uses in South San Francisco was the
extensive residential development that occurred during the 1940s and 1950s, creating large
areas almost entirely developed with single-family housing. Also during the 1950s, the City
of South San Francisco converted previously unused marshlands into areas usable for
industrial development, drastically reshaping the shoreline and attracting light industry to the
City for the first time. Plans were announced in 1963 for a 600-acre industrial park adjacent
to the newly developed Oyster Point Marina. This industrial park was South San Francisco's
first industrial development to incorporate comprehensive planning and integrated design and
performance provisions. It supplied ample parking and consistent landscaping and building
design. As a result, South San Francisco is largely comprised of single-use areas, with
industry in the eastern and southeastern portions ofthe City, single family homes to the north
and west, commercial uses along a few transportation corridors, and multiple family housing
clustered in those same corridors and on hillsides.
In some ways a microcosm of American industry, South San Francisco has been making a
slow industrial transformation for the past 30 years. Steel production and other heavy
industries have largely been replaced by warehousing, research, development and
biotechnology. Because the City's industrial base has continued to evolve as the context for
industry has changed, industry will continue to play an important role in South San
Francisco's future.
The City's continued status as a goods transportation hub, stemming mainly from proximity
to San Francisco International Airport, is reflected in the presence of large tracts of land,
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 8-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
formerly used for heavy industry, generally east of u.s. 101. As high technology businesses
have moved into many of these older industrial areas, conflicts, such as between automobile
and truck traffic, and land use and visual character have become increasingly pronounced.
The needs of business centers include smaller blocks, more through street connections,
ancillary facilities such as restaurants, easier connections to transit, sidewalks and bikeways
and higher landscape standards. These needs are much different than those of warehousing
and industrial areas. The City, however, attempts to balance regional growth objectives with
conservation of residential and industrial neighborhoods.
The Project site is situated within the Lindenville planning sub-area, named after the
government-built housing for military personnel and shipyard workers that was developed
during the war on the former marshland between Railroad Avenue, South Spruce Avenue,
and San Mateo Avenue. Demolition of most of the Lindenville military housing occurred in
the late 1950s, paving the way for redevelopment of the area with warehouses, light industry,
and single-family housing in the Mayfair Village subdivision. Today, warehousing and
distribution and light industrial uses are dominant; storage, automobile repair, manufacturing,
and small business parks are also present. Parcels in Lindenville are also smaller when
compared to their industrial counterparts in the East of 101 area.
EXISTING USES
Two land uses currently occur at the Project site, each on a separate parcel and described as
follows.
The first land use includes off-site parking intended for patrons of the San Francisco
International Airport. This private facility, with an address of 1080 San Mateo Avenue,
includes an approximate 975 square foot (sq.ft.), single-story building, entry canopy, several
attendant stations and an open surface parking lot with 670 parking spaces.
The second land use consists of warehouse and distribution within a portion of an existing
571,748 sq.ft. single-story building at 1070 San Mateo Avenue. This building interior has
been divided into ten (10) units with three (3) office spaces. Associated concrete and paved
parking and driveway areas surround the building. Current building occupants include the
U.S. Postal Service (USPS), General Services Administration (GSA), and the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) for the storage of office equipment and seized property,
and the processing and shipment of mail. This occurs within two of the ten mentioned tenant
spaces and amounts to an approximate occupied floor area of 77,477 square feet.
REGULATORY SETTING
There are no federal or state land use regulations applicable to the proposed Project.
PAGE 8-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 8: LAND USE
South San Francisco General Plan
The City of South San Francisco General Plan (1999) provides long-term guidance and
policies for maintaining and improving the quality of life in, and the resources of, the
community, both man-made and natural. The General Plan provides direction for the City's
growth and development and, in doing so, satisfies State law requirements that the General
Plan be comprehensive, internally consistent and long-range.
The Project site's General Plan Land Use designation is Mixed Industrial. This designation is
intended to provide and protect industrial lands for a wide range of manufacturing, industrial
processing, general service, warehousing, storage and distribution, and service commercial
uses. 1 The maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 0.4, with an increase to a total FAR of 0.6
for development seeking an FAR bonus with a Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
program, as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. 2
South San Francisco Municipal Code
Policies within the General Plan are implemented through enforcement of the City's zoning
regulations as presented in the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code (Title 20). The
zoning regulations prescribe, amongst other things, the allowable uses within specific zoning
districts and standards imposed upon on those uses. The Project site has a zoning designation
of Industrial District (SSFMC Chapter 20.30). The Industrial District zoning designation
includes eight different types ofland uses as described below:
1. Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution (SSFMC Section 20.06.270(d)) - defined as,
"The Wholesaling, Storage, and Distribution use type refers to establishments or
places of business primarily engaged in wholesaling, storage, and bulk sale
distribution, including, but not limited to open-air handling of materials and
equipment other than live animals and plants." Within this category, the Project
constitutes a sub-category of "Light" indicating, "Wholesaling, storage and
warehousing services within enclosed structures. Typical uses include wholesale
distributors, storage warehouses, moving and storage firms, freight forwarding and
customs brokerage" (SSFMC Section 20.06.270(d)(2)).
2. Light Manufacturing (SSFMC Section 20.06.160(f)) - defined as, "The Light
Manufacturing use type refers to the manufacture, predominantly from previously
prepared materials, of finished products or parts, including processing, fabrication,
assembly, treatment and packaging of such products and incidental storage, sales and
distribution of such products. A typical use is commercial printing."
, City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, Page 43.
2 Ibid
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 8-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
3. General Industrial (Section 20.06.11O(c)) - defined as, "The General Industrial use
type refers to industrial plants primarily engaged in manufacturing, compounding,
processlllg, assembling, packaging, treatment, or fabrication of materials and
products."
4. Custom Manufacturing (Section 20.06.070(t)) - defined as, "The Custom
Manufacturing use type refers to establishments primarily engaged in on-site
production of goods by hand manufacturing which involves only the use of hand tools
or domestic mechanical equipment not exceeding two horsepower or a single kiln not
exceeding eight kilowatts, and the incidental direct sale to consumers of only those
goods produced on-site. Typical uses include ceramic studios, candle making shops,
or custom jewelry manufacturers."
5. Food Preparation (Section 20.06.100(j)) - defined as, "The Food Preparation use type
refers to establishments primarily engaged in the preparation of food products only
for off-site sales. Typical uses include wholesale bakeries."
6. Laundry Services (Section 20.06.160(d)) - defined as, "The Laundry Services use
type refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of laundering, dry
cleaning, or dyeing services other than those classified as Linen Supply Services or
Personal Services. Typical uses include laundry agencies and diaper services."
7. Personal Storage (Section 20.06.200(e)) - defined as, "The Personal Storage use type
refers to storage services primarily for personal effects and household goods within
enclosed storage areas having individual access, but excludes uses such as
workshops, hobby shops, manufacturing, or commercial activity. Typical uses include
mini-warehouses. "
8. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Convenience (SSFMC Section 20.06.090(a)(1))
- defined as, "The Eating and Drinking Establishments use type refers to
establishments or places of business primarily engaged in the sale of prepared food
and beverages for on-premises consumption, but excludes those uses classified under
the Cocktail Lounge use type." Within this category, the Project constitutes a sub-
category of "Convenience" meaning, "Establishments or places of business primarily
engaged in the preparation and retail sale of food and beverages, and which do not
provide for ordering at the tables, if any. Food generally is taken out. Typical uses are
ice cream parlors, sandwich shops, and delicatessens with five or fewer tables"
(SSFMC 20.06.270(a)(1)).
9. Business and Professional Services - The Business and Professional Services use type
refers to establishments or places of business primarily engaged in the sale, rental, or
repair of office equipment and the provision of services to offices of other businesses
and organizations, rather than to individuals. Typical uses include office supply
PAGE 8-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 8: LAND USE
stores, photocopying centers, secretarial services, and office machine sales and repair
stores (Municipal Code Section 20.06.200(j)).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a project's environmental impacts are based on
CEQA Guidelines thresholds:
1. Would the Project physically divide an established community?
2. Would the Project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the Project?
3. Would the Project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
DIVIDING ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY
The Project would involve renovation of an existing building and construction of five new
buildings within an existing developed area substantially utilized for industrial land use. All
properties adjoining the Project site are developed and utilized for commercial and/or
industrial purposes. The nearest residential neighborhood is approximately 550 feet to the
west (beyond existing railroad tracks) or 1,350 feet to the south (past Interstate 380)
Therefore, the Project would have no impact related to the division of an established
community.
CONFLICT WITH PLANS AND POLICIES
The Project includes buildings that are intended to be occupied by an as-yet undetermined
mix of tenants. The current assumptions for future use of these buildings are as described
under the Reasonable Occupancy Scenario, as described in Chapter 3: Project Description.
This scenario estimates the location and occupancy by land use type (i.e., floor area) on the
Project site, including only those eight types of land uses included in the Industrial District
zoning designation.
The City's decision-makers will ultimately determine the Project's consistency with
applicable City plans and policies. From a CEQA perspective, the Project would not conflict
with plans or policies in any way that could have an adverse environmental impact. The
proposed Project is consistent with the following General Plan policies:
Policy 2-G-2 Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities
for continued economic growth, and building intensities that
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT PAGE 8-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Analvsis:
Policy 2-G-3
Analvsis:
Policy 2-G-4
Analvsis:
Policy 3.2-G-1
Analvsis:
Policy 3.2-1-1
Analvsis:
Policy 3.2-1-4
reflect South San Francisco's prominent inner bay location and
excellent regional access.
The Reasonable Occupancy demonstrates how the Project may
accommodate multiple land uses on one site. Additionally, the
Project would accommodate land use types (e.g., Wholesaling,
Storage and Distribution) utilizing nearby regional access options
such as US 101 and 1-380.
Provide land use designations that maximize benefits of increased
accessibility that will result from BART extension to the city and
adjacent locations.
The Project would increase employment opportunities at a location
less than one-half mile of both BART and Caltrain stations. As
such, future employees could contribute additional ridership to
BART and Caltrain.
Provide for continued operation of older industrial and service
commercial businesses at specific locations.
The Project would provide for the continued and expanded use of
an existing industrial building as well as include new buildings
providing for industrial and service commercial businesses.
Maintain the industrial character in the area from roughly the
Spruce Avenue corridor in the west to San Mateo Avenue in the
east, and south of Railroad A venue to the San Bruno BART station.
The Project is situated within the aforementioned "industrial
character" area and would include buildings and land uses
consistent with the policies intent.
Ensure that afull range of industrial uses continue to be permitted
as conforming uses on sites designated as Mixed Industrial in the
General Plan.
The Project would provide for the continued and expanded use of
an existing industrial building as well as include new buildings
providing for industrial and service commercial businesses.
Do not permit manufacturing, warehousing or distribution on the
sites designatedfor Regional Commercial facilities, and retail uses
on sites designated as Mixed Industrial.
PAGE 8-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 8: LAND USE
Analvsis: The Project could provide, as articulated in the Reasonable
Occupancy Scenario, for ancillary retail land use. This is provided
for under Zoning Regulations Section 20.30.030 and only upon
Use Permit approval.
Policy 3.2-1-5 Recognize the Golden Gate Produce Terminal as a conforming use
within the in the General Plan Regional Commercial designation.
Ensure that existing airport-oriented parking facilities located on
Produce Avenue, as well as office, manufacturing, and
warehouse/distribution uses located on the east side of San Mateo
Avenue continue to be recognized as conforming uses in the
Zoning Ordinance.
Analvsis: The Project site is not located on Produce Avenue and does not
constitute the Golden Gate Produce Terminal.
Policy 4. 2-G-5 Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities and, through
the arrangement of land uses, improved alternate modes, and
enhanced integration of various transportation systems serving
South San Francisco, strive to reduce the total vehicle-miles
traveled.
Analvsis: The Project is situated within walking distance of local and
regional transit modes (i.e., SamTrans, BART and Caltrain) and, as
required by Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.120, would include a
Transportation Demand Management Program which will
contribute toward a reduction oftotal vehicle miles traveled.
Policy 4.2-G-10 Exempt development within one-quarter mile of a Caltrain or
BART station, or a City-designated ferry terminal, from LOS
standards.
Analvsis: The Project site is located more than one-quarter mile of a Caltrain
or BART station, or a ferry terminal.
Policy 4.3-1-6 As part of any development in Lindenville or East of 101, require
project proponents to provide sidewalks and street trees as part of
frontage improvements for new development and redevelopment
projects.
Analvsis: As depicted in Figure 3-19 (Landscape Plan), the Project would
provide sidewalks and street trees.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT PAGE 8-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Policy 7.2-G-1
Analvsis:
Policy 7.2-1-1
Analvsis:
Policy 7.3-G-3
Analvsis:
Policy 7.3-1-2
Analvsis:
Policy 7.3-1-3
Analvsis:
Comply with the San Francisco Bay RWQCB regulations and
standards to maintain and improve the quality of both surface
water and groundwater resources.
As described in Chapter 7 (Hydrology), the Project would be
required to fulfill National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit requirements, as overseen by the San Francisco
Bay RWQCB.
Continue working with the San Francisco Bay RWQCB in the
implementation of the NPDES, and continue participation in
STOPPP for the protection of surface water and groundwater
quality.
As described in Chapter 7 (Hydrology), the Project includes design
features reducing non-point source stormwater pollutants and, as
described above, would be required to fulfill National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements.
Minimize conflicts between sensitive receptors and emissions
generators by distancing them from one another.
The Project, as proposed, does not include stationary emission
sources but would result in new mobile emissions from increased
vehicle traffic travelling to and from the site. However, emission
estimates are below significance levels as stated in Chapter 4 (Air
Quality). Additionally, any potential future stationary emission
sources or large laboratories would be subject to standard Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) permit
requirements. BAAQMD permit application review would include
consideration of sensitive receptors.
Use the City's development review process and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regulations to evaluate and
mitigate the local and cumulative effects of new development on
air quality.
This EIR evaluated potential air quality impacts and, in doing so,
fulfills Policy 7.3-1-2.
Adopt the standard construction dust abatement measures included
in BAAQMD 's CEQA Guidelines.
Mitigation Measure Air-l includes BAAQMD standard and
enhanced dust suppression and exhaust reduction measures.
PAGE 8-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 8: LAND USE
The proposed Project would be consistent with and would not conflict with or impede
achievement of applicable City of South San Francisco General Plan land use policies,
thereby constituting no impact.
CONFLICT WITH CONSERVATION PLAN
The Project site is predominantly covered with asphalt and large building. The eXlstlllg
vegetation consists of residual planter areas containing ground cover, shrubs and twenty-two
(22) trees within parking lots and along the site's perimeter. Trees present include non-native
eucalyptus and some are large enough to qualify under the City of South San Francisco Tree
Protection Ordinance.
South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 13.30 considers any tree with a circumference
of forty-eight inches or more when measured fifty-four (54) inches above natural grade to be
"protected." In order to remove a "protected" tree, the Planning Director must issue a permit
that includes either a requirement for a replacement tree planting, or payment of fees for
future tree planting by the City.
Of the twenty-two (22) trees on the Project site, four qualify as "protected," with a
circumference between 70 inches to 85 inches when measured from fifty-four (54) inches
above natural grade. The Parks and Recreation Director will need to consider issuance of a
permit for those "protected" trees to be removed. The director may require measures to
protect trees and require replacement trees. Through compliance with this permit process, the
Project would be consistent with the requirements of the Tree Protection Ordinance and
would mitigate any adverse impacts to "protected" trees. Accordingly, the Project would
have a less than significant impact regarding conflicts with conservation policies, ordinances
or plans protecting biological resources.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 8-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 8-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
9
NOISE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the potential for impacts related to noise and ground-borne vibration
resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. The primary noise concerns related to
the proposed Project would result from the increased vehicular traffic and noise levels
associated with construction. Specifically, this chapter evaluates site-specific environmental
impacts related to substantial temporary and/or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the proposed Proj ect and whether exposure to these increases would be in
excess of standards established in the South San Francisco General Plan, the City's Noise
Ordinance, or any other applicable standards.
SETTING
FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is
disturbing or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its
loudness. Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity
(frequency) of the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to
humans than sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with
the reception characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an
ocean wave in that it is a measure ofthe amplitude ofthe sound wave.
In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales
which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of
measurement which indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale
is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound
levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents
a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30
decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective
noisiness or loudness of a sound and its intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is
perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities.
Technical terms are defined in Table 9-1 below.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 9-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 9-1: DEFINITION OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS
TERM
DEF1NITIONS
Decibel, dB
A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base
10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which
is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter).
Frequency, HZ
The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below
atmospheric pressure.
A-Weighted Sound Level, dB
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the
A-weighting filter newark. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and
very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency
response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. All
sound levels in this report are A-weighted, unless reported otheIWise.
LOl,LlO,Lso,L90
The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%,10%,50%, and 90% of the time
during the measurement period.
Equivalent Noise Level, Leq
The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.
Community Noise Equivalent Level,
CNEL
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of
5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and after addition of 10
decibels to sound levels measured in the night behveen 10:00 PM and 7:00 am.
DaylNight Noise Level, Lctn
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of
10 decibels to levels measured in the night behveen 10:00 PM and 7:00 am.
Lmax,Lmin
The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement
period.
Ambient Noise Level
The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of
environmental noise at a given location.
Intrusive
That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given
location. The relative intrusiveness ofa sound depends upon its amplitude, duration,
frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the
prevailing ambient noise level.
Source: ILLINGWORlH & RODKIN, INC./ Acoustical Engineers, from City of South San Francisco 249 East Grand Avenue EIR
There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A-
weighted sound level or dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to
which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in
units of dBA are shown in Table 9-2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short
period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the
statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds
are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the
summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is
called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of
noise events of arbitrary duration.
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters
can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus I dBA.
Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such
as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance
PAGE 9-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 9: NOISE
the receptor is from the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to
within about plus or minus I to 2 dBA.
TABLE 9-2: TYPICAL ENVIRONMENT SOUND LEVElS
At a Given Distance From
Noise Source
A-Weighted
Sound Level in
Decibels
Noise Environments
Subjective Impression
140
Civil Defense Siren (l00')
130
Jet Takeoff (200')
120
Pain Threshold
110 Rock Music Concert
Diesel Pile Driver (l00')
100
Very Loud
90
Boiler Room
Freight Cars (50')
Pneumatic Drill (50')
Freeway (100')
Vacuum Cleaner (10')
Printing Press Plant
80
70
In Kitchen With Garbage
Disposal Running
Moderately Loud
60
Data Processing Center
Light Traffic (l00')
Large Transformer (200')
50
Department Store
40
Private Business Office
Quiet
Soft Whisper (5')
30
Quiet Bedroom
20
Recording Studio
10
Threshold of Hearing
o
Source: ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC.lAcoustical Engineers, from City of South San Francisco 249 East Grand Avenue EIR, 1012005
EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
According to the South San Francisco General Plan, the primary nOise sources within the
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 9-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
City are the San Francisco International Airport, streets and highways, rail operation, and
industrial use1 Background noise in the Project vicinity includes vehicle noise from US 101
to the east, vehicle noise from Interstate 380 to the south, surrounding industrial land uses,
local vehicular traffic, municipal buses, and commercial truck traffic.
REGULATORY SETTING
In South San Francisco, the Noise Element of the City's General Plan (1999) contains land
use criteria for noise impacted areas. These criteria define the desirable maximum noise
exposure of various land uses, in addition to certain conditionally acceptable levels
contingent upon the implementation of noise reduction measures. These criteria indicate that
noise levels of less than 75 dBA (CNEL)2 are acceptable noise levels for industrial and open
space uses.
The South San Francisco Noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations, Section
8.32.030) specifies the maximum permissible sound levels for residential, commercial and
industrial land uses. The Project site is zoned Industrial District (M-I) and the noise level
standard for this zone is 70 dBA (Lso), day or night3. Shorter periods with noise levels higher
than these limits are allowed, but only for specified periods of time. Specifically, the standard
+ 5 dB for more than 15 minutes, the standard + 10 dB for more than 5 minutes, and the
standard + 15 dB for more than one minute in any hour are used. The standard + 20 dB
cannot be exceeded for any period of time. However, where the existing ambient noise level
already exceeds the above noise limits, the ambient noise level becomes the standard4
The South San Francisco Noise Ordinance (Section 8.32.050) restricts construction activities
to the hours of 8:00 a.ill. 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. This ordinance also limits noise generation
of any individual piece of equipment to 90 dBA at 25 feet or at the property line.
, City of South San Francisco, General Plan, Page 275.
2 The decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit used to quantify sound intensity. Since the human ear is not equally
sensitive to all sound frequencies within the entire spectrum, human response is factored into sound
descriptions in a process called" A-weighting" written as "dEA" .
CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted
noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law requires that for planning purposes, an artificial dB
increment be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor called the Community Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL).
3 The noise limit that cannot be exceeded for more than 30 minutes in any hour (50 percent of any given hour).
4 Ibid
PAGE 9-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 9: NOISE
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a Project's environmental impacts are based upon
CEQA Guidelines thresholds:
1. Would the Project expose persons to, or generate noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
2. Would the Project expose persons to, or generate excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
3. Would the Project lead to a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project?
4. Would the Project lead to a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project?
5. For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project
expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
6. For a Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the Project expose people
residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
PERMANENT NOISE INCREASES
Project-generated traffic noise and other operational noise sources such as HV AC equipment
would not exceed noise standards and would not significantly increase ambient noise levels
nor substantially impact noise-sensitive receptors. This would be a less-than-significant
impact with no mitigation warranted.
Traffic
Implementation ofthe proposed Project would increase noise levels along local streets due to
Project-generated traffic. Under the Project, daily traffic trips to and from the site would
increase from an estimated 178 daily trips under the site's current development, to an
estimated 3,082 daily trips under the proposed Project, a difference of 2,904 trips.
In general, a doubling of traffic volumes would result in a 3-dBA noise increase for traffic
dominated noise environments, and a 3-dBA noise increase is barely perceptible to most
people. While the Project would contribute net new traffic trips to the nearby road network,
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 9-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
its contribution would result in less than a doubling of traffic volumes.5 Therefore, the
impact oftraffic noise produced by the Project would be considered less-than-significant.
Mechanical Equipment
Implementation of the proposed Project would increase ambient noise levels in the Project
vicinity due to the operation of more powerful and additional new rooftop mechanical
equipment. The impact of the HV AC systems would be considered less-than-significant
provided that the noise level produced by it conforms to the relevant City of South San
Francisco Noise Ordinance provisions, which are mandatory (Municipal Code Chapter 8.32).
The maximum permissible noise levels at the Project site are: 60 dB between the hours of 10
PM and 7 AM, and 65 dB between the hours of7 AM and 10 PM.
TEMPORARY NOISE INCREASE
Impact Noise-I:
Construction Related Noise. Project construction could result in
temporary short-term noise increases due to the operation of heavy
equipment. This would be a potentially significant impact associated
with Project development.
Construction noise sources range from about 82 to 90 dBA at 25 feet for most types of
construction equipment, and slightly higher levels of about 94 to 97 dBA at 25 feet for
certain types of earthmoving and impact equipment. During site preparation and construction
at the Project site, operation of heavy equipment could result in a substantial temporary
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity ofthe Project site.
Mitigation Measure
Noise-I:
Noise Abatement. The Project applicant shall require by contract
specification that construction best management practices be
implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels to the
noise limit specified in the City Noise Ordinance (90-dBA at 25 feet).
Best management practices include:
. Ensuring that construction equipment IS properly muilled
according to industry standards,
. Implementing noise attenuation measures which may include but
are not limited to noise barriers or noise blankets.
. Requiring heavily loaded trucks used during construction to be
routed away from noise and vibration sensitive uses such as Scott
Street (South San Francisco) and Walnut Street (San Bruno).
5 Comparison of Appendix D, Figure 1 (Existing Scenario Intersection Volumes) to Figure 4 (2010 Background
With Project Volumes).
PAGE 9-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 9: NOISE
Implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise-l would reduce construction-related nOise
impacts to a level of less-than-significant.
GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION
It is not expected that future land uses at the Project site would generate excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Businesses anticipated to occupy the Project
site include those that temporarily store and then deliver goods, manufacture goods, prepare
food or wash/dry laundry. A small portion of the Project would include commercial retail
space. These land uses do not characteristically generate groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise. Therefore, it is expected that the Project would have no impact related to
excessive groundborne vibration or excessive groundborne noise.
AIRPORTS
The City of South San Francisco Noise Element (1999) contains eXlstlllg and projected
airport noise contours associated with San Francisco International Airport, located south of
the site. These contours indicate the Project site is located within the 70-dBA (CNEL)
existing and future airport noise contours. Projected contours for road and railroad noise are
also included in the Noise Element. These contours indicate that the Project site is located in
an area where noise levels generated by major road and railroad noise sources will continue
to be 70 dBA (CNEL) or less. Based on the City's land use criteria6, the proposed Project's
industrial land use would be compatible with future noise level projections in the Project
vicinity of70 dBA (CNEL) or less, thereby representing no impact.
CUMULATIVE NOISE IMPACTS
The Project, together with anticipated future development in the area could result in long-
term traffic increases that could cumulatively increase noise levels. However, these increases
are not anticipated to be significant in the context of existing ambient noise and the Project
site's general industrial character, and the impact of cumulative noise increases would be
considered less-than-significant.
Noise from cumulative development in the area would primarily occur from increases in
motor vehicle traffic. Cumulative traffic noise levels in the area are based on traffic volumes
prepared by DKS Associated for Chapter 10 (Transportation and Circulation) of this
document. As can be seen in Fignres I through 12 (Appendix D), volumes on nearby
roadways would less than double during peak hours in future cumulative scenarios compared
to the existing situation.
As discussed under project-specific noise increases above, in general, a doubling of traffic
6 Table 9.2-1, City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco General Plan, 1999.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 9-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
volumes would result in a 3-dBA noise increase in a traffic dominated noise environment,
and a 3-dBA noise increase is barely perceptible to most people. Therefore, the cumulative
noise increase from increases traffic would not be expected to generate noise levels
perceptible over the existing ambient noise levels and the impact would be considered less-
than-significant.
PAGE 9-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
10
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the transportation conditions in the study area in terms of existing
roads and traffic operations, transit service and pedestrian and bicycle conditions. The
findings represented in this EIR are derived from the Centrum Logistics Traffic Impact
Analysis prepared for the City of South San Francisco by DKS Associates, dated May 30,
2009. Figures referenced in this chapter are included in Appendix D.
SETTING
ROADWAYS
Proiect Site
The Centrum Logistics Project site is located at 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue in the
City of South San Francisco, approximately 450 feet north of Interstate 380 and
approximately 650 feet west of Interstate 101 (Fignre I in Appendix D). The project site is
now served by two driveways connecting to San Mateo Avenue. The two existing driveways
lead to separate internal parking aisles. The Project would maintain two driveways yet
reconfigure the two existing sites into one, unified drive aisle network with corresponding
off-street parking. Project access to the U.S. 101, 1-280 and 1-380 freeways is provided by a
variety of major streets with several route options available to the three interchanges that
could potentially be used by Project traffic. Each is briefly described below.
Freewavs
U.S.IOl is an eight-lane freeway running in the north-south direction, US 101 is
approximately half a mile east of the project site. US 101 is over 1500 miles long and runs
between Los Angeles and Olympia, W A, and is a major regional freeway on the peninsula.
The freeway has an Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) of approximately 240,000
vehicles south of 1-380 including 16,700 vehicles during the peak hour. Additionally, north
of 1-380 the AADT is approximately 214,000 vehicles and 15,200 vehicles during the peak
hour. The most direct route from the project site is via the interchange with San Bruno
Avenue.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
1-280 is an eight-lane freeway that generally runs in the north-south direction 1.25 miles west
of the project site. It is one of two major regional freeways on the peninsula and has its
northern and southern termini respectively in San Francisco and San Jose. In the vicinity of
the proj ect site, 1-280 supports four mixed use lanes in each direction. 1-280 has an Annual
AADT of approximately 107,000 vehicles south of 1-380 including 11,200 during the peak
hour; and approximately 175,000 north of 1-380 including 13,400 during the peak hour.
Additionally, access to and from 1-280 from the project site is via interchanges with San
Bruno Avenue.
1-380 is an eight-lane spur freeway runs in the east-west direction for 1.5 miles between 1-
280 and US 101 and is approximately a tenth of a mile south of the project site. 1-380 has an
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of approximately 124,000 vehicles west of SR 82
with 9,300 vehicles during the peak hour; and approximately 145,000 vehicles east of SR 82
with 10,900 vehicles during the peak hour. Access to and from 1-380 from the project site is
most nearly accessed from El Camino Real / SR 82.
State Route 82 (SR 82) (EI Camino Real) is an arterial which extends north from the Santa
Clara County line across the San Francisco County line. The arterial is approximately half a
mile west of the proj ect site and has six lanes with three in each direction. In the vicinity of
the project site, the roadway has an AADT of approximately 37,500 vehicles south of 1-380
including 3,000 during the peak hour. North of 1-380, the AADT is 39,500 with 3,450
vehicles during the peak hour.
Streets
San Mateo Avenue is a two-lane arterial extending from Produce Avenue north of the project
site to SR 82 south of the project site. Generally running north-south, it provides frontage for
the project site and also allows for on-street parking for much of its length. In addition to
legal parking spaces, field observations indicated many illegally parked vehicles.
San Bruno Avenue is a four-lane arterial running between South Airport Boulevard to the
east and SR 35 to the west. San Bruno Avenue intersects with US 101 and 1-280 and provides
connections between the project site and these two freeway facilities. On-street parking is not
permitted along any segment of San Bruno Avenue.
Airport Boulevard is a four- to six-lane, north-south arterial street that parallels the west side
of the U.S.101 freeway. This roadway continues north into the City of Brisbane and the City
of San Francisco, where it is called Bayshore Boulevard. South of San Mateo Avenue,
Airport Boulevard changes names to Produce Avenue. In the General Plan, Airport
Boulevard is classified as a major arterial.
VOLUMES
Weekday AM and PM peak hour analysis was requested by City staff at the following twelve
(12) major intersections and sixteen (16) roadway segments serving the Project site. All
PAGE 10-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
locations are currently in operation.
Studv Intersections
I. Miller Avenue and Airport Boulevard
2. East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard
3. East Grand Avenue and Industrial Way / US 101 northbound off-ramp
4. East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard
5. San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard
6. US 101 northbound on/off-ramp and South Airport Boulevard
7. South Linden Avenue and Dollar Avenue
8. Shaw Road and San Mateo Avenue
9. San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue
10. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 southbound on/off-ramp
11. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 northbound on/off-ramp
12. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 northbound-right off-ramp
Studv Roadwav Segments
I. Airport Boulevard between Grand Avenue and Baden Avenue
2. Airport Boulevard between 2nd Lane and San Mateo Avenue
3. Airport Boulevard between San Mateo Avenue and Terminal Court
4. San Mateo Avenue between Airport Boulevard and Lowrie Avenue
5. San Mateo Avenue between Tanforan Avenue and Atlantic Avenue
6. San Mateo Avenue between Walnut Street and San Bruno Avenue
7. Grand Avenue between Airport Boulevard and NB US 101 off-ramp
8. San Bruno Avenue between Huntington Avenue and San Mateo Avenue
9. San Bruno Avenue between San Mateo Avenue and 2nd Avenue
10. San Bruno Avenue between 7th Avenue and SB US 101 on/off-ramp
11. San Bruno Avenue between SB US 101 ramps and NB US 10 I ramps
12. US 101 between San Francisco Airport and San Bruno Avenue
13. US 101 between San Bruno Avenue and 1-380
14. US 101 between 1-380 and Mitchell Avenue
15. US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and Grand Avenue
16. US 101 between Grand Avenue and Oyster Point Boulevard
The Centrum Logistics Traffic Impact Analysis incorporates data provided by traffic counts
performed by WIL TEC in January, 2009, the City of South San Francisco, and the County of
San Mateo. Fignre I (in Appendix D) presents existing AM and PM peak hour volumes at
the analysis intersections.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
INTERSECTION OPERATION
Analvsis Methodologv
City staff requested intersection and roadway segment evaluation for the following traffic
scenanos:
Existing Condition - Operation analysis based on eXlstlllg peak hour volumes and
existing intersections and roadway segment lane geometry.
2010 Background Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from the County of
San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2010 Background with Project Condition - 2010 Background Condition plus project-
generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center.
2020 Cumulative No Project Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from the
County of San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2020 Cumulative with Project Condition - 2020 Cumulative No Project Condition plus
project generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center.
2030 Cumulative No Project Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from the
County of San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2030 Cumulative with Project Condition - 2030 Cumulative No Project Condition plus
project generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center.
Data Collection
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Intersection turning movement volumes for the study intersections were performed by
WILTEC in January, 2009. AM and PM peak hours were included for analysis since it is
expected that daily staff shift changes would occur during these two periods.
Existing peak hour traffic volumes on US-I 0 I were obtained from the California Department
of Transportation (Caltrans), District 4, and from California Freeway Performance
Measurement System (PeMS) data for Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays between
March I, 2008 and March I, 2009.
Intersection and Roadway Configuration
Site visits were conducted by DKS Associates in January, 2009, to confirm lane
configuration and traffic control at study intersections and roadway segments.
PAGE 10-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS
The Level of Service (LOS) evaluation indicates the degree of congestion that occurs during
peak travel periods and is the principal measure of roadway and intersection performance.
LOS can range from "A" representing free-flow conditions, to "F" representing extremely
long delays. LOS B and C signify stable conditions with acceptable delays. LOS D is
typically considered acceptable for a peak hour in urban areas. LOS E is approaching
capacity and LOS F represents conditions at or above capacity. The correlation between
average stopped delay and level of service for both signalized and unsignalized intersections
is shown in Table 10-1.
Table 10-1: Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds
Vehicle Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Description
Level of
Service
Signalized
Intersections
Unsignalized
Intersections
A
Delay ~ 10.0
Delay ~ 10.0
Free FlowlInsigni:licant Delays: No approach
phase is fully utilized and no vehicle waits longer
than one red indication.
B
10 < Delay ~ 20.0
10.0 < Delay~ 15.0
Stable Operation/Minimal Delays: An
occasional approach phase is fully utilized.
Many drivers design to feel somewhat restricted
within platoon of vehicles.
c
20.0 < Delay ~ 35.0
15.0 < Delay ~ 25.0
Stable Operation! Acceptable Delays: Major
approach phases fully utilized. Most drivers feel
somewhat restricted.
D
35.0 < Delay ~ 55.0
25.0 < Delay ~ 35.0
Approaching Unstable/Tolerable Delays:
Drivers may have to wait through more than one
red signal indication. Queues may develop but
dissipate rapidly, without excessive delays.
E
55.0 < Delay ~ 80.0
35.0 < Delay ~ 50.0
Unstable Operation/Significant Delays: VollllTIes
at or near capacity. Vehicles may wait through
several signal cycles. Long queues from
upstream from intersection.
F
Delay < 80.0
Delay < 50.0
Forced flow/Excessive Delays: Represents
januned conditions. Intersection operates below
capacity with low volumes. Queues may block
upstream intersections.
Source: DKS Associates
The Level of Service (LOS) at the selected study intersections and roadway segments was
determined on methodology described below.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Intersection Level of Service
Intersection analysis was conducted using the criteria described in the City/ County
Association of Governments (C/CAG) 2007 Congestion Management Program and utilized
the Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2000) for the analysis where appropriate. For
reference purposes, LOS as defined in the HCM is a quality measure describing operating
conditions within a traffic stream. It is generally described in terms such as service measures
as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and
convenience. LOS at study intersections was calculated using TRAFFIX software for
signalized and unsignalized intersections.
Unsignalized Intersections
At unsignalized intersections, each approach to the intersection is evaluated separately and
assigned a LOS. The level of service is based on the delay at the worst approach for two-way
stop controlled intersections. Total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a
vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. This time
includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-
in-queue position.
Signalized Intersections
At signalized intersections, level of service is evaluation on the basis of average stopped
delay for all vehicles at the intersection.
Roadwav Segment Level of Service
Roadway segment analysis was conducted using the criteria described in the City/ County
Association of Governments (C/CAG) 2007 Congestion Management Program and utilized
the Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2000) for the analysis where appropriate. For the
purposes of the traffic analysis, two types of roadways were identified: arterials and
freeways.
Roadway Segment - Arterials
Arterials are generally larger capacity roads tying smaller residential streets to areas of
commercial and retail activity and also connect to freeways. In the area of the project site,
Airport Boulevard, Linden Avenue, San Mateo Avenue, Grand Avenue, and San Bruno
Avenue are considered arterials.
Under the 2007 Congestion Management Program, levels of service for arterials are
dependent on the arterial class denoted as Type I, II, or III. Type I arterials are principal
arterials with suburban design, I to 5 signals per mile, no parking and free-flow speeds of 35
to 45 miles per hour. Type III arterials have urban designs, with 6 to 12 signals per mile,
parking permitted and are undivided with free-flow speeds of 25 to 35 miles per hour. Type
PAGE 10-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
II arterials fall between Type I and II and have free-flow speeds of30 to 35 miles per hour.
The LOS for arterials is based on maneuverability, delays, and speeds, As the volume
increases, the probability of stopping at an intersection due to a red signal indication
increases and the LOS decreases. The specific LOS criteria from the HCM is presented in
Table 10-2.
TABLE 10-2: LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR ARTERIALS
Arterial Class Average Travel Speed (miles per hour)
II III
Range of Free Flow Speeds 35 to 45 30 to 35 25 to 35
Typical Free Flow Speed 40 33 27
A .:: 35 .::30 .:: 25
B .:: 28 .::24 .:: 19
C .::22 .:: 18 .:: 13
D .:: 17 .:: 14 .::9
E .:: 13 .:: 10 .::7
F < 13 < 10 <7
Source: San Mateo COlmty Congestion Management Agency, 2007
Roadway Segment - Freeway
According to the 2007 Congestion Management Program, a freeway is defined as a "divided
highway facility with two or more lanes in each direction and full control of access and
egress. It has no intersections; access and egress are provided by ramps at interchanges." As
an example, US 101 is considered a freeway.
For freeway segments, a calculation method based on the v/c ratio was selected for the 2007
Congestion Management Program. Volumes on each roadway segment in each direction are
divided by the capacity, estimated to be 2,200 vehicles per hour per lane on freeways. For
this report, the freeway free-flow speed was determined to be 65 miles per hour. The v/c ratio
for freeways with a 65 mile per hour free flow speed is related to LOS based on the
information in Table 10-3. It should be noted that LOS E and LOS D are the operating
standards for US 101 and I 280 near the study area.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE 10-3: LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR FREEWAYS
BASED ON VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIOS
65 rnph - Free-Flow Speed
Level of Service Density" (pc/milln) Speedb (ruph) Maxirnurnc vie MSpd (pcphpl)
A 10.0 65.0 0.295 650
B 16.0 65.0 0.473 1,040
C 24.0 64.5 0.704 1,548
D 32.0 61.0 0.887 1,952
E 39.3 56.0 1.000 2,200
P Variable Variable Variable Variable
Notes: a Density in passenger cars per mile per lane, b Average travel speed in miles per hour, cMaximum volume-to-capacity ratio,
dMaximum service flow rate under ideal conditions in passenger cars per hour per lane
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209 (Washington, D.C., 1994), pp. 3-9
EXISTING OPERATING CONDITIONS
Intersection Operating Conditions
Level of service calculations were performed at twelve (12) intersections for the weekday
AM and PM peak hours. The AM peak hour is the highest one-hour period between 7:00 AM
and 9:00 AM while the PM peak hour is the highest on-hour traffic volume between 4:00 PM
and 6:00 PM. Table 4 of Appendix D summarizes the results of the intersection level of
service for the existing condition, and illustrates that all of the twelve (12) intersections
currently operate at LOS D or better during the respective AM and PM peak hours.
Roadwav Segment Operating Conditions
Based on the classification of the roadway segments described earlier, eleven (11) arterial
roadway segments and five (5) freeway segments were evaluated for the existing AM and
PM peak hour operating conditions. Table 5 of Appendix D provides a summary of the
roadway segments operational condition for the existing conditions, and illustrates all
roadway segments currently operate at or above LOS D with the exception of northbound US
101 between 1-380 and Mitchell Avenue during the AM peak hour.
Traffic Signal Warrant Analvsis
A traffic signal warrant analysis is a method which defines the minimum conditions where a
traffic signal may be applicable for an existing unsignalized intersection. While meeting the
warrant criteria does not ensure that a signal is justified at a certain location (since there are
many factors which influence the effectiveness of a traffic signal), it does establish the
minimum conditions under which a traffic signal can be considered. Conversely, not meeting
the signal warrant suggests that a traffic signal should not be installed and alternative traffic
PAGE 10-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
control solutions should be explored.
A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted at all unsignalized intersections in
accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) -
Section 4C. The unsignalized intersection was investigated if the signal warrants for the
"Peak Hour" was met. The signal warrant is met when either of the two following criteria is
satisfied.
Criterion 1: The criterion is satisfied when all three of the following conditions exist in the
same one hour of an average day:
I. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one
direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: 4 vehicle-hours for a one-
lane approach; or 5 vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach, and
2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds
100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic of 150 vehicles per hour for two
moving lanes and
3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per
hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections
with four or more approaches.
Criterion 2: The criterion is satisfied when the plotted point representing the vehicles per
hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour
on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) for I hour (any four
consecutive 150 minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable Peak Hour
Warrant Curves for the existing combination of approach lanes.
Table 6 of Appendix D summarizes the results of the signal warrant analysis. Based on the
analysis results, the intersection of San Bruno Avenue and NB US-1O I off-ramps
northbound-right does not meet the signal warrant criteria for the existing condition during
either the AM or the PM peak hours.
TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES
Transit Facilities
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) operates a commuter rail public transit system with 43
stations through San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Mateo Counties. The five
lines provide regular service between 4:00 AM and midnight with trains for each line
arriving every 15 minutes. In the vicinity of the project site, the San Bruno Station is
approximately on-third of a mile west of the proposed Centrum Distribution Center. Between
October 2007 and September 2008, the average weekday exits at this station were 2,574
riders.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) operates 55 bus routes throughout San
Mateo County and link to areas of San Francisco and Palo Alto. Sam Trans buses connect to
BART and Caltrain Stations while providing local and express service to the county. The
closest SamTrans routes are near the San Bruno BART Station, approximately one-third of a
mile near west of the project site. The 133, 140, 141,391,38, and 43 bus routes all stop at the
San Bruno BART Station.
Pedestrian Facilities
Existing sidewalks in Project vicinity are between five and twelve feet in wide and are
provided in most areas near the project site. Crosswalk striping is not provided at most
unsignalized intersections. However, crosswalk striping is provided at signalized intersection
including the equidistant signalized intersections of San Mateo Avenue at San Bruno Avenue
and San Mateo Avenue at Linden Avenue.
Sidewalks in the Project's vicinity are generally in acceptable condition with some
exceptions near auto repair shops. Some sidewalk furniture is present the area which includes
light poles, fire hydrants, street sign poles, trees in some areas, and mailboxes. Additionally,
the sidewalks are generally adjacent to the street with no parkways providing a buffer
between the two.
Bicvcle Facilities
In the City of South San Francisco, there are three different bicycle facility classifications:
. Bike Paths (Class I facilities) - Paved facilities that are physically separated from
roadways used by motor vehicles by space of a physical barrier and are designated for
bicycle use.
. Bike Lanes (Class II facilities) - Lanes on the outside edge of roadways reserved for the
exclusive use of bicycles designated with special signing and pavement markings.
. Bike Routes (Class III facilities) - Roadways recommended for use by bicycles and often
connect roadways with bike lanes and bike paths. Bike routes are designated with signs.
San Mateo Avenue, which serves as the access road for the project site, is classified as a bike
route in the City's General Plan. North of the project site, Airport Boulevard is also classified
as a bike route. No existing bicycle facilities near the proj ect site are identified in the City of
San Bruno General Plan.
EXISTING PARKING
Off-Street Parking
Between the two lots, there are approximately 920 parking spaces available for use. Of these
PAGE 10-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
spaces, 670 belong to an airport parking facility while the remaining 250 are on the current
site. Access to the two parking areas have separate entrance/exits off of San Mateo Avenue
approximately 0.4 miles north of San Bruno Avenue.
On-Street Parking
On-street parking in the vicinity of the project site is generally scarce. Along San Mateo
Avenue, parking regulations and restrictions limit the number of potential parking spaces.
The existing parking supply is often highly utilized during weekday since many of the
industrial uses in the area do not have private parking areas and must use park along the
curbside. During DKS field visits, some vehicles were observed to be parking illegally due to
the high on-street parking demand (e.g. blocking driveways, in red curb zones, during street
sweeping hours).
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The City of South San Francisco requires that all nonresidential development expected to
generate 100 or more average daily trips, based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE)
trip generation rates or a project seeking a floor area ratio (FAR) bonus implement
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce vehicle traffic (Chapter
20.120 Transportation Demand Management) (refer to Appendix E). The purposes of the
TDM ordinance are as follows:
. Implement a program designed to reduce the amount of traffic generated by new
nonresidential development, and the expansion of existing nonresidential development
pursuant to the City's police power and necessary in order to protect the public health,
safety and welfare.
. Ensure that expected increases in traffic resulting from growth in employment
opportunities in the City of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated.
. Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of
services, incentives, and facilities.
. Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that
new developments are designed in ways to maximize the potential for alternative
transportation usage.
. Establish minimum TDM requirements for all new nonresidential development.
. Allow reduced parking requirements for projects implementing the requirements of this
chapter.
. Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that the measures
are implemented.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
IMPACT ANALYSIS
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Intersection and roadway segment significance criteria have been adopted from the 2007 San
Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP). Based on the CMP standards, the
acceptable operating level of service (LOS) is defined at LOS D unless defined differently by
the 2007 CMP. In the area of the Project site, the 2007 CMP establishes that the roadway
level of service standard for US 101 is LOS E. No CMP intersections are included in this
study, based on the location of the proposed project and study intersections. However the
City of South San Francisco also uses the following additional criteria for the evaluation of
local intersections.
Intersection Impact Thresholds
For an intersection that is currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
. A project will be considered to have an impact if the project will cause the intersection to
operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted; or
. A project will be considered to have an impact if the cumulative analysis indicates that
the combination of the proposed project and future cumulative traffic demand will result
in the intersection to operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted and
the proposed project increases average control delay at the intersection by four (4)
seconds or more.
For an intersection that is not currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will add any additional traffic to
the intersection that is currently not in compliance with its adopted level of service
standard.
Freewav Segment Impact Thresholds
For freeway segments currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will cause the freeway segment to
operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted; or
. A project will be considered to have an impact if the cumulative analysis indicates that
the combination of the proposed project and future cumulative traffic demand will result
in the freeway segment to operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted
and the proposed project increases traffic demand on the freeway segment by an amount
equal to one (1) percent or more of the segment capacity, or causes the freeway segment
volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio to increase by one (1) percent.
PAGE 10-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
For freeway segments currently not in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will add traffic demand equal to
one (1) percent or more or the segment capacity or causes the freeway segment volume-
to-capacity (v/c) ratio to increase by one (1) percent, if the freeway is currently not in
compliance with the adopted LOS standard.
Arterial Segment Impact Thresholds
The CMP states that the analysis of arterial segments is only required when a jurisdiction
proposes to reduce the capacity of a designated arterial through reduction in the number of
lanes, adding or modifying on-street parking, or other actions that will affect arterial segment
performance.
. A project is considered to have an impact if it causes mid-block queuing, parking
maneuvers resulting in delays or other impacts that result in any segment to operate at a
level of service that violates the adopted LOS standard set for the nearest intersection.
Additionally, an impact is determined if the average travel speed for the arterial segment
is reduced by 4 miles per hour or more. This criterion was used in evaluating arterial
segments.
Although the proj ect does not anticipate reducing the capacity of arterials through a reduction
in the number of lanes, adding or modifying on-street parking, or other actions that may
affect the segment performance, arterial segment analysis was performed for a more
conservative, comprehensive traffic analysis.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Impact Traf-l: Project Trip Generation Exceeds 100 Trips During Peak Hours. The
Project would generate more than 100 net new trips during the AM and
PM peak hours. The San Mateo City/County Association of Governments
(C/CAG) Agency Guidelines for the implementation of the 2003 Draft
Congestion Management Program ("C/CAG Guidelines") specifies that
local jurisdictions must ensure that the developer and/or tenants will
mitigate all new peak hour trips (including the first 100 trips) projected to
be generated by the development. This would be a potentially significant
impact.
The Project's trip generation was based on the Reasonable Occupancy Scenario's! square
footage and standard trip generation rates for a warehousing, light industrial, convenience
market, eatery without a drive-through, and print and shipping store land use, as published by
, See Chapter 3 (project Description).
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1 0-1 3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the 8th edition of the Trip Generation Handbook,
as described in Table 10-4.
The trip generation also takes into account the Project's number of heavy vehicle trips. Due
to the different vehicle characteristics between heavy vehicles and passenger cars, heavy
vehicles were converted to passenger-car-equivalents (PCEs) by the ratio of 4 vehicle trips
per one (1) truck trip.
TABLE 10-4: TRIP GENERATION RATE CORRELATION
Floor Area
Reasonable Occupancy Scenario
368,969 sq.ft.
245,979 sq.ft.
1,500 sq.ft.
1,000 sq.ft.
6,600 sq.ft.
General Industrial
ITE Trip Generation Rate
Light Industrial
VVholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light
Eating and Drinking Establislunents (Convenience and Limited)
Warehousing
Eatery without Drive-Through
Convenience Sales
Convenience Market
Business and Professional Services
Print and Shipping Store
Source: Centrum Logistics Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated April 13, 2009.
TDM Trip Reductions
Although the TDM program required for the Project is intended to achieve a 30% mode shift
in site-generated peak hour trips, for purposes of this EIR a more conservative 15% trip
reduction has been assumed for the Project. Under this TDM assumption, 10% of generated
trips would utilize transit services (BART and SamTrans) while the remaining 5% would
participate in care share programs. The trip reduction would be accomplished primarily
through the support of alternative modes of transportation including transit and carpooling.
Site-specific improvements may include shuttle services to Caltrain and BART and will
include complimentary carpool parking. Additionally, proposed providing amenities for
pedestrians and bicyclists including bicycle racks and lockers will further encourage the use
of alternative modes of transportation.
Internal Trip Capture And Pass-By Trip Reduction
An internal trip capture reduction and pass-by trip reduction were calculated as part of the
trip generation for the site. Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook Based provides
related information to calculate the overall internal capture for a mixed-use development.
Using this resource, a 12% internal trip capture rate was calculated and has been applied to
the trips generated by the project. Additionally, based on field observations and given the
light-industrial nature of the area surrounding the project site, an addition 5% trip reduction
for pass by was applied to the overall site-related trip generation. These reductions are
reflected in Table 10-5.
PAGE 10-14
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
TABLE 10-5: PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION, WITH A 15% TDM
REDUCTION
Direction Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trucks Autos Total Trucks Autos Total Trucks Autos Total
Expressed as Vehicles
Inbound 173 1542 1715 37 273 310 7 91 98
Outbound 173 1542 1715 9 86 95 41 292 333
Total 345 3084 3430 46 359 405 48 383 431
Passenger Car Equivalent
Inbound 690 1542 2232 148 273 421 28 91 119
Outbound 690 1542 2232 36 86 122 164 292 456
Total 1380 3084 4464 184 359 543 192 383 575
Source: DKS Associates
Trip Distribution
The direction of approach and departure for project trips of the proposed Centum
Distribution Center were estimated from the existing traffic patterns in the vicinity of the
project site. Table Traf-6 shows the Project's assumed trip distribution patterns.
The Project truck trips having their origins or destinations on US-101 would be assumed to
access the Project site via the interchanges at San Bruno Avenue, Produce Avenue,
Wondercolor Lane, and Miller Avenue. The remaining Project truck trips would access 1-280
via San Bruno Avenue. During the respective AM and PM peak hours, approximately 16 to
24 trucks would pass through the intersection of San Mateo Avenue and San Bruno Avenue.
For trucks, full site access would be off of San Mateo Avenue at the existing driveway
location. This location would also serve as the employee and visitor entrance.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1 0-1 5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
TABLE TRAF-6: PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Origin I Destination
Autos
North via US 101 30
South via US 10 1 25
North via Airport Blvd 3
West via Grand Ave 2
North via Linden Ave 10
South via San Mateo Ave 15
West via San Bnmo Ave 15
Total 100
Source: DKS Associates.
Percentage of Total Traffic (%)
Trucks
45
50
5
100
Mitigation Measure
Traf-l: Transportation Demand Management Program. The Project sponsors
shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program
consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter
20.120 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG.
These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life
ofthe development.
The City of South San Francisco requires that all nonresidential development expected to
generate 100 or more average daily trips, based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE)
trip generation rates or a project seeking a floor area ratio (FAR) bonus, implement
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce vehicle traffic. The Project
would exceed 100 trips. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Traf-l would ensure
compliance with the City of South San Francisco requirements.
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION IMPACTS
Under existing (Year 2010) conditions, the Project's addition of traffic would not result in
any significant impacts to study intersections during either of the peak hours analyzed. This
would be a less than significant impact.
Year 2010 (Without Proiect) Conditions
This section discusses the traffic operating conditions of the study intersections and roadway
segments under the 2010 Background without Project Condition. The 2010 Background
Conditions include the existing traffic volumes plus the addition of background growth
traffic derived from the C/CAG travel forecast model. The background and cumulative
PAGE 10-16
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
growth volumes have been calculated by using the C/CAG traffic forecast model which
provides 2005 and forecasted 2030 traffic volumes. Using a furness process between the
2009 existing field volumes, C/CAG 2005, and C/CAG 2030 traffic volumes, 2010
Background traffic volumes were estimated.
Table 7 of Appendix D identifies the Year 2010 without Project Condition intersection
traffic volumes at each study intersection, including that no intersections would deteriorate
from an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) to a deficient LOS (LOS E or F) during either
peak hour.
Year 2010 (With Project) Conditions
Table 17 of Appendix D shows that all study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS
(LOS D or better) under the Year 2010 without Project Condition, and would continue to
operate at acceptable LOS under the Year 2010 with Project Condition. The Project's
addition of traffic would not result in any significant impacts to study intersections during
either ofthe peak hours analyzed and no mitigation measures are warranted.
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT IMPACTS
Under existing (Year 2010) conditions, the Project's addition of traffic would not result in a
significant impact to the study area roadway segments. This would be a less than significant
impact.
Year 2010 (Without Project) Conditions
Table 8 of Appendix D identifies the analysis result of the study roadway segments under
the Year 2010 without Project Condition, including that all of the study roadway segments
would continue to operate at acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) during the AM peak hour.
Year 2010 (With Project) Conditions
Table 18 of Appendix D provides a summary of Year 2010 with Project Condition roadway
segments operation conditions, including the measures of effectiveness (average travel speed
or v/c ratio) and LOS, and illustrates that all study area roadway segments would continue to
operate at an acceptable LOS. Therefore, under this scenario the Project would not result in a
significant impact to the study area roadway segments, and no mitigation is required.
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT IMPACTS
Under existing (Year 2010) conditions, the Project's addition of traffic would not result in a
significant impact to unsignalized intersection in the study area. This would be a less than
significant impact.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-17
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Year 2010 (Without Project) Conditions
Table 9 of Appendix D identifies the warrant analysis for the Year 2010 without Project
Condition, concluding that the one unsignalized intersection at San Bruno Ave / NB US-101
Off-Ramp NB-Right would not meet the peak hour signal warrant during the AM or PM
peak hours. Signalization would, therefore, not be warranted.
Year 2010 (Without Project) Conditions
Table 19 of Appendix D identifies the signal warrant analysis results for the Year 2010
without Project Condition. The single unsignalized intersection would not meet the peak hour
signal warrant during either the AM or PM peak hours. Signalization would, therefore, not be
warranted and no mitigation is required.
CUMULATIVE (YEAR 2020) INTERSECTION IMPACTS
Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2020)
conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in significant
impacts to three study intersections during the PM peak hour: a) East
Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard; b) San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB
Ramps; and c) San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard. This would be a
potentially significant impact.
Year 2020 (Without Project) Conditions
Table 20 of Appendix D summarizes the results of the intersection level of service
calculations for the 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition. This table shows that under
2020 Cumulative without Project Condition, four of the twelve study intersections would
operate at an unacceptable LOS ofE or F in at least one of the peak hours.
During the AM peak period the following intersections would operate at LOS F:
. East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard, (delay of 115.4 seconds)
. East Grand Avenue / US 101 northbound off-ramps, (delay of250.6 seconds) and
. East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard (delay of 197.8 seconds).
During the PM peak hour period the following intersections would operate at LOS E or F:
. East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (LOS E, delay of63.1 seconds)
. San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard (LOS F, delay of 151.0 seconds)
Year 2020 (With Project) Conditions
The Year 2020 with Project Condition includes the existing traffic volumes plus the additions
PAGE 10-18
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
of background growth traffic derived from the C/CAG travel forecast model, plus traffic
generated by the Project.
Table 26 of Appendix D shows that during the AM peak period, the three intersections
operating at LOS F under the Year 2020 without Project Conditions would not be
substantially further impacted by Project traffic. However, during the PM peak hour, three
intersections would have a significant increase in traffic impacts:
. East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard - the intersection delay would increase from 63.1
seconds and LOS E in the Year 2020 without Project Condition to 65.4 seconds and LOS
F during the Year 2020 with Project Condition. The Project would increase the
northbound through and right direction traffic, and the southbound through direction
traffic.
. San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard - would still remain at LOS F, but the delay
would increase from 151.0 seconds in the Year 2020 without Project Condition to 158.4
seconds in the Year 2020 with Project Condition. Project-related trips would increase
traffic at all approaches but most notably in the northbound direction.
. San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps - would increase from LOS D and 47.4 seconds
of delay under the Year 2020 without Project Condition to LOS E and 56.8 seconds of
delay under the Year 2020 with Project Condition. This increase in delay is attributed to
project-related traffic using the US 101 northbound and southbound interchange ramps.
Mitigation Measures
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM)
Traf-2a:
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to
mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-
striping the westbound approach from a shared left-through lane and a
right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared through-right lane.
With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 54.9 seconds, such
that the "with project" delay would be reduced to below the "without project" condition. This
improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less
than significant level. This mitigation strategy would not cause an impact during the AM
peak hour.
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM)
Traf-2b:
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to mitigate
this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-striping one of
the eastbound left-through lanes to a through-right lane.
With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 150.7 seconds, such
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1 0-1 9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
that the "with project" delay would be reduced to below the "without project" condition. This
improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less
than significant level. This mitigation strategy would not cause an impact during the AM
peak hour.
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM)
Traf-2c:
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM). In order
to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-
striping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a
southbound through-right lane.
With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 28.7 seconds, such
that the "with project" delay would be reduced to below the "without project" condition. This
improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less than
significant level. However, because the intersection is within the city limits ofthe City of San
Bruno, adoption of the measure is not within the responsibility or jurisdiction of the City of
South San Francisco. While San Bruno could implement the mitigation measure to ensure
that this impact is reduced to a less than significant level, the City of South San Francisco, as
lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the measure will actually be
implemented; therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
CUMULATIVE (YEAR 2020) ROADWAY SEGMENT IMPACTS
Under cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would not result in a
significant traffic impact on roadway segments. This would be a less than significant impact.
Year 2020 (Without Proiect) Conditions
Table 21 of Appendix D shows that under the Year 2020 without Project Conditions, none
of the roadway segments operate under unacceptable LOS conditions (i.e., worse than LOS
E). The addition of other cumulative growth in traffic would not result in any of the roadway
segments operating under unacceptable conditions.
Year 2020 (With Proiect) Conditions
Table 27 of Appendix D shows that all roadway segments would continue to operate
without impacts (i.e., at LOS E or better) under the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition.
Although the segment of southbound US 101 between Mitchell and 1-380 would operate at
LOS E with a v/c ratio of 0.91, the 2007 CMP establishes that the roadway level of service
standard for US 101 is LOS E in the area of the Project site.
CUMULATIVE (YEAR 2020) TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT IMPACTS
Under cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the Project's addition of traffic would not trigger a
PAGE 10-20
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
traffic signal warrant that was not already triggered under without-project conditions. This
would be a less than significant impact.
Year 2020 (Without Project) Conditions
Table 22 of Appendix D summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis performed at the
single unsignalized intersection at San Bruno Ave / NB US-101 Off-Ramp NB-Right. Based
on the analysis results, that intersection would satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during the
PM peak hour. Signalization would, therefore, be warranted.
Year 2020 (With Project) Conditions
Table 28 of Appendix D presents the warrant analysis results for the Year 2020 with Project
Condition. This analysis concludes that the unsignalized intersection at San Bruno Ave / NB
US-101 Off-Ramp NB-Right would continue to be warranted during the PM peak hour and
would also now satisfy peak hour signal warrant during the AM as well.
Since the signal warrant was required under the without-Project condition and the Project
would not further exacerbate this condition once the signal is installed, the impact would be
less than significant and no mitigation is required.
CUMULATIVE (YEAR 2030) INTERSECTION IMPACTS
Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2030)
conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in significant
impacts to two study intersections during the AM peak hour: a) East
Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard; and b) San Bruno Avenue / US 101
northbound ramps. Additionally, Project traffic would result in significant
impacts to three study intersections during the PM peak hour: c) East
Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard; d) San Mateo Avenue / Airport
Boulevard; and e) San Bruno Avenue / US 101 southbound ramps. This
would be a potentially significant impact.
Year 2030 (Without Project) Conditions
This section discusses the traffic operating conditions of the study intersections and roadway
segments under the Year 2030 without Project Condition. The Year 2030 without Project
Condition includes the existing traffic volumes plus the additions of background growth
traffic derived from the C/CAG travel forecast model.
Table 29 of Appendix D summarizes the results of the intersection level of service
calculations for the 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition. This table shows that under
2030 Cumulative without Project Condition, six of the twelve study intersections would
operate at an unacceptable LOS ofE or F in at least one of the peak hours.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-21
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
During the AM peak period the following intersections would operate at LOS F:
. East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard,
. East Grand Avenue / US 101 northbound off-ramps,
. East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard
. San Bruno Avenue / US 101 northbound right off-ramp
During the PM peak hour period the following intersections would operate at LOS F:
. East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard
. East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard
. San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard
. San Bruno Avenue at US 101 southbound ramps.
Year 2030 (With Proiect) Conditions
The Year 2030 with Project Condition includes the existing traffic volumes plus the additions
of background growth traffic derived from the C/CAG travel forecast model, plus Project
traffic. Table 35 of Appendix D shows that during the AM peak period, two of the four
intersections operating at LOS F under the Year 2030 without Project Conditions would be
further impacted by Project traffic:
. The intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would operate at LOS F
and 192.8 seconds of delay under the Year 2030 without Project Conditions and LOS F
and 195.2 seconds of delay under the Year 2030 with Project Condition. The Project
would increase traffic in the northbound through and right directions, and in the
southbound through direction.
. The intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 101 southbound ramps would deteriorate
from 89.5 seconds of delay and LOS D in the 2030 without Project Condition to 106.0
seconds of delay and LOS E under with the Year 2030 with Project Conditions.
During the PM peak hour, three of the four intersections operating at LOS F under the Year
2030 without Project Conditions would be further impacted by Project traffic:
. The intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would operate with 98.4
seconds of delay and LOS F under the Year 2030 without Project Condition and would
operate with 103.3 seconds of delay and LOS F in the Year 2030 with Project Condition;
. The intersection of San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard would operate at LOS F
PAGE 10-22
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
and 238.9 seconds of delay under the Year 2030 without Project Condition and LOS F
and 246.4 seconds of delay in the Year 2030 with Project Condition.
. The intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 10 I southbound ramps would operate with
89.5 seconds of delay and LOS F under the Year 2030 without Project Condition and
106.0 seconds of delay and LOS F in the Year 2030 with Project Condition.
Mitigation Measures
Traf-3a:
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM)
East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM). In order
to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-
striping and modifications to both intersection geometry and traffic
signals, to change the westbound approach from a shared left-through lane
and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared through-right lane
would need to occur.
With this improvement, the delay at this intersection would be reduced to 118.8 during the
AM and 81.0 during the PM, thereby restoring the level of service to a level below the
"without project" condition. This improvement would mitigate the impact at this intersection
to a less than significant leveL .
Traf-3b:
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2030 AM and PM)
San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2030 AM). In order
to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-
striping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a
southbound through-right lane.
With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 28.7 seconds during
the AM and 41.8 during the PM, thereby restoring the level of service to a level below the
"without project" condition. This improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's
impact at this intersection to a less than significant level, however, because the intersection is
within the city limits of the City of San Bruno, adoption of the measure is not within the
responsibility or jurisdiction of the City of South San Francisco. While San Bruno could
implement the mitigation measure to ensure that this impact is reduced to a less than
significant level, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot
require or guarantee that the measure will actually be implemented; therefore, this impact
would remain significant and unavoidable.
Traf-3c:
San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 PM)
San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 PM). In order to
mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-
striping one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a through-right lane.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-23
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 238.3 seconds, such
that the "with project" delay would be reduced to below the "without project" condition. This
improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less
than significant level. Even though this mitigation measure would reduce the intersection
delay to below "without project conditions" levels, the intersection would still operate at
LOS F. This mitigation strategy would not cause an impact during the AM peak hour.
CUMULATIVE (YEAR 2030) ROADWAY SEGMENT IMPACTS
Under cumulative (Year 2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would not result in a
significant traffic impact on project roadway segments. This would be a less than significant
impact.
Year 2030 (Without Proiect) Conditions
Table 30 of Appendix D shows that, under the Year 2030 without Project Condition, one
roadway segment would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period, and four roadway
segments would operate at LOS E:
. Southbound segment of Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court -
Would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period;
. Southbound US 101 direction from Oyster Point Boulevard to Grand Avenue - Would
operate at LOS E;
. Southbound US 101 direction from Grand Avenue to Mitchell Avenue - Would operate
at LOS E;
. Southbound US 101 from Mitchell Avenue to 1-380 - Would operate at LOS E; and
. Northbound segment of US 101 between 1-380 and Mitchell Avenue - Would operate at
LOSE.
Although the segments of US 101 would operate at LOS E, the 2007 CMP establishes that
the roadway level of service standard for US 101 is LOS E in the area of the Project site. All
other study roadway segments would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better.
Year 2030 (With Proiect) Conditions
Table 36 of Appendix D shows that, under the Year 2030 with Project Condition, roadway
segments would not be significantly impacted by Project traffic.
Northbound US 101 from Grand Avenue to Oyster Point Boulevard would operate with a
0.89 v/c ratio and LOS E under the Year 2030 without Project Condition and would continue
to operate at LOS E (0.90 v/c ratio) in the Year 2030 with Project Condition.
PAGE 10-24
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Southbound US 101 from Mitchell Avenue to 1-380 would remain at LOS E for the Year
2030 without Project Condition and Year 2030 with Project Conditions, even though the v/c
ratio would increase from 0.97 to 0.98. Southbound US 101 between Grand Avenue and
Mitchell would operate at LOS E with a 0.91 v/c ratio in the Year 2030 without Project
Condition and would continue to operate at LOS E with a 0.91 v/c ratio in the with project
condition. Southbound US 101 between Oyster Point Boulevard and Grand Avenue would
experience a 0.89 v/c ratio and LOS E in the Year 2030 without Project Condition and would
remain at LOS E (with a 0.90 v/c ratio) in the Year 2030 with Project Condition.
The 2007 CMP establishes that the roadway level of service standard for US 101 is LOS E in
the area of the Project site. However, it should be noted that the CMP requires subtraction of
traffic originating outside of San Mateo County. Therefore, given that reduction of traffic, it
is unlikely that traffic levels would (or could) exceed LOS E.
The southbound segment of Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court
would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period, but Project traffic would not cause an
the average travel speed to be reduced by 4 miles per hour or more.
TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE OPERATIONS
The Project would have a less than significant impact on alternative modes of travel,
including transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Transit Operations
As part of the required TDM program, an estimated 10% to 20% percent transit mode share
would result in between approximately 60 to 119 AM, and approximately 72 to 144 PM
transit-related trips via BART and Sam Trans. Load factors and operations of current transit
services in the area would not be adversely affected by these net-new transit trips related to
the proposed project. Therefore it is anticipated that the proposed project would not create
significant impacts to the existing transit services.
Pedestrian Facilities
Existing sidewalks in the area are between five and twelve feet in wide and are provided in
most areas near the project site. Crosswalk striping is not provided at most unsignalized
intersections however, crosswalk striping is provided at signalized intersection including the
equidistant signalized intersections of San Mateo Avenue at San Bruno Avenue and San
Mateo Avenue at South Linden Avenue.
The sidewalks in the vicinity of the project site are generally in acceptable condition with
some exceptions near auto repair shops. Some sidewalk furniture is present in the area which
includes light poles, fire hydrants, street sign poles, trees in some areas, and mailboxes.
Additionally, the sidewalks are generally adjacent to the street with no parkways providing a
buffer between the two.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-25
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Bicvcle Facilities
In the City of South San Francisco, there are three different bicycle facility classifications:
. Bike Paths (Class I facilities) - Paved facilities that are physically separated from
roadways used by motor vehicles by space of a physical barrier and are designated for
bicycle use.
. Bike Lanes (Class II facilities) - Lanes on the outside edge of roadways reserved for the
exclusive use of bicycles designated with special signing and pavement markings.
. Bike Routes (Class III facilities) - Roadways recommended for use by bicycles and often
connect roadways with bike lanes and bike paths. Bike routes are designated with signs.
The City of South San Francisco General Plan depicts a future bike path for a railroad right-
of-way approximately 0.25 miles west of the Project site. Additionally, bike paths are
planned for Herman Street (approximately 0.10 miles west of the project site) and South
Linden Avenue (approximately 0.35 miles northwest of the project site). In the City of San
Bruno General Plan, potential future bikeways are proposed along Huntington Avenue and
San Bruno Avenue in the vicinity of the project.
San Mateo Avenue, which serves as the access road for the Project site, is classified as a bike
route in the City's General Plan. North ofthe Project site, Airport Boulevard is also classified
as a bike route. No existing bicycle facilities near the Project site are identified in the City of
San Bruno General Plan.
All of these operations would continue to function as described in the existing conditions
discussion above.
SITE PLAN AND AREA CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project's circulation plan will not reduce the
number of lanes, add or modify on-street parking, or result in other actions
that will affect arterial segment performance. However, the Project would
contribute additional large commercial vehicular turn movements to an
intersection with insufficient turning radius. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
Site Circulation
Project site vehicular access would be via two curb cuts along San Mateo Avenue. The
northerly curb-cut would provide access for passenger vehicles and trucks while the
southerly curb-cut would be restricted to passenger vehicles only. The site plan would
include truck docks on the western edge of the building. Truck access to San Mateo Avenue
from the loading docks follows paths without tight turning radii and provides sufficient
lateral clearance for truck turning movements. Passenger vehicle access is also facilitated by
PAGE 10-26
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
turning radii geometries, lane widths, and the aforementioned two egress and ingress points
to San Mateo Avenue.
Turning Movements
The curb radius at the northeast corner of San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue will not
accommodate large vehicle types such as commercial semi-trucks attempting to travel
eastbound along San Bruno Avenue to northbound San Mateo Avenue and the Project site.
Auto Turn analysis has been performed on the current northeast curb geometry to determine
the vehicle path. Based on the AutoTurn results, the turning paths for larger vehicles such as
commercial semi-trucks would cross over into the opposite travel lane on San Mateo Avenue
in order to complete the turning movement.
While occupants of buildings at the Project site may self-restrict vehicles from traveling
along San Bruno Avenue and from making a turn at this intersection of concern, the ability to
confirm measure effectiveness would be highly dependent upon enforcement. Regardless, it
is not feasible to increase the subject turning radius at this intersection due to existing
development. Approximately 50-55 feet of right-of-way would need to be acquired in order
to facilitate this truck turning movement. To do so, would require removal, at minimum, of
the majority of the off-street parking lot serving existing auto repair businesses on the corner
parcel.
Additionally, the intersection of San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue is located within
the city limits of the City of San Bruno. Adoption of the mitigation measures is not within the
responsibility or jurisdiction of the City of South San Francisco. While San Bruno could
agree to allow implementation of mitigation measures, the aforementioned physical
limitations would preclude their implementation. The City of South San Francisco, as lead
agency for the Proj ect, cannot require or guarantee that the measure will actually be
implemented.
Taking into account the economic, jurisdictional and technological factors required to
facilitate the truck turning movement, there is no feasible mitigation that would reduce this
impact to a less than significant-level. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and
unavoidnble.
PARKING
The Project would have a less than significant impact on parking.
Off-Street Parking
As part of the proposed site plan, the two existing lots would be combined and their parking
supply joined as well. The resulting on-site parking plan would include parking for
approximately 670 autos and trucks. Access would occur from San Mateo Avenue through
two curb cuts. A curb cut near the southern edge of the project site would be for autos only
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 10-27
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
while another curb cut slightly farther north would provide access for both autos and trucks.
Internal circulation paths would join areas of parking regardless of which access point a
vehicle utilized.
Based on information provided by South San Francisco city staff, the total minimum required
parking spaces would be 381 off-street parking spaces. As a result, the Project would provide
an excess of322 off-street parking spaces.
On-Street Parking
On-street parking conditions are expected to remain the same under the Project condition.
While the off-airport parking lot curb cut would be removed under Project conditions, a new
curb cut is proposed near the southern edge of the Project site. In effect, the existing curb cut
would be moved south but should have no affect on on-street parking conditions.
PAGE 10-28
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
11
UTILITIES
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes existing public utilities on and in the vlclmty of the Project and
evaluates the impact of the proposed project on the provision of public utilities and possible
adverse physical impacts to the environment that could result from constructing expanded
facilities. The discussion includes information drawn from the Wet Utility Capacity Study by
Hydroconsult Engineers, Inc. dated May 1,2009.
SETTING
WATER SUPPLY
South San Francisco has two water suppliers. The California Water Service Company
Peninsula District (CWSC) serves that portion of the City east of Interstate 280, which
represents the majority of the City's area. The CWSC also serves San Carlos and San Mateo,
with no restrictions on water allocation among these communities. The company's current
contract with the San Francisco Water Department (SFWD) entitles the City to 42.3 million
gallons per day (MGD) per year. An additional 1.4 MGD can be pumped from groundwater.
The Westborough County Water District serves the area west of 1-280, an area not targeted
for growth in the City's General Plan.!
Water use has increased steadily, and at a rate faster than increases in the number of users.
Water use has rebounded significantly from the levels of the late 1980s and early 1990s,
when an extended period of drought and resulting conservation measures brought water use
levels down considerably.
While residential users comprise approximately 90% of the water accounts in South San
Francisco, less than half of the total consumption may be attributed to residential users. On
the other hand, industrial users comprise less than I % of the water accounts but use II % of
the total water. Part of the reason for the high industrial water usage in the City is the
predominance of biotechnology firms. Pharmaceutical manufacturing requires extremely
pure water, and large quantities of water are used to achieve necessary water purity levels.
, City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The CWSC bases its future water use projections on estimates of both the number of future
water users and the amount of water each type of user will consume. The five year average
growth in the number of accounts is the basis for the utility's projections of the number of
water users through 2020. Water use projections for 2020 range from 5.9 MGD to 9.1 MGD.
Assuming the SFWD contract allocation is not modified during the remaining contract
period, the CWSC has adequate supply to meet even the highest projected demand. 2
The Project site is located on the city limit boundary between South San Francisco and San
Bruno. Consequently, a third water supplier - the City of San Bruno - currently provides
domestic water and fire flows to 1070 San Mateo. The CWSC currently provides service to
1080 San Mateo.
The existing 1080 San Mateo Avenue water supply consists of a I-Yz inch meter serving both
domestic and irrigation. The existing 1070 San Mateo water supply consists of an 8-inch
meter serving fire, domestic, and irrigation.
WASTEWATER
South San Francisco Municipal Wastewater Svstem
As the name implies, the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno jointly own and
operate the South San Francisco-San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) which
would treat wastewater from the Project site. The complete sewer network leading to the
WQCP consists of approximately 155 miles of 6-inch through 36-inch diameter pipes, which
convey flows from the cities of South San Francisco, San Bruno, and portions of Daly City
and Colma. The WQCP is located at the end of Belle Air Road in South San Francisco. 3
Much of the existing South San Francisco sewer collection system is over sixty years old,
and portions of the system are in need of repair. Since 1997, the City of South San Francisco
has been under a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (R WQCB) to upgrade its facilities in order to protect the
environmental quality of the Bay. The required work at the WQCP has been completed; the
remaining work within the sewer collection network was not accomplished by the CDO
deadline of November 2005, however the remaining work is in process or planned4
The WQCP has the capacity to provide secondary treatment for 13 MGD in dry weather and
62 million gallons per day in wet weather. Average dry weather flows for the past five years
to the plant are 9.2 MGD; average peak wet weather flows approach 30 MGD.5 Wastewater
2
City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, p.194.
City of South San Francisco, 249 East GrandAve EIR, 2005
Castagnola, 2007
Page 10, Wet Utility Capacity Study, by Hydroconsult Engineers, Inc., dated May 1, 2009.
4
PAGE 11-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 11: UTILITIES
treatment at the WQCP consists of screening, grit removal, chemical addition to aid settling
of solids, primary settling under vacuum, aeration, clarification, and disinfection by
chlorination. Excess chlorine is removed prior to discharge of the treated water 2 miles
offshore in San Francisco Bay.6
The City of South San Francisco shares the WQCP with the City of San Bruno. Currently,
the City of South San Francisco has an allocation of treatment capacity of 8.74 mgd, and is
currently generating 5.6 mgd. This equates to an unused allocation of 3.14 mgd available for
growth. 7
Proiect Vicinitv Wastewater Svstem
The existing wastewater system (i.e., lines of conveyance) serving the Project site is operated
and maintained by the City of San Bruno Public Works Department. Specifically, this
includes an 8-inch sewer that is partially PVC and partially clay. The PVC section runs
across the Project site, south to north, and serves the southern portion of existing Building 1.
The clay portion runs across the Project site, west to east, in a 20-foot easement which enters
from San Mateo Avenue and discharges into a 24-inch diameter sewer at a manhole behind
310 Shaw Road.
The 24-inch diameter sewer gathers flows from the Project site and other contributing
properties in a northerly direction until combining with two major trunk sewers (the 27-inch
Tanforan sewer from South San Francisco and the 36-inch 7th Avenue sewer from San
Bruno), which discharge into Shaw Road Pumping Station No. 11. Shaw Road Pump Station
No. II pumps to the WQCP via approximately 2,800 feet of 33-inch force main. The Shaw
Road Pump Station No. 11 has recently been relocated slightly to the north and upgraded in
capacity to approximately 24 million gallons per day (mgd).
STORM DRAINAGE
The existing drainage system in the Project vicinity is generally designed and constructed for
industrial development, which has a high ratio of impervious surfaces. For example, the
Project site's 25.02 acres are approximately 95% impervious surface.
Stormwater runoff from the Project site begins as overland sheet flow on rooftops and paved
surfaces. Runoff from the 1080 San Mateo property flows to a stormdrain along the eastern
property boundary. This stormdrain runs north to south to a pump in the southeastern corner
of the parcel which discharges to San Mateo Avenue. Runoff from the eastern side of the
1070 San Mateo parcel flows directly to the stormdrain along Shaw Road. Roof runoff from
the southwestern portion of the building, along with runoff from the parking lot in the
6
Ibid
Ibid
7
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
southwestern corner of the 1070 parcel flows by gravity in a stormdrain along the southern
project boundary and discharges to the stormdrain along Shaw Road.
SOLID WASTE
Solid waste is collected from South San Francisco homes and businesses and then processed
at the South San Francisco Scavenger Company's materials recovery facility and transfer
station. Materials that cannot be recycled or composted are transferred to the Ox Mountain
Sanitary Landfill, near Half Moon Bay. Browning-Ferris Industries, owner of the landfill, has
a permit for forward expansion of the Corinda Los Trancos Canyon at Ox Mountain. When
the permit expires in 2016, either Corinda Los Trancos will be expanded further or Apanolio
Canyon will be opened for fill.
The South San Francisco Scavenger Company's facility is permitted to receive a daily
maximum of 1,250 tons per day of wastes and recyclable materials. This facility gives the
Company increased capability to recover valuable materials from wastes, reducing the
amount of waste being sent to the landfill. South San Francisco recycles both household and
industrial solid waste and sewage sludge.
With an expected buildout population of 67,000 residents in South San Francisco, the City
will generate approximately 38,000 tons of solid waste each year, based on the assumed
generation rates used by San Mateo County.
REGULATORY SETTING
Wastewater treatment and disposal in the City of South San Francisco is governed by laws,
regulatory programs and policies established by the Federal government, the State of
California, the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, and the City of South San Francisco. Most of the
pertinent requirements affecting wastewater facilities for the proposed Proj ect are contained
in the following:
Federal Laws and Regulations
Clean Water Act (CWA)
The Clean Water Act (CW A) was enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times
since its inception. It is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States,
and forms the basis for several state and local laws throughout the country. Its objective is to
reduce or eliminate water pollution in the nation's rivers, streams, lakes, and coastal waters.
The CW A prescribed the basic federal laws for regulating discharges of pollutants as well as
set minimum water quality standards for all waters of the United States. At the Federal level,
the CW A is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EP A). At the state
and regional level, the CW A is administered and enforced by the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). The
State of California has developed a number of water quality laws, rules, and regulations to
PAGE 11-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 11: UTILITIES
assist in the implementation of the CW A and related Federally mandated water quality
requirements. In many cases, the Federal requirements set minimum standards, and the laws,
rules, and regulations adopted by the State and Regional Boards are more restrictive, i.e.
more protective of the environment.
State Laws and Regulations
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act establishes the SWRCB and the RWQCB as
the principal state agencies having primary responsibility for coordinating and controlling
water quality in California. The Porter-Cologne Act establishes the responsibility of the
RWQCBs for adopting, implementing, and enforcing water quality control plans (Basin
Plans), which set forth the state's water quality standards (i.e. beneficial uses of surface
waters and groundwater) and the objectives or criteria necessary to protect those beneficial
uses.
San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB is responsible for the development, adoption, and
implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay
region. The Basin Plan is the master policy document that contains descriptions of the legal,
technical, and programmatic bases of water quality regulation in the San Francisco Bay
Region. The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses of surface waters and groundwater within
its region and specifies effluent limitations, discharge prohibitions, and water quality
objectives to maintain the existing potential beneficial uses of the waters. The proposed
Proj ect is required to adhere to all applicable requirements of the Basin Plan.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit Requirements
The San Francisco-San Bruno WQCP operates under an NPDES permit issued by the State
of California. One of the requirements of the permit is that the WQCP implement a
Pretreatment Program to regulate the collection of toxic and hazardous wastes in municipal
sewers. Under the Pretreatment Program, dischargers of industrial wastewater are required to
abide by specific wastewater discharge limits and prohibitions. Industrial dischargers are also
required to submit self-monitoring reports on the total volume and pollutant concentrations of
their wastewater, and to allow for inspections by the City of South San Francisco.
REASONABLE OCCUPANCY SCENARIO
As indicated in Chapter 3 (Project Description), full development under the proposed Project
is referred to as "buildout." Although the Proj ect intends to accommodate up to potentially
eight (8) different land use types (within Buildings I through 5), as permitted in the M-I
zone, the actual mix of tenants is unknown. Therefore, for purposes of CEQA, this chapter
utilizes the Reasonable Occupancy Scenario identified in Table I of Appendix F, and which
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
has been slightly adjusted from that presented in Chapter 3 (Project Description), in order to
account for and analyze the potential for occupancy by higher water consuming or
wastewater generating land uses.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following thresholds for measuring a Project's environmental impacts are based upon
CEQA Guidelines:
I. Would the Project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
2. Would the Project require substantial expansion or alteration of the City's water or
wastewater treatment and collection facilities of which would cause significant
environmental effects?
3. Would the Proj ect require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would result in
significant environmental effects?
4. Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
5. Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
6. Would the Project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs?
7. Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
8. Would the Project violate applicable federal, state and local statutes and regulations
relating to energy standards and/or would energy consumption increases resulting from
the Project trigger the need or expanded off-site energy facilities?
INCREASE IN WASTEWATER FLOWS
Impact Util-l: Wastewater Generation and Infrastructure Capacity. The Project
would contribute wastewater to the WQCP system, which has adequate
treatment capacity. The line and facilities conveying Project wastewater
are adequately sized to accommodate increased flows. However, the
Project would utilize an existing 24-inch sewer line currently impeded by
sediment and sewage. Therefore, the Project would have a potentially
PAGE 11-6 CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 11: UTILITIES
significant impact relative to increased wastewater flows.
As indicated in the Wet Utility Capacity Study by Hydroconsult Engineers (see Appendix F,
Table 2), the Project's estimated wastewater flows would average approximately 85,000
gallons per day (gpd). With a peaking factor of 3 and an assumed 1/1 rate of 5%, this would
result in peak flows from the Project of approximately 267,700 gpd or 0.414 cubic feet per
second (cfs). The existing wastewater flows from the existing utilized warehouse building
space are conservatively estimated at approximately 0.080 cfs, resulting in a net increase in
peak flow of 0.334 cfs8 The proposed Project does not include specific plans for graywater
recycling, on-site treatment, or any other method that would reduce its wastewater flows to
the municipal system.
The Proj ect would contribute both domestic sewage and industrial wastewater to the City of
South San Francisco's municipal sewer system. It would have two waste disposal systems (a
domestic sewer system and an industrial waste system) that would ultimately combine into
one sewer line. The domestic sewer system would be used for discharges from restrooms,
break rooms and other similar areas, while the industrial waste system would collect
wastewater from laboratory sinks, fume hoods, floor drains, autoclaves, glass washers and
other similar equipment. An outdoor sampling port would be located in the industrial waste
system before the connection to the combined sewer but after any necessary pre-treatment
on-site to enable monitoring by the City of South San Francisco.
. Wastewater flows from Building 6 would be conveyed on-site in a new 6-inch sewer,
discharging to an existing northerly flowing 8-inch diameter sewer located in an
easement just east of San Mateo Avenue. Projected increases in peak daily sewage flows
in this 8-inch line, as a result of the Project, are estimated to be approximately 0.001 cfs,
a negligible increase.
. Wastewater flows from Buildings I through 5 would discharge to a different location, the
easterly flowing existing 8-inch diameter sewer, which discharges into the 24-inch
diameter sewer in the manhole behind 310 Shaw Road. Projected increases in peak daily
sewage flows in this 24-inch line, as a result of the Project, are estimated to be
approximately 0.333 cfs.
There are approximately nine other existing connections to the 24-inch diameter sewer other
than the Project9 Combined, these existing users equate to approximately 850,000 square
feet of building floor area. Assuming 75% building coverage by lot area (i.e., 25% parking),
there is approximately 640,000 gross square feet (gsf) of existing building floor area
contributing flows to the 24-inch sewer. Using the City's conservative estimate of 400
gallons per day (gpd) per 1000 gsf and a peaking factor of three (3), these existing
8 Wet Utility Capacity Study, by Hydroconsult Engineers, Inc., dated May 1, 2009.
9 Ibid.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
connections are contributing an estimated peak flow of approximately 1.28 cfs to the 24-inch
diameter sewer.
Adding the projected net increase in peak flow to this line from the Project (approximately
0.333 cfs) to the existing flows totals approximately 1.61 cfs peak flow to the 24-inch sewer.
These existing and with-Project flows represent approximately 12% of the capacity of this
24-inch sewer line, which is estimated at 13.3 cfs. While there is adequate capacity in offsite
sewers to accommodate the increase in flows resulting from the Project, the existing 24-inch
sewer, to which Buildings I through 5 will discharge, is partially impeded by sediment and
sewage.
Mitigation Measure
Util-l:
Sewer Line Repair and/or Replacement. In the event that the City of
San Bruno Public Works Director, in consultation with the City of
South San Francisco Public Works Director, reasonably determines the
Project's wastewater may degrade or further degrade the condition of
the existing sanitary sewer line, the Project applicant, in consultation
with the City of San Bruno and the City of South San Francisco, shall
participate in any necessary repairs and/or replacement of the exiting
24-inch sanitary sewer line to accommodate the Project's wastewater.
The City of San Bruno Public Works Director shall determine the
extent to which such repairs or replacement is required.
Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce the impact of Project
wastewater to a level of less than significant through repair and/or replacement of a sewer
line segment, thereby enabling adequate and functioning wastewater infrastructure.
Additionally, the installation of this line would not result in any additional significant
impacts beyond those already identified in the EIR. This approximately 840 linear foot
segment of sewer line occurs in an urbanized environment consisting of asphalt and concrete
parking lots behind and between existing buildings.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Wastewater flows from the proposed Project would include both domestic sewage and
industrial wastes. The industrial wastewater at the Project site would be collected separately
from the domestic sewage, and a sampling port would be installed in the industrial sewer line
in accordance with the San Francisco-San Bruno WQCP Pretreatment Program. After the
monitoring point, both wastewaters would be combined and routed through the City's
sanitary sewers to the WQCP. The WQCP treats wastewater to secondary levels and
discharges effiuent to the San Francisco Bay in accordance with RWQCB Waste Discharge
Requirements.
The Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) treats flows from South San Francisco, San Bruno,
and parts of Daly City and Colma. The facility also provides dechlorination and discharges
PAGE 11-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 11: UTILITIES
treated effluent from Burlingame, Millbrae, and SFO. The average dry weather flow to the
WQCP in 2008 was 9.2 million gallons per day (mgd), the average for the last five years has
been approximately 9.5 mgd. Average peak wet weather flows are 30 mgd. The WQCP has
recently been upgraded from 9 to 13 mgd in dry weather and from 35 to 62 mgd in wet
weather. South San Francisco has an allocation of WQCP capacity of 8.74 mgd, and is
currently generating 5.6 mgd. This equates to an unused allocation of 3.14 mgd available for
future growth, including the Proj ect. Therefore, since there is sufficient capacity in the
treatment plant for the additional flows from the Project, estimated at approximately 0.268
mgd, the Project would have a less than significant impact relative to wastewater treatment
capacity.
WATER SUPPLY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
The Project would lead to an increase in demand for potable water. Under the Project, the
existing I-Yz inch CWSC meter will supply drip irrigation for the Project, and the existing 8-
inch San Bruno meter will supply the domestic and fire service for the Project. Total Project
domestic water demand is estimated at 93,481 gallons per day. 10 This increase in demand for
potable water resulting from the Project can be fulfilled by the California Water Service
Company and City of San Bruno, respectively, as stated in the South San Francisco General
Plan.11 Additionally, the new demand can be accommodated with existing facilities or
planned upgrades. The Project would, therefore, have a less than significant impact on water
supplies and infrastructure with no mitigation warranted.
STORM DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE
As referenced in Chapter 7 (Hydrology), the Project would re-direct some of the existing
stormwater flows, yet would result in no increase in peak runoff from the site. The existing
drainage system in the Project vicinity is generally designed and constructed for industrial
development. Regardless, the Project will not result in an increase peak stormwater runoff
from the site. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact on storm
drainage infrastructure with no mitigation warranted.
LANDFILL CAPACITY
The Project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the Project's solid waste disposal needs, and would not require or result in construction of
landfill facilities or expansion of existing facilities nor would it impede the ability of the City
to meet the applicable federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
The Project would have a less than significant impact with no mitigation warranted.
10 Wet Utility Capacity Study, by Hydroconsult Engineers, Inc., dated May 1, 2009.
11 Page 194, City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City of South San Francisco's solid waste is transported to the Ox Mountain Landfill
Facility, which has a permit to receive waste until 2016.12 Upon expiration of the permit,
either Corinda Los Trancos will be expanded further or Apanolio Canyon will be opened for
fill. Given the large amount of space still available at Ox Mountain, and the option of
opening Apanolio Canyon after Ox Mountain is no longer available, the Project would have a
less than significant impact on solid waste service capacity with no mitigation warranted.
ENERGY
The Project would have an incremental increase in the demand for gas and electrical power
given the increase in development on the Project site. However, the Project is expected to be
served with existing capacity and would not require or result in construction of new energy
facilities or expansion of existing off-site facilities and would not violate applicable federal,
state and local statutes and regulations relating to energy standards. The Project would have a
less than significant impact relating to energy consumption with no mitigation warranted.
The Project proposes renovation of an existing building and construction of five (5) new
building for combined total of 622,048 square feet over what is currently on the Project site.
Overall, the level of energy required for a Project ofthis size and type would not be expected
to violate applicable federal, state and local statues and regulations relating to energy
standards or exceed PG&E service capacity or require new or expanded off-site facilities.
The Project would be required by the City to comply with all standards of Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations, aimed at the incorporation of energy-conserving design and
construction. PG&E infrastructure exists on the Project site, and any improvements and
extensions required to accommodate the Project would be determined in consultation with
PG&E prior to installation. As a result, although the Project would incrementally increase
energy consumption, the Project would have a less than significant impact related to the
provision of energy services.
CUMULATIVE UTILITIES IMPACTS
As discussed previously in this chapter, the Project would result in less than significant
project-level effects on the ability of the City of South San Francisco and other service
providers to effectively deliver water supply, sanitary sewer, stormwater drainage, solid
waste, and energy services to the Project site. The Project site is located in a largely built-out,
urban area where utility services are currently provided. While the proposed Project, as well
as other foreseeable projects in the area, would increase demand for utilities and service
systems, intensification of development in the area is, and has been, anticipated by the City
and service providers and the proj ect lies well within what is planned for the future capacity
ofthese systems.
12 Page 258, City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999.
PAGE 11-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 11: UTILITIES
Consequently, the increased development resulting from the Project, in conjunction with
other foreseeable development in the area, would not result in cumulative impacts on utilities
and service systems and would be considered less than significant with identified project-
level mitigation measures.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 11-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 11-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
12
CUMA TE CHANGE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the Project's potential impacts relative to global climate change.
Global climate change refers to alterations in weather features which occur across the Earth
as a whole, such as temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global
temperatures are modulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases, such as water vapor,
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. These gases allow sunlight into the Earth's
atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping into outer space, thus altering the
Earth's energy balance in a phenomenon called the greenhouse effect.
SETTING
GREENHOUSE GASES
Global Climate Change is a long-term substantial change in the average weather on earth, as
often measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation and temperature. The science of
global climate change is evolving and remains subject to extensive debate and uncertainties,
however, recent reports from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) have concluded that global climate change is likely due, at least partially, to
emissions of "greenhouse gasses" (GHGs) from human activity.!
Greenhouse gasses are most frequently produced by the burning of fossil fuels for
transportation and electricity generation, and include carbon dioxide (C02), methane (CH4),
nitrous oxide (N20), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), and water vapor (H20). They allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere, but trap a
portion of the outward-bound infrared radiation, thereby warming the air. The process is
similar to the effect greenhouses have in raising the internal temperature, hence the name
greenhouse gases.
Greenhouse gases have varying global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is the potential
1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group I: The Physical Basis of Climate Change,
http://ipcc-wgl.ucar.edu/wgliwg1-report.html, website accessed July 2,2007.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 12-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects
of a gas over a specified time horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas
relative to a reference gas. Because it contributes to over 80% of U. S. greenhouse gas
emissions, carbon dioxide is the reference gas for climate change. To account for the
warming potential of greenhouse gases, greenhouse gas emissions are often quantified and
reported as CO2 equivalents (C02E). The carbon dioxide equivalent is a good way to assess
emissions because it gives weight to the GWP of the gas. Large emission sources are
reported in million metric tons of C02E (MMTC02E). A summary of the atmospheric
lifetime and GWP of selected gases is summarized in the Table 12-1 below. As shown in the
table, GWP ranges from I to 23,900.
TABLE 12-1 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS (100-YEAR TIME HORIZON)
Atmospheric Lifetime Global Warming Potential
Gas (years) (100 year time horizon)
Carbon Dioxide 50-200
Methane 12 ct 3 21
Nitrous Oxide 120 310
HFC-23 264 11700
HFC-134a 14.6 1300
HFC-152a 1.5 140
PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) 50000 6500
PFC: Hexafluoromethane (~F,) 10000 9200
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF,) 3200 23900
Source: us. EPA, Inventory of us. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (2007)
According to the 2006 California Climate Action Team Report,2 the following climate
change effects, which are based on the IPCC trends, can be expected in California over the
course ofthe next century:
. A diminishing Sierra snowpack declining by 70 percent to 90 percent, threatening the
state's water supply;
. Increasing temperatures from 8 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit under the higher emission
scenarios, leading to a 25 percent to 35 percent increase in the number of days ozone
pollution levels are exceeded in most urban areas;
2 California Environmental Protection Agency, Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and
the Legislature, March 2006.
PAGE 12-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 12: CUMATE CHANGE
. Increased vulnerability of forests due to pest infestation and increased temperatures; and
. Increased electricity demand, particularly in the hot summer months.
Additionally, health effects from global climate change may arise from temperature
increases, climate-sensitive diseases, extreme events, and air quality. There may be direct
temperature effects through increases in average temperature leading to more extreme heat
waves and less extreme cold spells. Those living in warmer climates are likely to experience
more stress and heat-related problems. Heat related problems include heat rash and heat
stroke. In addition, climate sensitive diseases may increase, such as those spread by
mosquitoes and other disease carrying insects. Those diseases include malaria, dengue fever,
yellow fever, and encephalitis. Extreme events such as flooding and hurricanes can displace
people and agriculture, which would have negative consequences. Global warming may also
contribute to air quality problems from increased frequency of smog and particulate air
pollution.
Like the science of global climate change, the law surrounding its impacts is still evolving.
Currently, neither CEQA nor the implementing Guidelines expressly require analysis of a
project's GHG emissions or impacts on global climate change. This is likely to change,
however, following the adoption of Senate Bill (SB) 97, discussed in more detail below.
Though not required under CEQA, the following analysis evaluates the proposed project's
GHG impacts.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Standards
To date, the federal government has not adopted any legislation regulating emissions of
greenhouse gases.
State Standards
The State of California has been proactive in studying the impacts of climate change. In
2005, in recognition of California's vulnerability to the effects of climate change, Governor
Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order S-3-05, which sets forth a series of target dates by
which statewide emission of greenhouse gas would be progressively reduced, as follows:
. By 2010, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels;
. By 2020, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels; and
. By 2050, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
In 2006, the State Legislature passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
(Assembly Bill No. 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 12-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
seq., or AB 32), which requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to design and
implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-
effective statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020
(representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in emissions).
CARE Early Actions
In June 2007 CARB directed staff to pursue 37 early actions for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The broad
spectrum of strategies to be developed - including a Low Carbon Fuel Standard, regulations
for refrigerants with high global warming potentials, guidance and protocols for local
governments to facilitate greenhouse gas reductions, and green ports - reflects that the
serious threat of climate change requires action as soon as possible3.
In addition to approving the 37 greenhouse gas reduction strategies, CARB directed staff to
further evaluate early action recommendations made at the June 2007 meeting, and to report
back to CARB within six months. Since the June 2007 CARB hearing, CARB staff has
evaluated all 48 recommendations submitted by several stakeholder and several internally-
generated staff ideas and published the Expanded List of Early Action Measures To Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration in
October 20074 Based on its additional analysis, CARB staff is recommending the expansion
of the early action list to a total of 44 measures. Nine of the strategies meet the AB 32
definition of discrete early action measures.
Discrete early action measures are measures that will be in place and enforceable by January
1,2010. The discrete early action items include: (1) a low carbon fuel standards for ethanol,
biodiesel, hydrogen, electricity, compressed natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas and biogas;
(2) restrictions on high global warming potential refrigerants; (3) landfill methane capture,
(4) Smartway truck efficiency; (5) port electrification; (6) reduction of perfluorocarbons from
the semiconductor industry; (7) reduction of propellants in consumer products; (8) tire
inflation; and (9) sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6) reductions from non-electricity sector. The entire
list of early action strategies is shown in Table 12-2 below.
In total, the 44 recommended early actions have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by at least 42 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (C02) equivalent (MMTC02E)
emissions by 2020, representing about 25% of the estimated reductions needed by 20205
The 44 measures are in the sectors of fuels, transportation, forestry, agriculture, education,
3 California Air Resources Board, September 2007, Draft List of Early Action Measures To Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.
4 California Air Resources Board, October 2007, Expanded List of Early Action Measures To Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.
5 Ibid.
PAGE 12-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 12: CLIMATE CHANGE
energy efficiency, commercial, solid waste, cement, oil and gas, electricity, and fire
suppression. The 2020 target reductions are currently estimated to be 174 MMTC02E6
CARB has approved a 1990 emissions inventory and 2020 limit of 427 MMTC02E.7
In addition to identifying early actions to reduce greenhouse gases, CARB has also
developed mandatory greenhouse gas reporting regulations pursuant to requirements of AB
32. The regulations will require reporting for facilities that make up the bulk of the stationary
source emissions in California. The regulations identify major facilities as those that generate
more than 25,000 MMTC02E/yr. Cement plants, oil refineries, electric generating
facilities/providers, co-generation facilities, and hydrogen plants and other stationary
combustion sources that emit more than 25,000 MMTC02E/yr, make up 94 percent of the
point source CO2 emissions in California8
CARE Scoping Plan
AB 32 further requires ARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that contains the main strategies
California will use to reduce the GHGs that contribute to climate change. In June 2008, ARB
released an initial draft of the Scoping Plan9 In October 2008, ARB released a Proposed
Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan was adopted by the Air Resources Board on December II,
2008. The Scoping Plan contains a series of recommended actions to reduce GHG emissions
that will provide the framework for development of specific regulations that will be adopted
by January 2011 and enforceable by January 2012. The key elements of the Proposed
Scoping Plan include:
. Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and
appliance standards;
. Achieving a statewide renewable energy mix of33 percent;
. Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate
Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system;
. Establishing targets for transportation-related greenhouse gas emiSSIOns for regions
throughout California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets;
6 Ibid.
7 State of California Air Resources Board Res. NO.07-55 (Dec. 6, 2007); Available for download at
http://www.arb.ca.gov /cc/inventory/1990level/arb Jes07-55 _1990 _ghg_levelpdf
8 California Air Resources Board, December 6, 2007, Mandatory Reporting of California greenhouse gas
Emissions, Presentation in El Monte, California.
9 California Air Resources Board. 2008. Climate Change Draft Scoping Plan: aframeworkfor change. June
2008.
CENTRLlM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 12-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
. Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies,
including California's clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low
Carbon Fuel Standard; and
. Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global
warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State's long
term commitment to AB 32 implementation.
TABLE 12-2: RECOMMENDED AB32 GREENHOUSE GAS MEASURES
ID# Sector Strategy Name ID# Sector Strategy Name
SF 6 reductions from the 000-
1 Fuels Above Ground Storage Tanks 23 Commercial electric sector
Diesel- Offroad equipment
2 Transportation (non-agricultural) 24 Transportation Tire inflation program
3 Forestry Forestry protocol endorsement 25 Transportation Cool automobile paints
4 Transportation Diesel- Port trucks 26 Cement Cement (A): Blended cements
Diesel- Vessel main engine Cement (B): Energy efficiency of
5 Transportation fuel specifications 27 Cement California cement facilities
Diesel- Commercial harbor Ban on HFC release from Motor
6 Transportation craft 28 Transportation Vehicle AC service / dismantling
Diesel- Off-road equipment
7 Transportation Green ports 29 Transportation (agricultural)
Manure management (methane Add AC leak tightness test and
8 Agriculture digester protocol) 30 Transportation repair to Smog Check
Local Gov. Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) reduction guidance / Research on GHG reductions
9 Education protocols 31 Agriculture from nitrogen land applications
Business GHG reduction Specifications for commercial
10 Education guidance / protocols 32 Commercial refrigeration
Reduction in venting / leaks from
11 Energy Efficiency Cool communities program 33 Oil and Gas oil and gas systems
Reduce high Global Warming
Potential (GWP) GHGs in Requirement of low-GWP GHGs
12 Commercial products 34 Transportation for ne\V Motor Vehicle ACs
Reduction ofPFCs from Hybridization of medium and
13 Commercial semiconductor industry 35 Transportation heavy-duty diesel vehicles
Reduction of SF 6 in electricity
14 Transportation SmartWaytruck efficiency 36 Electricity generation
Low Carbon Fuel Standard High GWP refrigerant tracking,
15 Transportation (LCFS) 37 Commercial reporting and recovery program
Reduction ofHFC-134a from
DIY Motor Vehicle AC Foam recovery / destruction
16 Transportation servicing 38 Commercial program
Alternative suppressants in fire
17 Waste Improved landfill gas capture 39 Fire Suppression protection systems
Gasoline dispenser hose Strengthen light-duty vehicle
18 Fuels replacement 40 Transportation standards
Truck stop electrification with
19 Fuels Portable outboard marine tanks 41 Transportation incentives for truckers
Standards for off-cycle driving
20 Transportation conditions 42 Transportation Diesel- Vessel speed reductions
Diesel- Privately owned on- Transportation refrigeration -
21 Transportation road trucks 43 Transportation electric standby
Electrification of stationary
22 Transportation Anti-idling enforcement 44 Agriculture agricultural engines
Source: California Air Resources Board, October 2007, Expanded List of Early Action Measures To Reduce Greenhouse Gas
Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.
PAGE 12-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 12: CLIMATE CHANGE
Senate Bill 97
Senate Bill 97 (SB 97), enacted in 2007, amends the CEQA statute to direct the California
Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop draft CEQA guidelines for the mitigation
of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions by July I, 2009. It
also directs the Resources Agency to certify and adopt these CEQA guidelines by January I,
2010. On April 13, 2009, OPR submitted to the Secretary for Natural Resources its proposed
amendments to the CEQA guidelines for greenhouse gas emissions, as required by Senate
Bill 97.
The draft CEQA guidelines for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, which have not
been adopted at the time this DEIR was published, grant lead agencies discretion to establish
thresholds of significance for GHG emissions, but require agencies to make a good-faith
effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of
greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. The guidelines further direct lead
agencies to consider feasible means of mitigating GHG emissions, which measures may
include existing plans or mitigation programs, existing project features or design elements, or
other off-site measures.
OPR CEQA and Climate Change Technical Advisory
In June 2008, OPR released a technical advisory document providing a recommended
approach to addressing climate change in CEQA documents. It recommends that lead
agencies develop an approach that follows three basic steps for analysis: (I) identify and
quantify GHG emissions; (2) assess the significance of the impact on climate change; and (3)
if the impact is significant, identify mitigation measures and/or alternatives to reduce the
impact to a less than significant level. OPR recommends that lead agencies undertake a good-
faith effort, based on available scientific and technical information, to estimate GHG
emissions from a proj ect.
OPR specifically identifies vehicle traffic, energy consumption, water usage, and
construction as potential sources of GHG emissions. OPR recognizes that establishing a
threshold of significance for GHG emissions is "perhaps the most difficult part of the climate
change analysis," and has asked ARB technical staff to recommend a statewide threshold of
significance for GHG emissions. While this statewide threshold is pending, OPR
recommends that lead agencies "undertake a project-by-project analysis, consistent with
available guidance and current CEQA practice" to determine the significance of impacts.
The Technical Advisory also notes that while "climate change is ultimately a cumulative
impact, not every individual project that emits GHGs must necessarily be found to contribute
to a significant cumulative impact on the environment." Most importantly, OPR advises that
a significance threshold of no new GHG emissions is not required. OPR recognizes that a
significance standard can be qualitative or quantitative. If a lead agency determines a project
will have a significant impact due to GHG emissions, it should consider alternatives or
mitigation measures to reduce or offset project emissions.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 12-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The OPR Technical Advisory notes that the most difficult part of a climate change analysis is
the determination of significance since there are no established regulatory thresholds for
GHGs from the State, air quality management districts or any other sources. Until the
issuance of amended CEQA Guidelines addressing GHG impacts (scheduled for release in
January 2010), the determination of a GHG threshold is left to the lead agency.
On October 24, 2008, ARB staff released a document entitled Preliminary Draft Staff
Proposal - Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for GHGs
under CEQA. 10 This Preliminary Draft document contains guidelines for the development of
significance thresholds for certain types of projects. The draft proposal identifies types of
approaches, but does not contain defined standards. For residential projects, the proposal
includes a mixture of undefined performance standards for energy use, water use, waste and
transportation, and an unspecified quantitative threshold for the amount of emissions below
which impacts would be considered less than significant.
At this time, the Preliminary Draft is out for public review and comment. ARB held a public
workshop to receive to public comments in December 2008. It is unknown if OPR will
include any ARB recommendations on significance thresholds in its proposed revisions to the
CEQA Guidelines. It also is unknown if the Resources Agency will ultimately adopt the
ARB-proposed thresholds when and ifthey are finalized.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
As discussed above, at this time there are no adopted statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas
emission impacts, but this will be addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 ("SB
97"), which was enacted in 2007. SB 97 requires that OPR to develop CEQA guidelines for
the effects and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. The guidelines will not be available
until after OPR fulfills the deadline of July I, 2009 to draft the new greenhouse gas
guidelines, and the State Resources Agency will thereafter have until January I, 2010 to
certify and adopt the regulations. At the time of this DEIR's publication, the State Resources
Agency had not certified and adopted the regulations.
Although there is currently no adopted threshold to evaluate potential GHG impacts for this
Project, the Project would be considered to have a significant impact if it would conflict with
or obstruct implementation of greenhouse gas reduction measures under AB 32 and other
state regulations. Three types of analyses are used to determine whether the project could be
in conflict with the State measures for reducing greenhouse gas emissions:
1. Whether the Project conflicts with or obstructs implementation of CARB's 44
10 See ARB website (http://www.opLca.gov/ceqa/pdfsiPrelim_Draft_ StafC Proposal_IO-24-08.pdf).
PAGE 12-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 12: CLIMATE CHANGE
early action strategies.
The Project would not, by nature of its expected land use, associated activities,
and existing, built-out context, result in greenhouse gases falling under the
sectors and action items listed in Table 12-1 above. Most of the early action
strategies pertain to other land use types (e.g., agriculture, cement facilities),
regulation or standard changes (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard), new
regulatory agency educational programs (e.g., local government and business
GHG reduction protocols), or new technologies or products (e.g., hybridization of
medium and heavy-duty vehicles). Despite the Project's inapplicability to many
ARB early action strategies, Mitigation Measure Air-3a would, however, achieve
the substantive content of ARE early action strategy No. 22 (Anti-idling
Enforcement). Therefore, given the above, no conflict would result.
2. Whether the Project's volume of emissions trigger the need to report greenhouse
gas emissions to the state (i.e., emissions of at least 25,000 metric tons of
C02E/yr)11. As noted above the 25,000 metric ton limit identifies the large
stationary point sources in California that make up 94 percent of the stationary
emissions. If a Project's total emissions are below this limit, its total emissions are
equivalent in volume to the smaller projects in California that as a group only
make up six percent of all stationary emissions.
The Project's estimated yearly emissions of CO2 are 6,497.55 ton/2 This figure
is well below the reduction state goal and reporting limit for major facilities. Not
surprisingly, the Project does not constitute a "major facility" that is a large
stationary point source of emissions.
3. Whether elements of the Project, recommended mitigation measures, and required
City policies and requirements that contribute to the efficiency of the Project and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Most projects will include project components
and/or mitigation measures that may not be intended to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, but will nonetheless have this effect. Similarly, many City policies and
requirements, such as traffic demand management programs, may also operate to
improve the efficiency and reduce emissions associated with the project. An
analysis of a project's impact on climate change should consider such elements,
measures, and requirements.
As discussed in the Air Quality and Traffic chapters of this document, the Project
includes a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan. The TDM Plan,
required by City Ordinance for the life of the Project, is required to achieve a
11
The State of California has not provided guidance as to quantitative significance thresholds for assessing the
impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change and global warming concerns. Nothing in the CEQA
Guidelines directly addresses this issue.
See Appendix C, URBEMIS 2007 emission calculations.
12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 12-9
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
30% alternative transportation mode-use by tenant employees. This would serve
to reduce emissions related to employee vehicle use commuting to and from work.
Additionally, the enhanced measures to reduce construction exhaust (Jvfitigated
Measure Air-i) would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions resulting from, for
example, the use of alternative fuels, electrical service for powered equipment
and reduced diesel engine idling times frames.
Because the project would not conflict with or obstruct achievement of ARB's early action
strategies, would not exceed, or even approach, the threshold for mandatory emissions
reporting, and would incorporate a number of project elements, mitigation measures, and
City requirements that would operate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the project would
have a less-than-significant impact on climate change.
PAGE 12-10
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
13
AL lERNA liVES
INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines, 1970, as amended,
Section 15126.6) require an EIR to include a discussion of a reasonable range of alternatives
to the proposed Project. The CEQA Guidelines also require that the EIR explain why specific
project alternatives considered at one time in developing the project proposal were rejected in
favor ofthe proposed Project. The selection of alternatives is to be guided by the provision of
reasonable choices and the promotion of informed decision making and public participation.
An EIR need not evaluate alternatives that would have effects that cannot be determined or
for which implementation would be remote and speculative.
The CEQA Guidelines also require that the EIR specifically evaluate a "No Project"
alternative and that an "environmentally superior" alternative be identified (Section 15126.6
[e]). The proposed Project is described in Chapter 3 of this EIR (Project Description) and its'
environmental effects are addressed in the trailing Chapters 4 through 12. This chapter
transitions to a discussion ofthe following two alternatives:
. No Proiect Alternative - Retention of the Project site in its current state, as articulated in
the existing setting discussion of Chapter 3 (Project Description). In summary, this
includes: (a) private, off-site parking facility serving patrons of the San Francisco
International Airport; and (b) 77,477 sq. ft. of floor area, within an existing 571,748 sq.ft.
single-story building, occupied by the United States Postal Service (USPS) year round.
. Reduced Intensitv Alternative - Remodel of existing Building I including use of its entire
approximate 571,748 square feet of floor area, elimination of proposed new Building
Nos. I through 5, and construction of proposed new Building No.6 including 9,100
square feet of floor area.
These alternatives were selected based on the following factors:
. The extent to which the alternative would accomplish most of the basic project
objectives;
. The extent to which the alternative would avoid or lessen any of the identified significant
environmental effects ofthe project (discussed in Chapters 4 through II);
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
. The potential feasibility ofthe alternative (as discussed in this Chapter); and
. The extent to which the alternative contributes to a "reasonable range" of alternatives
necessary to permit a reasoned choice.
The proposed Proj ect results in modification and expansion of an existing land use that is, in
both the before and after situations, compliant with both the City's General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance. For this reason, alternative locations are not considered in this analysis. Alternate
locations could not accomplish the city's adopted land use policy direction for the
Lindenville planning sub-area.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
CEQA requires the analysis of alternatives that would feasibly attain "most of the basic
objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects
of the project.,,1 Therefore, the Project's stated objectives can be used as a metric against
which an alternative can be measured when determining overall feasibility. 2
CEQA requires the evaluation of a proposed Project to address impacts to the physical
environment. Economic and social effects can be analyzed only as one link in a chain of
cause and effect from a proposed decision (e.g., physical changes caused, in turn, buy
economic and social changes)3 However, economic viability can be considered when
determining the feasibility of a Project alternative4 Applicant objectives are often expressed
in terms of economic viability. Therefore, economic viability, as expressed in the Project
objectives, can be considered among the factors for accepting or rejecting a considered
alternative.
The following are applicant and city objectives that are fulfilled by the proposed Project (also
outlined on Page 3-9 of this document). Alternatives will be evaluated in part based on their
ability to meet these objectives.
1. Upgrade the existing outdated warehouse/distribution site for use as a modernized
warehouse/distribution and light industrial site that can serve the San Francisco
Peninsula.
2. Generate an option for non-conforming uses in other South San Francisco locations to
relocate, freeing up valuable Bio- Tech development potential elsewhere.
1 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6 (a)
2 Ibid, Section 15126.6 (a)
3 Ibid., Section 15131.
4 Ibid, Section 15126.6(1)(1).
PAGE 13-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
3. Develop a modernized Project that provides for continued operation of an older industrial
building with warehousing/distribution services and light industrial uses consistent with
the M-I Zoning and Mixed Industrial General Plan designation for the site.
4. Create a Project that generates long-term employment opportunities for residents of the
City of South San Francisco, as well as short-term construction jobs.
5. Enhance the appearance of an existing property with high quality design that will
improve the streetscape and visual quality along San Mateo Boulevard.
6. Generate revenue that will contribute to the City's fiscal health.
7. Attract new small businesses to the area by providing modern small space in the new
buildings.
8. Improve existing storm water management through landscaping to improve water quality.
9. Create a pedestrian-friendly environment throughout the site with landscape buffers,
trees, and seating areas.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Development of the proposed Project would result in significant or potentially significant
impacts to the following resources (before mitigation):
. Air Quality
. Geology and Soils
. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
. Hydrology
. Noise
. Transportation and Circulation
Most of the potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels
through incorporation of mitigation measures.
The following analysis presents the alternative that was considered for the proposed Project.
The alternative is examined for its ability to reduce environmental impacts relative to the
proposed Project, feasibility of implementation, and ability to meet most basic Project
objectives.
The two alternatives considered in this EIR would all have the same or only slightly lessened
impacts on Traffic and Circulation and Air Quality than the proposed Proj ect. Impacts in the
other topic areas of Aesthetics, Geology and Soils, Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Utilities
would be the same or minimally reduced by these alternatives. Table 13-3 at the end of this
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Chapter shows a summary comparison of the impacts of these alternatives, while a more
detailed discussion of each alternative is provided below.
NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Description
Under the No Project Alternative, the Project site would remain as it is today, with one
existing one-story building totaling 571,748 square feet providing for a warehouse and
distribution land use and a separate airport parking lot. The No Project Alternative assumes
the proposed Project would not be approved. While it is possible the site will be redeveloped
at some future point even if a project does not proceed at this time, there is no reason to
believe this would happen in the near-term or that new development would necessarily be
more intensive than the existing development. Therefore, the No Project Alternative
presumes the site would remain in its current state.
Impact Analvsis
The No Project Alternative would not involve any change to the Project site, either in terms
of physical changes or increased occupancy of existing floor area within Building I, and so
would not introduce any new environmental impacts. The impacts associated with the
existing Project site constitute the baseline for evaluation in this EIR (See Page 3-1 to 3-4).
Therefore, this baseline situation results in no new impacts.
However, leaving the site in its current state would avoid all construction-related impacts as
demolition, grading, and construction. Because the No Project Alternative would not involve
modifications to the existing developed site condition, it would not improve landscaping to
levels aesthetically consistent with other modern development in the area and as required in
applicable land use regulations.
TABLE 13-1. TRIP GENERATION - No PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Occupied Building Square Footage Daily Trips
Project 624,048 5,510
No Project Alternative 77,477 276
Notes: See Chapter 10; Traffic, Tnp GeneratIOn Table 10-5. No reductIOns from the TDM program are shown for tlllS companson as
TDM reductions are targeted at peak hours rather than daily rates. Trips from the off-site airport parking facilities are not included
since the ITE Trip Generation Manual provides no method for estimating total daily trips.
PAGE 13-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
Abilitv to Accomplish Proiect Obiectives
The No Project Alternative would not change the existing condition of the site, and so would
not meet any of the Project's basic objectives to the same degree as the proposed Project. The
No Project Alternative would not upgrade or expand existing warehouse and distribution
uses, might provide for different land uses consistent with the site's existing zoning, and
would not accomplish General Plan policy to, "Provide for continued operation of older
industrial and service commercial businesses at specific locations.,,5 Similarly, the No
Project Alternative would not fulfill General Plan policy to, "Ensure that a full range of
industrial uses continue to be permitted as conforming uses on sites designated as Mixed
Industrial in the General Plan,,,6 nor would it provide new jobs or increased revenues. This
alternative would also prevent the establishment of additional landscaping and design
improvements that are being proposed for the site by the Project applicant to further meet the
city-wide design guidelines.
REDUCED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Description
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is a measurement of the intensity of development calculated by
dividing the total square footage ofthe building by the total square footage ofthe site. A one-
story building that covers 100% of a site would have an FAR of I as would a two-story
building that covers only 50% of a site. This analysis considers a reduced FAR ofthe Project.
Under this alternative, the Project's FAR would be reduced from the currently proposed 0.57
FAR for a total 624,048 square feet of building space, to an FAR of 0.53 for a total square
580,848 square feet of building space. This Alternative represents the retention of existing
Building I and construction of the proposed, new Building 6. This Alternative also includes
removal of proposed new Buildings I through 5 for a total FAR reduction of 7% as compared
to the proposed Project.
Under this alternative the 571,748 sq.ft. of floor area of existing Building I would become
fully occupied by: (I) 343,048 sq. ft. of General Light Industrial; and (2) 228,699 sq.ft. of
Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light. Building 6 would be constructed and occupied,
as contemplated under the proposed Project, as follows: (I) 1,500 sq. ft. of Eating and
Drinking Establislunents (Convenience and Limited); (2) 1,000 sq.ft. of Convenience Sales;
and (3) 6,600 sq.ft. of Business and Professional Services.
Impact Analvsis
The impact analysis below focuses on those impacts that were determined to be potentially
5 City of South San Francisco, General Plan, Policy 2-G-4.
6 City of South San Francisco, General Plan, Policy 3.2-1-1.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
significant under the proposed Project. Less than significant impacts are discussed only if
implementation ofthe alternative will substantially increase the impact.
Impact Summarv
Reduced development intensity proposed under this Alternative would produce only slightly
fewer vehicle trips and less air pollutant emissions. However, the Alternative's traffic levels
would not be sufficiently reduced reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Rather, like
the proposed Proj ect, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would also result in significant and
unavoidnble impacts relative to cumulative air quality and transportation and circulations.
Reduced square footage would result in a shorter construction phase so a reduced impact
related to construction noise and diesel emissions from construction vehicles. Reduced
square footage would also be expected to result in a reduced number of workers/level of
operations so would translate to a reduction in the operational use of hazardous materials and
potential for hazardous materials-related impacts. A reduction in the number of workers on
site would also slightly reduce impacts related to geological events that could pose a danger
to people as there would be fewer people on site.
Overall, this Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed Project.
Air Quality
While the building size would be reduced under this Alternative, the footprint of the
buildings would be expected to remain the same. Therefore, this Alternative would result in
the same or similar air quality impacts related to construction activities at the site as the
proposed Project and mitigation measure Air-I would be required to reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level.
Because this Alternative would result in only slightly fewer vehicle trips to the Project site
than the proposed Project, air quality impacts associated with vehicle trips would only be
slightly less than those identified under the proposed Project.
The Project's maximum total daily emissions would occur during the winter are estimated at
40.66 pounds per day (Ibs/day) for ROG, 112.43 Ibs/day for NOx, and 52.87 Ibs/day for
PMlO. The Project maximum total yearly emissions are estimated at 7.11 pounds per day
(Ibs/day) for ROG, 17.22 Ibs/day for NOx, and 9.64 Ibs/day for PMlO. URBEMIS 2007
(version 9.2.4) model estimates for this Alternative's worst case daily winter emission results
in amounts of39.25 Ibs./day for ROG, 110.65 Ibs./day for NOx, and 52.18 Ibs./day for PMlO.
Yearly emission estimates equal 6.85 tons/year for ROG, 16.94 tons/year for NOx, and 9.52
tons/year for PMlO. NOx emissions for both the proposed Project and Reduced Intensity
Alternative are above the threshold of significance.
As with the proposed Project, the ability of Mitigation Measures Air-3a, Air-3b to reduce
impacts below the threshold of significance can not be determined with certainty. Therefore,
PAGE 13-6
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
for cumulative air quality impacts, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would also result in a
significant and unavoidable impact.
Geology and Soils
Impacts to the exposure of people and/or structures to strong seismic groundshaking and the
effects of liquefaction, densification, and settlement would be slightly reduced under this
Alternative as compared to the proposed Project due to the fact that fewer people would be
employed at the Project site, thereby slightly reducing the risk of human injury. Mitigation
measures Geo-Ia, Geo-I b and Geo-Ic would be required to reduce these impacts to less than
significant levels.
Impacts related to increases in erosion during the construction phase of the Project and the
potential for differential settlement due to unstable soils would be the same as those
described for the proposed Project. It is assumed that while there would be less new square
footage constructed under this Alternative, the footprint of the Project would not
substantially change. As a result, no decreases in the potential for erosion or the exposure of
structures to differential settlements would be realized by this Alternative. Mitigations Geo-
2a, Geo-2b, Geo-3 and Geo-4 would be required to reduce these impacts to less than
significant levels.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impacts related to the potential for accidental upset, release, and environmental
contamination of hazardous materials during proj ect operation, and the potential impacts on
nearby sensitive receptors would be slightly reduced under this Alternative as compared to
the proposed Project due to the fact that reduction in building size would reduce industrial
activities on site with fewer employees and decreased use of hazardous materials. Mitigation
measures Haz-Ia through Haz-If and Haz-2b would be required to reduce impacts to less-
than-significant levels.
Similar to the proposed Project, this Alternative would result in impacts related to
construction such as release of hazardous materials from structure materials during
demolition, fugitive contaminated dust during grading and construction, potential contact
with contaminated soils and groundwater, and the potential impacts on the nearby children's
center. It is assumed that while there would be less square footage constructed under this
Alternative, the footprint of the buildings would not change. Therefore, hazardous materials
impacts related to construction would remain the same as with the proposed Project with the
following mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels:
Haz-2a, Haz-2c, Haz-3a and Haz-3b.
Hydrology
While the square footage on the Project site under this Alternative would be reduced by
approximately 7%, the project footprint would not substantially change under this
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-7
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Alternative. As a result, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in the same or similar
impacts to hydrology and water quality as those described for the proposed Project.
Mitigations measures Hydro-I through Hydro-2b would be required to reduce impacts to
less-than-significant levels.
Land Use and Planning
Similar to the proposed Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would not result in any
significant land use impacts.
Noise
Because the total square footage of the Project would be reduced by approximately 7% under
this alternative, it is expected that construction phases would be shortened, thereby
decreasing the duration of construction-related noise in the Project area and resulting in
somewhat reduced construction-related noise impacts compared to those described for the
proposed Project. Mitigation measure Noise-I would result in this Alternative having, like
the Project, a less-than-significant impact.
Transportation and Circulation
Similar to the proposed Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in new
vehicle trips in the vicinity. The number of trips generated under this Alternative would still
result in an increase over the threshold of 100 new vehicle trips, triggering the requirement of
a TDM Plan.
TABLE 13-2. TRIP GENERATION - REDUCED FLOOR AREA ALTERNATIVE
Building Square Footage Daily Trips
Project 624,048 5,510
Reduced Intensity Alternative 580,848 5,445
Notes:
1 See Chapter 11; Traffic, Trip Generation Table IO-xx. No reductions from the IDM program are shown for this comparison as
IDM reductions are targeted at peak hours rather than daily rates.
As shown in Table 13-2 above, when compared to the proposed Project, would result in only
slightly reduced trips. Consequently, this alternative also would not reduce traffic levels
sufficiently to reduce any cumulative off-site traffic impacts to a less than significant level.
Therefore, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in significant and unavoidable
impacts identical to the proposed Proj ect.
Utilities and Service Systems
As the Reduced Intensity Alternative would reduce the total square footage of the project,
PAGE 13-8
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
fewer employees would be accommodated at the Project site. This reduction in employees
would translate to reduced wastewater flows relative to the proposed Project. Similarly, the
reduction in floor area would translate to slightly less water consuming and wastewater
generating land uses. Therefore, impacts related to increased wastewater flows would be
somewhat reduced under the Alternative as compared to the Project. Thus, this Alternative
would, like the propose Project, result in an impact that is less-than-significant with
implementation of Mitigation Measure Util-l.
Abilitv to Accomplish Proiect Obiectives
Like the proposed Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would support all Project
objectives albeit to a lesser degree. Furthered Project objectives include an increase in quality
jobs, additional tax and fee generation, and the upgrading and provision of warehousing and
industrial jobs in the Lindenville Area. However, this Alternative would not, as discussed
above, result in the avoidance or lessening of the Project's identified significant impacts to a
less than significant level.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The CEQA Guidelines require that an environmentally superior alternative to the proposed
project be identified in an EIR. The CEQA Guidelines also require that "if the
environmentally superior alternative is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify
an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(e)(2)). In general, the environmentally superior alternative minimizes
adverse impacts to the environment, while still achieving the basic project objectives.
Consideration of the alternatives to the proposed Project reveals that the environmentally
superior alternative would be the No Project Alternative, since it would result in no new
environmental impacts.
However, in the absence of the No Proj ect Alternative, the Reduced Intensity Alternative
would be designated as environmentally superior. It would slightly reduce the project's air
emissions while fulfilling the Project Objectives albeit to lesser degree as the proposed
Project. A reduction in vehicle trips and related air emissions would be achieved by project
design, through provision of a reduced building area in conjunction with a TDM Plan.
Table 13-3, on the following pages, provides a summary comparison of the environmental
impacts (after mitigation) between the proposed Project and the alternatives.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-9
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
TABLE 13-3. COMPARISON OF IMPACTS, PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES
Level of
Significance
Impact Relative to the Proposed
Project
Potential Environmental Impacts
Proposed
Project
No Project
Alternative
Reduced
Intensity
Alternative
Impact Air-I: Construction Dust and Exhaust.
Construction activity involves a high potential for the
emission of air pollutants. Construction activities would
generate exhaust emissions from vehicles/equipment and LTS - s
fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect
local air quality. This would be a potentially significant
impact.
Impact Air-2: Carbon Monoxide. Mobile emissions
generated by Project traffic would increase carbon
monoxide concentrations at intersections in the Project
vicinity. However, these increases would be below LTS
significance thresholds of the Bay Area Air Quality - s
Management District so would be considered a less-than-
significant impact.
Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The
proposed Project would contribute to regional air quality
emissions but not exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds LTS - -
for ROG, NOx and PMIO. This would be considered a less
than significant impact.
Impact Air-4: Future Emissions Near Sensitive
Receptors. Although not proposed at this time, the Project
could include stationary combustion equipment or
laboratory facilities that emit air pollution. These sources
could emit small amOlmts of toxic air contaminants with LTS - -
the potential to affect sensitive receptors. This impact,
however, would be reduced to a less-than-significant level
with standard BAAQMD permitting requirements.
Impact Air-5: Construction-Related Diesel Odors.
During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles
and equipment in use on the site would create odors. These
odors would be temporary and not likely to be noticeable
much beyond the Project site's bOlllldaries. As the potential
for diesel odor impacts would not affect a substantial LTS - -
amount of people, this impact is less-than-significant and
is further reduced by Measures to Reduce Construction
Exhaust in Mitigation Measure Air-I. Therefore, no
mitigation is required.
LTS ~ Less Than Significant A "-" (minus sign) signifies a minimal reduction in the
impact under the Alternative as compared to the proposed
S = Significant Project.
An "s" (lower-case s) signifies the impact would be the A "+" (plus sign) would have signified an increase in the
same or similar under the Alternative as compared to the impact under the Alternative as compared to the proposed
proposed Project. Project, but was not applicable to items in this table.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 1 3-1 0
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
Impact Air-6: Operational-Related Objectionable
Odors. \Vhile it is not known at this time what specific
businesses will occupy the completed Project, these
businesses will be required to conform to applicable air LTS - -
quality regulations in order to ensure that any odors
resulting from operations will remain at a less-than-
significant level. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Impact Geo-l: Geologic Hazards. According to CEQA
guidelines, exposure of people or structures to major
geological hazards is a significant adverse impact. The
primary seismic hazards affecting the Project are strong LTS - s
seismic grOlllld shaking and potentially liquefiable fill
soils, each of which are considered a potentially significant
impact.
Impact Geo-2: Soil Erosion. The Project would involve
mass grading in a location that could facilitate storrnwater-
related soil transfer to the San Francisco Bay. This could
potentially impact vicinity drainages such as Cohna Creek LTS - s
and the San Francisco Bay. This would be a potentially
significant impact during and following site construction
activities.
Impact Geo-3: Unstable Soils. The Project site is
potentially llllderlain by fill soils of unknown quality,
which may be expansive, prone to settlement, or LTS - s
susceptible to seismically induced liquefaction or dynamic
densification. This is apotentially significant impact.
Impact Geo-4: Potentially Expansive and Compressible
Soils. The Project site is potentially llllderlain by fill soils
of unknown quality. These materials may contain
expansive clay minerals subject to shrinking and swelling LTS
in response to changes in water content. These expansive - S
soils could cause damage to fOlllldations, concrete slabs,
and pavements. The impact due to expansive soils is
potentially significant.
Impact Haz-l: Routine transportation, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials. The risk of accidental upset and
environmental contamination from routine transport,
storage, use and disposal of hazardous and potentially LTS - -
hazardous materials to the public and environment is a
potentially significant impact.
LTS ~ Less Than Significant A "-" (minus sign) signifies a minimal reduction in the
impact llllder the Alternative as compared to the proposed
S = Significant Project.
An "s" (lower-case s) signifies the impact would be the A "+" (plus sign) would have signified an increase in the
same or similar llllder the Alternative as compared to the impact llllder the Alternative as compared to the proposed
proposed Project. Project, but was not applicable to items in this table.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-11
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Impact Haz-2: Accidental Hazardous Materials
Release. According to previous investigations, petrolelllTI
products and volatile organic compOllllds (VOCs) are
present in site soils. During demolition operations
hazardous materials could be released from structures at
the site or from the llllderlying soils. Following
construction, operations at the proposed facilities are LTS - -
expected to represent a continuing threat to the
enviromnent through accidental release of hazardous
materials since the site is proposed for industrial uses,
where use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials
may occur. This represents a potentially significant impact.
Impact Haz-3: Exposure to contaminated soil and
groundwater. During demolition and construction,
workers could be exposed to contaminated soil and
grOlllldwater. Disturbance of the subsurface also increases LTS
the potential for contamination to spread through surface - -
water runoff, creation of seepage pathways, and through
wind blown dust. These impacts are potentially significant.
Impact Hydro-I: Erosion and Sedimentation On- or
Off-site. Construction operations associated with the
Project would present a threat of soil erosion from soil LTS - s
disturbance by subjecting unprotected bare soil areas to the
erosion forces of rlllloff. This is a potentially significant
impact.
Impact Hydro-2: Non-Point Source Pollutants. The
project will involve an intensification ofland-use by
increasing floor area and nlllTIber of occupants, and will
add potential new sources of non-point source pollutants to LTS - s
the area. This may increase non-point source pollution to
receiving waters. This is a potentially significant impact.
ImpactNoise-l: Construction Related Noise. Project
construction could result in temporary short-term noise
increases due to the operation of heavy equipment. This LTS - -
would be a potentially significant impact associated with
Project development.
Impact Traf-l: Project Trip Generation Exceeds 100
Trips During Peak Hours. The Project would generate
more than 100 net new trips during the AM and PM peak
hours. The San Mateo City/Collllty Association of
Govermnents (CICAG) Agency Guidelines for the
implementation of the 2003 Draft Congestion
Management Program ("CICAG Guidelines") specifies LTS - s
that local jurisdictions must ensure that the developer
and/or tenants will mitigate all new peak hour trips
(including the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by
the development. This would be a significant impact.
LTS ~ Less Than Significant A "-" (minus sign) signifies a minimal reduction in the
impact under the Alternative as compared to the proposed
S = Significant Project.
An "s" (lower-case s) signifies the impact would be the A "+" (plus sign) would have signified an increase in the
same or similar llllder the Alternative as compared to the impact under the Alternative as compared to the proposed
proposed Project. Project, but was not applicable to items in this table.
PAGE 12-12
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection
Impacts. Under clllTIulative (Year 2020) conditions, the
addition of Project traffic would result in significant
impacts to three study intersections during the PM peak LTS S
hour: a) East Grand Avenue I Airport Boulevard; b) San -
Bnmo Avenue IUS 101 SB Ramps; and c) San Mateo
Avenue I Airport Boulevard. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection
Impacts. Under clllTIulative (Year 2030) conditions, the
addition of Project traffic would result in significant
impacts to two study intersections during the AM peak
hour: a) East Grand Avenue I Airport Boulevard; and b)
San Bnmo Avenue I US 101 northbOlllld ramps.
Additionally, Project traffic would result in significant LTS - s
impacts to three study intersections during the PM peak
hour: c) East Grand Avenue I Airport Boulevard; d) San
Mateo Avenue I Airport Boulevard; and e) San Bnmo
Avenue I US 101 SOUthbOlllld ramps. This would be a
potentially significant impact.
Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project's
circulation plan will not reduce the number oflanes, add or
modify on-street parking, or result in other actions that
will affect arterial segment performance. However, the
circulation plan could potentially cause mid-block LTS S
queuing, driveway maneuvers resulting in delays, or other -
impacts that could result in roadway segments operating at
a level of service that violates the adopted LOS standard
set for the nearest intersection. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
Impact Util-l: Wastewater Generation and
Infrastructure Capacity. The Project would contribute
wastewater to the WQCP system, which has adequate
treatment capacity. The line and facilities conveying
Project wastewater are adequately sized to accommodate LTS S
increased flows. However, the Project would utilize an -
existing 24-inch sewer line currently impeded by sediment
and sewage. Therefore, the Project would have a
potentially significant impact relative to increased
wastewater flows.
LTS ~ Less Than Significant A "-" (minus sign) signifies a minimal reduction in the
impact llllder the Alternative as compared to the proposed
S = Significant Project.
An "s" (lower-case s) signifies the impact would be the A "+" (plus sign) would have signified an increase in the
same or similar llllder the Alternative as compared to the impact llllder the Alternative as compared to the proposed
proposed Project. Project, but was not applicable to items in this table.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-13
CHAPTER 1 3 : ALTERNATIVES
This page intentionally left blank
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 13-14
14
REFERENCES
REPORT PREPARERS
Lamphier - Gregory
1944 Embarcadero
Oakland, Ca. 94606
510-535-6690
Lamphier-Gregory
(Primary Report Preparers)
Scott Gregory, President
Kevin Colin, Associate Planner
DKS Transportation Group
(Transportation and Circulation)
Mark Spencer, Principal
Paul Stanis, Associate Transportation Engineer
Ouesta Engineering, Inc.
Jeffrey H. Peters, Principal
Will N. Hopkins, Engineering Geologist
REFERENCES
Association of Bay Area Governments, www.abag.ca.gov. accessed January 2009.
Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP), 2007. Alternative Approaches to
Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, 1996 (Revised
1999).
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Annual Bay Area Air Quality Summaries, 2003-
2008.
Bonilla, M.G., Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Francisco South 7.5' Quadrangle and
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 14-1
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Part of the Hunters Point 7.5' Quadrangle, San Francisco Bay Area, California: A digital
database, USGS Open-file Report 98-354, 1998.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2008. CEQA and Climate
Change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act.
California Air Resources Board, September 2007a. Draft List of Early Action Measures To
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.
California Air Resources Board, October 2007b. Expanded List of Early Action Measures To
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.
California Air Resources Board, December 6, 2007c. Mandatory Reporting of California
greenhouse gas Emissions, Presentation in EI Monte, California.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Earthquake Fault Zone Map of the South San
Francisco Quadrangle, 1982.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent
Areas, 1994.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Evaluation Reports Prepared Under the
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, CGS CD 2002-01, 2002.
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), New Development and Redevelopment
Handbook,2003.
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), California Storm water BMP
Handbook, Industrial and Commercial, January 2003.
Caltrans, Traffic Volumes on California State Highways, 2007 (http://traffic-
counts.dot.ca.gov/).
City of South San Francisco, prepared by Dyett & Bhatia, South San Francisco General
Plan: Existing Conditions and Planning Issues, 1997.
City of South San Francisco, prepared by Dyett & Bhatia, City of South San Francisco
GeneralPlan, adopted October 1999.
City of South San Francisco, prepared by Lamphier-Gregory, 213 East Grand A venue
Project Environmental Impact Report, Draft May 2008, Final September 2008.
City of South San Francisco, prepared by Lamphier-Gregory, 249 East Grand A venue
Project Environmental Impact Report, Draft December 2005, Final June 2006.
PAGE 14-2
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
CHAPTER 14: REFERENCES
City of South San Francisco and Crane Transportation Group, Terrabay Phase 3 Final EIR,
October 2006.
City of South San Francisco, prepared by EIP Associates and Korve Engineering, Genentech
Corporate Facilities Master Plan Draft EIR, December 2006.
DKS Associates, Inc., Centrum Logistics Traffic Impact Analysis, dated April 13, 2009.
Knudsen, K.L., Noleer, 1S., Sowers, 1M., Lettis, W.R., Quaternary Geology and
Liquefaction Susceptibility, San Francisco, California I: I 00, 000 Quadrangle: A Digital
Database, USGS Open-File Report 97-715,1997.
Land America Assessment Corporation, Seismic Damageability Assessment Probable
Maximum Loss Report- SFO Logistics Center, 1070 San Mateo Avenue South, South San
Francisco, CA 94080, July 9, 2008.
Land America Commercial Services, Environmental Site Assessment - SFO Logistics 1070
and 1080 San Mateo Avenue South, South San Francisco, California 94080, July II, 2008.
Land America Commercial Services, Property Condition Report - SFO Logistics 1070 and
1080 San Mateo Avenue South, South San Francisco, California 94080, July 9, 2008.
Phillips, Steven P., Scott N. Hamlin, Eugene B. Yates, Geohydrology, Water Quality, and
Estimation of Ground-Water Recharge in San Francisco, California 1987-92. US Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4019, 1993.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Screening for Environmental
Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, 2003
Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000.
Treadwell & Rollo, Geotechnical Feasibility Study - 1070 San Mateo Avenue, South San
Francisco, California, January 23, 2009.
Wentworth, C.M., Graham, S.E., Pike, R.1, Beukelman, G.S., Ramsey, D.W., Barron, A.D.,
San Francisco Bay Region Landslide Folio Part C - Summary Distribution of Slides and
Earthflows in the San Francisco Bay Region, California, USGS Open File Report 97-745 C,
1997.
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, Earthquake Probabilities in the San
Francisco Bay Region, 1001-2031, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-214.
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
PAGE 14-3
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
This page intentionally left blank
PAGE 14-4
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
ApPENDIX A
NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP) AND
COMMENTS
Notice of Preparation
Form B
Notice of Preparation
To: State Clearinghouse
P.O, Box 3044
F City of South San Francisco
rom:
P.O. Box 711
Sacramento, CA 95812-36\14re3s)
South San Francisco, c!:('~lI:M':\
Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental impact Report
The City of South San Francisco
will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental
impact repOlt for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and
content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in
connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the ErR prepared by our agency when
considering your pennit or other approval for the project.
The project description, location, and the potential environmental efIects are contained in the attached
materials. A copy of the Initial Study ( lil! is 0 is not) attached.
Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not
later than 30 days atter receipt of this notice.
Please send your response to Sieve Carlson, Senior Planner
shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency.
at the address
T Centrum Logistics Project
Project itle:
Project Applicant, if any: Centrum Properties, Inc.
Date
2J~ .Jmu DC;
"~4'~
Title. c}\:ll ''bR '~fI) a
Telephone 6SD. g7~ g 556
Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375,
26
Notice of Preparation
Form B
Notice of Preparation
To: State Clearinghouse
P.O, Box 3044
F City of South San Francisco
rom:
P.O. Box 711
Sacramento, CA 95812-36\14re3s)
South San Francisco, c!:('~lI:M':\
Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental impact Report
The City of South San Francisco
will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental
impact repOlt for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and
content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in
connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the ErR prepared by our agency when
considering your pennit or other approval for the project.
The project description, location, and the potential environmental efIects are contained in the attached
materials. A copy of the Initial Study ( lil! is 0 is not) attached.
Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not
later than 30 days atter receipt of this notice.
Please send your response to Sieve Carlson, Senior Planner
shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency.
at the address
T Centrum Logistics Project
Project itle:
Project Applicant, if any: Centrum Properties, Inc.
Date
2J~ .Jmu DC;
"~4'~
Title. c}\:ll ''bR '~fI) a
Telephone 6SD. g7~ g 556
Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375,
26
ApPENDIX B
INITIAL STUDY
CENTRUM LOGISTICS PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: To BE ASSIGNED
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO e
315 M!\PLEAVENUE
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94083
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INITIAL STUDY .....................................................................................................................................................1
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION ... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ..... ..... 1
Proj ect Entitlements....................................................................................................................... ......................................... 1
Lead 1
Contact Pers on .............................................................................................................................. .......................................... 1
Proj ect Sponsor......................................................................................................................... ............................................... 1
Proj ect Location........................................................................................................................ ............................................... 2
General Plan Designation..................................................................................................................... .................................. 2
Zoning .............................................................................................................................. ........................................................ 2
Description of Proj ect ............................................................................................................................... ............................. 2
SurrOlmding Land Uses and Setting. ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ........ 3
LEAD AGENCY DETERlvUNATION .. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... .......... 29
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ...........................................................................................................................30
AESTHETI CS ............................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 31
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES.. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......... 32
AIR QUALITy........................................................................................................................ ............................................................. 33
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ....... 35
CULTURAL REso URCES .............................................................................................................................. ...................................... 37
GEOLOGY AND SOILS.. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ....... 39
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS J'v1ATERIALS .. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... 41
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... .......... 43
LAND USE AND PLANNING ... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ........ 45
MINERAL RESOURCES ... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46
NOISE......................................................................................................................... ........................................................................ 47
POPULA TION AND HOUSING....................................................................................................................... ................................... 48
PUBLIC SERVICES ... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ........ 49
RECREATION .............................................................................................................................. ....................................................... 51
TRANSPORT A TI ON /TRAFFI C ............................................................................................................................... ........................... 52
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.. ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......... 54
J'v1ANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................................................. 56
RE PORT PREP ARERS .............................................................................................................................. ..................................... 57
RE FERENCES .............................................................................................................................. .................................................. 57
INITIAL STUDY
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
As submitted, the Project requires a Use Permit, Variance, Design Review, and a Transportation
Dernand Managernent (TDM) Plan in accordance with the City of South San Francisco Municipal
Code requirernents. The project sponsor also proposes a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to rnerge
three parcels.
The Project site's abutting public right-of-way at San Mateo Avenue is located within the
incorporated limits of the City of San Bruno. Therefore, construction within this right-of-way
including, for example, modification to the driveway and utility connections, will require review and
approval of the City of San Bruno.
LEAD AGENCY
City of South San Francisco
Department of Econornic and Cornrnunity Developrnent
315 Maple Avenue (Street Address)
P.O. Box 711 (Mailing Address)
South San Francisco, CA 94083
CONTACT PERSON
Steve Carlson, Senior Planner
City of South San Francisco
650-877-8535 or steve.carlson@ssf.net
PROJECT SPONSOR
Centrum Properties, Inc.
225 W. Hubbard Street, 4'" Floor
Chicago, IL 60610
Contact: Michael McLean (312-279-1390 or MMclean@centrurnproperties.com)
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 1
PROJECT LOCATION
The Project site is located at 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue, in the City of South San Francisco,
in the County of San Mateo. This L-shaped site consists of three adjoining parcels totaling 25.87
acres. The site has lirnited street frontage as it is situated behind a nurnber of cornrnercial properties
along San Mateo Avenue. The site is approximately 650 feet west of Highway 101 and
approxirnately 500 feet north of Interstate 380. The Project site has Assessor's Parcel Nurnbers
(APN) of 015-163-230 and 015-163-120.
The Project site location is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 below.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Mixed Industrial
ZONING
Industrial District (M-l)
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Existing Setting
Two land uses currently occur at the Project site, each on a separate parcel.
The first land use includes off-site parking intended for patrons of the San Francisco International
Airport. This private facility, with an address of 1070 San Mateo Avenue, includes an approxirnate
975 square foot (sq. ft.), single-story building, entry canopy, several attendant stations and an open
surface parking lot with 670 parking spaces.
The second land use consists of warehouse and distribution within a portion of an existing 571,748
sq.ft. single-story building. This building interior has been divided into ten (10) units with three (3)
office spaces. Associated concrete and paved parking and driveway areas surround the building.
Current building occupants include the General Services Adrninistration, U.S. Postal Service (USPS)
and the Drug Enforcernent Administration (DEA) for the storage of office equiprnent and seized
property, and the processing and shiprnent of rnail. This occurs within two of the ten rnentioned
tenant spaces and illIlounts to an approximate floor area of 237,477 square feetl
A third parcel (rnentioned under the Project Entitlernents section above) concerns an abutting
railroad spur presently not utilized for good transport.
160,000 square feet are used on a part-time basis by the u.s. Postal Service for a five-month period.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 2
Physical Changes
The Project would rnerge the existing three parcels into a single parcel via a Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map. The existing 571,748 square foot (sq. ft.) single-story building (Building 1) would be converted
for rnulti-tenant use with thirty-one (31) truck trailer loading docks. Proposed uses include those
identified under South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.30.020(c) (i.e., Custorn
Manufacturing, Food Preparation, General Industrial, Laundry Services, Light Manufacturing,
Personal Storage, Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light, Wholesaling, Storage and
Distribution: Heavy).
The existing entry canopy and approxirnate 975 sq.ft. building would be dernolished. Existing
parking areas would be reconfigured into a single, interconnected, at-grade parking lot with spaces
for 670 passenger vehicles and trucks. Also, five new single-story buildings would be constructed.
Proposed new buildings would have floor areas as follows: (Building 1) 9,600 sq.ft.; (Building 2)
12,000 sq. ft.; (Building 3) 12,000 sq.ft.; (Building 4) 9,6000 sq.ft.; and (Building 5) 9,100 sq. ft. The
total new proposed building floor area equals 52,300 sq.ft. Building 2 through 5 would be used in a
rnanner consistent with Building 1 described above. The proposed new Building 6 fronting San
Mateo Avenue would be utilized as convenience retail space. The proposed rnaxirnurn building
heights of these new buildings range between 25 feet 10 inches to 28 feet 4 inches.
SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING
The proposed Project is located in the "Lindenville" planning sub-area which, beginning in the late
1950s, was redeveloped with warehouses, light industry, and single-fillIlily housing in the Mayfair
Village subdivision. Today, warehousing and distribution and light industrial uses are dorninant;
storage, automobile repair, manufacturing, and small business parks are also present. Lindenville is
the city's only industrial area west of U.S. 101.
North: Areas imrnediately adjacent to the north include several rnulti-tenant industrial buildings with
Shaw Road addresses.
South: Areas imrnediately adjacent to the south include the Sky Park Indoor Airport Parking facility,
with Interstate Highway 380 directly beyond and overhead.
East: Areas irnrnediately adjacent to the east include nurnerous rnulti-tenant industrial buildings
with Shaw Road addresses.
West: Areas imrnediately adjacent to the west of the Property include the frontage street San Mateo
Avenue and a nurnber of industrial buildings with addresses ranging frorn 1090-1220 San
Mateo Avenue, including auto repair facilities and a dry-cleaning plant (McNevin) facility.
Beyond San Mateo Avenue are more industrial, auto repair and servicing facilities.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 3
, ,
'1
'--.
I Brisbane
Colma
Son Bruno Mountoin
County Pork
L.
-~=-~';
San
Francisco
Bay
f!.Vf)'
-.'"
I
1/4
1/2
'EB
WALNUT
CREEK
MILES
~"
RAMON
SAN LORENZO
HAYWARD
FREMONT
SANTA
N
SAN
JOSE
ShaWR~C:::
Q)
.;c
seoti S\
,'/;'0
S"L'3'te
\0~e~
Walnut Street
San Bruno Ave E
City of San Bruno
Figure 2 - Project Location
City of South
San Francisco
y;
,I
\
\
\
\
\
San Francisco
I nternationa I
Airport
SOURCE: Lamphier-Gregory
This page intentionally left blank
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 6
-'~oii-l
.1iiI!iMiI-i~g~flnii!llll
I Figure 4. Existing Building Floor Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 9
~
~1
~ .Iitl..ol........
lr4mtifti~ - ~L
_ll:~1lI~~
Il
; I
I
M: l!W:i
urJ.!.lII
j
'I
Figure 5. Dernolition Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 10
,
PJlII :1
~1
tllm .a.t.....-.:mtiIi
~ ....
WIIm~~Ii!I""""'1d
I
I Figure 6. Building 1 Floor Plan.
.... Jbf
.h:!l~K..M M::I~l.HI ~
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE11
~
"
---11
III __L__.!!IH!ll
kmDt,i&1II_-'~-.'h
_tB1mg~_ I
I
l
I
I
\
-
I Figure 7. Buildings 2 & 5 Floor Plan.
,
_0
~
..,.,"""
1
'I
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 12
~
~1
JiIfij ~
~ -..
~iI~MIia~&JdIt
J
PJlII :,1
\
I Figure 8. Buildings 3 & 4 Floor Plan.
- -
.IW.o! ~
Ml>!~~1tiJ M:!I~lJ!l ~
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 13
~
,
_0
~
_ ~__!!IIM
~'_'_AL.
"IIiiI!:l!Iiillmilfilf!l!liiIri:lIm'Jd
c
~ B1UilU1L!I..!!! Ill'{ .I::IJ!!Jl J!I ~
'I
Figure 9. Building 6 Floor Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 14
---11
III _____.!!II.J1I
kmDt,i&1II_-'~-..h
_t~l1I~d
"
I I "I
Figure 10. Building 1 Roof Plan.
~
..,.,"""
1
"
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 15
JiIfij ~
~ -..
~iI~MIia~&JdIt
....~ll ~
Ml>!~~1tiJ M:!I~lJ!l ~
II
I Figure 11. Buildings 2 & 5 Roof Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 16
~
~1
~
If -~
~ .lJto....l~.....A..
~j&\dQ--~_....
_t~l!Ij~_
.:~
t'J.!.lII
j
II
Figure 12. Buildings 3 & 4 Roof Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 17
~
~
JlkJ -<"I~..ll>Ld!h
~'_'_AL.
"IIiiI!:l!Iiillmilfilf!l!liiIri:lIm'Jd
Figure 13. Building 6 Roof Plan.
.:~
t'J.!.lII
j
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 18
~
I Figure 14. Building 1 Elevations.
~ .lJto....l.....&.
~~--~_...
_t~I!I'I1i!~_ I
"
-~
t'J.!.lII
j
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 19
~
~1
, ,
I Figure 15. Building 1 Elevations.
~ lItl...l......oiI..
~iktittlW\--~.N
_lt~~jlJilltll_
" ,
"
'!! M: l!W:i
I'"~
urJ.!.lII
j
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 20
~
~1
I Figure 16. Building 1 Elevations.
~ lItl...l......oiI..
~iktittlW\--~.N
_lt~~jlJilltll_
"
~!
M: l!W:i
urJ.!.lII
j
'I
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 21
~
~1
,
Figure 17. Building 1 Elevations.
~ lItl...l......oiI..
~iktittlW\--~.N
.lC~!!!!i~d
~!
~
um
II
~
M: l!W:i
urJ.!.lII
j
'I
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 22
~1
~ lItl....l~....ililo..
~iktittlW\_-~~
.lC~!!lj~_
I Figure 18. Buildings 2 & 5 Elevations.
-
"
III
- ~I'"
,
M: l!W:i
urJ.!.lII
j
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 23
~
~1
I Figure 19. Building 6 Elevations.
"
~ lItl....l~....ililo..
~iktittlW\--~.N
_lt~~!IlliAmd
III
- ~I'"
f
M: l!W:i
urJ.!.lII
j
II
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 24
~
..
I
...
I~.~
~1
- -~-
IHi!i'll!.J ~It.otr\tl_~.li.
~_'~il';,,~iI~a
&
.g~l~t
............,..,,~...'I<-
I I
.........
-....All..... ..
;
...
i
I
--
I Figure 20. Conceptual Grading Plan.
U,l'lD...:lIlJ
~~
IlM1~M) JJ:!I
I
I
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 25
~1
- -~-
~.mI~ltl_~.~
"~mil~_
..
I
...
I
..
..
I
ill
....
~u I~ ~L
Iwl' [1111
"
Itl
".....,,.................-....-,,,.,.........-.......--...,,-....-
-
I
! Figure 21. Conceptual Grading Plan.
l
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 26
~
I till "'~.
....- . -
M
Figure 22. Landscape Plan.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 27
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 28
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Environmental factors which rnay be affected by the Project, as defIned by the California
Environmental Quality Act are listed alphabetically below. Factors marked with a tilled in block (III)
were determined to be potentially affected by the Project, involving at least one impact that has been
identifIed as a "Potentially Significant Impact", as indicated in the Environmental Evaluation Form
Checklist and related discussion that follows. Unmarked factors (D) were determined to not be
significantly affected by the Project, based on discussion provided in the Checklist.
,= Aesthetics
= Agriculture Resources
ill Air Quality
= Biological Resources
= Cultural Resources
II Geology and Soils
III Hazards and Hazardous Materials
II Hydrology and Water Quality
II Land Use and Planning
J Mineral Resources
II Noise
= Population and Housing
= Public Services
[ Recreation
I!lI Transportation and Circulation
II Utilities and Service Systems
LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environrnent, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect ou the environment,
there "will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made
by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECL\RATION will
be prepared.
L I find that the proposed Project lYIA Y have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL INfPACT REPORT is required.
I fmd that the proposed Project ]'vIA Y have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless lnitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier docurnent pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) lias
been addressed by mitigation measures based on dle earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it rnust analyze only the
effects that rernain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project, an
EIR Addendmll is required.
~~
Steve Carlson, Senior Planner
Z;6JIi)J eft
Date
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 29
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
The Checklist portion of the Initial Study begins below, with explanations of each CEQA issue
topic. A "no impad' response indicates that no action that would have an adverse effect on the
environrnent would occur due to the Project. A "less than significant' response indicates that while
there may be potential for an environmental impact, there are standard procedures or regulations in
place, or other features of the Project as proposed, which would lirnit the extent of this irnpact to a
level of "less than significant." Responses that indicate that the irnpact of the Project would be "less than
significant with mitigatiod' indicate that mitigation measures, identified in the subsequent discussion,
will be required as a condition of Project approval in order to effectively reduce potential Project-
related environrnental effects to a level of "less than significant." A ''potentially significant impact" response
indicates that further analysis is required to determine the extent of the potential impact and identifY
any appropriate rnitigation. Topics with a ''potentially significant impact" response will be analyzed in an
Environrnental Irnpact Report to be subsequently prepared for the Project.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 30
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
I. AESTHETICS - Would the Project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic [ J']
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, [ J']
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual [ J']
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or [ J']
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
a) Scenic Vistas. The Project site is not located within a scenic vista. Therefore, the Project would
result in no impact concerning scenic vistas.
b) Scenic Highways. Although the Project is located nearby two highways (i.e., U.S. 101 and
Interstate 280), neither is designated scenic highway. The Project is not visible frorn any other
highway. Therefore, the Project would result in no impact to state scenic highways.
c) Visual Character. The proposed Project would involve the dernolition of one rnodestly sized
structure, construction of five new building, landscape improvements, and color/architectural
changes to the existing warehouse building. The proposed Project would not result in developrnent
incongruous to existing and proposed developrnent in the surrounding area. The developrnent
would, therefore, have no impact, since it would not substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
d) Light and Glare. The proposed Project, even with its new buildings, would result in rninirnal
additional light ernanating frorn structures, parking areas and other sources. New lighting would,
however, be required to conform to standards' that limit the arnount of light that can spill over to
other properties, through the use of downcast lighting fIxtures. Therefore, the Project would result
in a less than significant irnpact concerning a new source of substantial light or glare.
2 City of South San Francisco, Zoning Ordinance, Section 20.74.130.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 31
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation
and Site Assessment Mode (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional mode
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. Would the Project.
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conlict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use?
[ J']
[ J']
[ J']
a) Prime Farmland. No designated agricultural land is located on the Project site.
b) Williamson Act Contracts. Noland on the Project site is under a Williarnson Act contract.
c) Farmland Conversion. Noland on the Project site is used for agricultural purposes.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 32
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance
criteria estatJished by the applicatJe air quality
management or air poll uti on control district may be
reied upon to make the fdlovving determinations.
Would the Project:
a) Conlict with or obstruct implementation of the [ J']
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [ J']
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net [ J']
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
Project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial [ J']
pdl utant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a [ J']
substantial number of people?
a) Air Quality Plan Conflict. The local air quality agency is the Bay Area Air Quality Managernent
District (BAAQMD). The District enforces rules and regulations regarding air pollution sources and
is the prirnary agency preparing the regional air quality plans rnandated under state and federal law.
The San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan is the current ozone air quality plan required under
the Federal Clean Air Act. The state rnandated regional air quality plan is the Bay Area 2000 Clean
Air Plan. A project would be judged to conflict with or obstruct implernentation of the regional air
quality plan if it would be inconsistent with the growth assurnptions, in terms of population,
ernployrnent or regional growth in Vehicle Miles Traveled.
The illIlount of developrnent associated with the proposed Project is consistent with the intensity of
developrnent for the Project site foreseen in the South San Francisco General Plan, which was
published in 1999. The site is located in an area designated as Mixed Industrial in the General Plan.
The General Plan provides for a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between 0.40 to 0.60 for the Mixed
Industrial land use designation when a use includes a low ernployrnent intensity such as wholesaling,
and warehouse and distribution businesses3 At 0.57, the Project is within the planned FAR range.
The Project site's proposed use is consistent with the city's Zoning Ordinance.
The city's General Plan designations, and future land use types and intensities, would have been
taken into account during preparation of the BAAQMD's rnost recent Clean Air Plan, released in
City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, Table 2.2-1, Footnote 7.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 33
2000. The Project would therefore be consistent with the growth assurnptions, ernployrnent growth
and growth in vehicle rniles travelled as assurned in the Clean Air Plan and have a less than
significant impact on the Clean Air Plan.
b), c) Air Quality Standards and Criteria Pollutants. Air quality irnpacts due to construction
activity could be significant, due to airborne particulate matter and construction vehicle emissions.
The EIR will evaluate this impact and will recornrnend rnitigation rneasures to reduce impacts to the
extent feasible.
Concerning potential long-term irnpacts, the Project would attract rnotor vehicles generating
emissions. Mobile emissions, such as those associated with vehicles, would incrementally increase
regional vehicular ernissions. The EIR will deterrnine whether Project-related stationary and rnobile
emissions would exceed significance thresholds and, if so, recommend mitigation measures to
reduce irnpacts to the extent feasible. Additionally, the EIR will address the Project's Greenhouse
Gas Ernissions including their corresponding effect upon Global Climate Change.
d) Sensitive Receptors. For CEQA purposes, the BAAQMD defines a sensitive receptor as a
location where human populations, especially children, seniors, and sick persons are located and
where there is reasonable expectation of continuous human exposure. Three sensitive receptors are
located in the Project site vicinity, including: (1) Bell Air School located approxirnately 0.75 rniles
south of the Project site at 450 yd Avenue, San Bruno; (2) the Decrnina MAllen School located
approximately 0.75 rniles south frorn the Project site at 875 Angus Way, San Bruno; and (3) the
South San Francisco High School located approxirnately 1.0 rnile northwest of the Project site at 400
B Street, South San Francisco. The EIR will evaluate the Project's potential irnpacts on these
sensitive receptors including temporary increases in diesel particulate emissions due to operation of
heavy equipment during construction, as well as long term exposure to air emissions due to Project
operations.
e) Objectionable Odors. During construction the various diesel-powered vehicles and equiprnent
in use on the site would create odors. These odors would be ternporary and not likely to be
noticeable rnuch beyond the Project site's boundaries. The potential for diesel odor irnpacts is
therefore less than significant.
Because at this tirne it is not known exactly what type of business activity (beyond what has been
identified as warehouse and distribution) would take place at the Project site, it is not possible to
determine if the Project would result in any operational odor irnpacts. However, the Project would
be expected to conform to any applicable air quality regulations such as those found in the South
San Francisco Municipal Code including those prornulgated by the Bay Area Air Quality
Managernent District. For exarnple, SSFMC Section 20.30.040(g) requires approval of a Use Permit
before release of objectionable odors and this can also be addressed by the adoption of condition of
approvals. These rneasures would ensure that.. the project would produce" a less than significant
amount of offensive odors.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 34
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the Project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly [ J']
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional pans,
pdicies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any [ J']
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
pdicies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally [ J']
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any [ J']
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildife nursery sites?
e) Contlict with any local policies or ordinances [ J']
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
D Contlict with the provisions of an adopted [ J']
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
a) - b) Special Status Species and Habitat. The Project site does not contain special status
species habitat. The site has been developed, is either covered by buildings or pavernent, and is in an
urbanized state. The Project has no impact on special status species and habitat.
c) - d) Wetlands and Wildlife Corridors. The proposed Project site does not contain wetland
areas. It is an area that is currently developed with urban land uses. The Project has no impact on
wetlands and wildlife corridors.
e) - f) Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Project site is predorninantly covered with asphalt and
large buildings. The existing vegetation consists of residual planter areas containing ground cover,
shrubs and twenty-two (22) trees within parking lots and along the site's perirneter. Trees present
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 35
include non-native eucalyptus and sorne are large enough to qualify under the City of South San
Francisco Tree Protection Ordinance.
South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 13.30 considers any tree with at least a circurnference
of forty-eight inches or rnore when rneasured fifty-four (54) inches above natural grade in order to
be "protected." In order to remove a "protected" tree, the Planning Director must issue a permit
that includes either replacernent or payrnent of fees for future tree planting by the City. Of the
twenty-two (22) trees on the Project site, four qualify as "protected" with a circumference between
70 inches to 85 inches when rneasured frorn fifty-four (54) inches above natural grade.
Given the srnall nurnber of eucalyptus trees and the surrounding industrial land uses, very few
wildlife species would be expected to occur on the site as cornpared to other eucalyptus plantations
in less urban areas throughout the Bay Area. Therefore, given the Planning Director rnust issue a
permit for "protected" trees to be removed and, given that such permit would include replacement
plantings, the Project has a less than significant impact on the Tree Protection Ordinance or other
policies, ordinances or plans protecting biological resources.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 36
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the Project
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ J']
significance of a historical resource as defined
in SI5064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ J']
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to SI5064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique [ J']
paleontdogical resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those [ J']
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a) Historical Resources. The Project site contains two industrial buildings. The larger warehouse
structure located at 1070 San Mateo Avenue was built in approxirnately 19514 and is proposed for
exterior alteration. The srnaller structure located at 1080 San Mateo Avenue was built in
approxirnately 20055 is proposed to be dernolished.
Only the building at 1070 San Mateo Avenue would rneet the rninirnurn criteria of being 50 years old
to consider eligibility as a historic resource.' However, it is not on the City's list of designated
historic sites 7 or the list of potentially eligible historic resources under the City's Historic Marker
ProgrillIl.8 The Project, therefore, has no impact on historical resources.
b) Archaeological Resources. According to the City of South San Francisco General Plan, South
San Francisco's coastal location, and its rich history as a center of industry makes the existence of
prehistoric and historic archaeological resources likely. It is possible that buried prehistoric resources
rnay be found in the City, although currently there is insufficient data to predict that they rnay be
found at the Project site, especially because the site has been previously disturbed.
If currently unknown archaeological resources are discovered on site during construction and
grading operations, these resources shall be handled according to CEQA Section 15064.5(c), which
calls on lead agencies to refer to the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 or Section
21084.1 if the archaeological site is determined to be a historical resource. This would be a standard
condition of any Project approval so the irnpact is considered less than significant.
4 Land America, Environmental Site Assessment Report - SFO Logistics 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Awnue, Page 28, Paragraph
3, dated July 11, 2008.
5 Environmental Site Assessment, Page 29, Paragraph 1.
6 City of South San Francisco, Municipal Code Section 2.58.020(g).
7 City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, Figure 7-3.
8 City of South San Francisco, Historic Marker Program (http://ssf.net/depts/ecd/historic/marker_program.asp).
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 37
c) Geologic/Paleontological Features. There are no unique geologic or paleontological features
associated with the Project site. The Project has no impact on paleontological resources or geologic
features.
d) Human Remains. There are no known hurnan rernains that would be disturbed by the
proposed Project. As rnentioned under b) above, rnost of the Project site has already been disturbed
by urban developrnent. No formal cerneteries have been located on the Project site.
Ifhurnan rernains are found within the Project site, they will be handled according to Section 7050.5
of the Health and Safety Code or, if the rernains are Native American, Section 5097.98 of the Public
Resources Code as per CEQA Section 15064.5(d). This is a standard condition of any project
approval so the irnpact is considered less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 38
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the Project
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [ J']
deineated on the most recent Alquist-
Prido Earthquake FaultZoning Map
issued by the State Gedogist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of
a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Gedogy Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ J']
iii) Seismic-reated ground failure, including [ J']
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? [ ] [ J']
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of [ J'] [ ]
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is [ J'] [ ]
unstatJe, or that would become unstable as a
result of roadway improvements, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in [ J']
TatJe 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapatJe of adequatey supporting [ J']
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
The project sponsor is preparing a prelirninary geotechnical report that will be addressed in the
forthcorning Environrnental Irnpact Report (EIR). The City's CEQA consultant teillIl will peer
review the project sponsor's report.
a) Seismic Impacts. The Project site is located in a seisrnically active area and rnay be subject to
strong ground shaking during the lifetirne of the Project, sirnilar to all developrnent in the region.
Seisrnic shaking could induce settlernent of loose, unconsolidated sediments, and differential seisrnic
settlernent could occur on the site. Since the Project site and nearby area is nearly level, the risk frorn
slope instability rnay be assurned to be less than significant. The EIR will identify potential seisrnic
irnpacts that would affect the Project, and will recornrnend rnitigation rneasures that can be
irnplernented to reduce irnpacts to the extent feasible.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 39
b) Erosion. The Project site is predorninantly urbanized, with only a portion of the area's soils
exposed, including srnall areas used for landscaping. However, irnpacts could occur due to
construction activity that disturbs the soil if not properly protected frorn wind and rain erosion. Best
Managernent Practices (EMPs) could be used to rnitigate the potential impacts of soil erosion on the
site. Project plans include conceptual provisions for site drainage, such as up grading existing catch
basins to collect and filter debris and landscaped drainage swales in parking areas. These provisions,
including a Storrn Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Grading and Drainage Plans, rnust
be evaluated under the Permit issued to the San Mateo County by the San Francisco Bay Area
Regional Water Quality Board. The EIR will evaluate these impacts and provide rnitigation rneasures
to reduce these irnpacts to the extent feasible.
c) Unstable Soils. The Project would result in developrnent that would require grading, excavation,
or other rnodifications to the sailor geology which could increase the potential for soil instability on
the site. The EIR will provide additional description of the geologic and soils condition of the site
and recommend mitigation measures for any potential impacts.
d) Expansive Soils. A large portion of the city, defined by the General Plan as a "Lowland
Zone,,,9 is underlain by deposits of Bay rnud up to 80 feet deep in sorne places. Developrnent
hazards associated with Bay rnud fill typically include shrink-swell, settlernent, and corrosivity.
Seisrnic hazards include earthquake wave amplification and liquefaction. Developrnent in the City's
Lowland Zone, where the Project site is located, often requires engineering solutions to address soil
constraints and the increased risk of geologic and seisrnic hazard in this area. The EIR will evaluate
in rnore detail the potential irnpacts associated with expansive soils at the Project site, and will
recommend measures to mitigate these impacts.
e) Septic Tanks. The proposed Project would not involve the use of septic tanks. Proposed Project
buildings would be connected to sanitary sewer infrastructure.
9 City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, Page 246 and Figure 8-1.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 40
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS-
Would the Project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ J']
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ J']
environment through reasonatJy foreseeatJe
upset and accident conditions involving the
reease of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or hande hazardous [ J']
or acutey hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list [ J']
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a Project located within an airport land use [ J']
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a putJic airport or
public use airport, would the Project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in
the Project area?
D For a Project within the vicinity of a private [ J']
airstrip, would the Project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
Project area?
g) Impair imfJementation of or physically interfere [ J']
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk [ J']
of loss, injury or death involving wildand fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildands?
a) Transport, Use or Disposal of Hazardous Materials. Land uses at the site under the proposed
Project would involve warehouse/distribution related activities, which rnay be expected to involve
the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous rnaterials. The EIR will evaluate the extent of this
potential impact and, if identified, advance mitigation measure(s).
b) Hazardous Materials Release. A records search for the Project site determined a nurnber of
prior activities involved the use of hazardous rnaterials. The records search also revealed the Project
site's prior listing on the Cortese list, pursuant to Governrnent Code Section 65962.5 (as noted
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 41
below). Land uses proposed for the Project site rnay involve activities that would potentially lead to
hazardous rnaterials upset or accident conditions. Redeveloprnent of the site has the potential to
result in the release of hazardous rnaterials into the environrnent. The EIR will evaluate the extent of
this potential impact and recommend mitigation measures.
c) Hazardous Materials Near Schools. The Project site is not located within \/,;-rnile of a school.
The nearest school, Happy Hall Pre-School, is located approxirnately 1.25 rniles south of the Project
site at 233 Santa Inez Avenue, San Bruno. Other schools are located further away. The EIR will
confirm the distance and identifY any potential hazardous rnaterials irnpacts on pre-schools including
recommended mitigation measures.
d) Hazardous Materials List. The Project site was the location of rnany industrial activities
including, for example, warehousing, possibly chemical storage, prior underground storage tank(s),
auto disrnantling, vehicle storage, and possibly auto repair. A records search revealed the Project
site's prior listing on the Cortese list, pursuant to Governrnent Code Section 65962.5. The EIR will
review past and current uses of the site. The use and storage of hazardous rnaterials at the site will
also be reviewed and, all of which, will culrninate in the evaluation of potential irnpacts and
recommend measures to mitigate such impacts.
e) Airport Land Use Plan. The Project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Airport Land
Use Plan for the San Francisco International Airport. Cornpliance with this plan and potential
irnpacts will be analyzed in the EIR.
f) Private Airstrips. No private airstrips are located in the vicinity of the Project site. Therefore, the
Project would have no impact related to private airstrips.
g) Emergency Response Plan. Operations and/or construction activity could interfere with an
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Potential impacts and mitigation measures
will be identified in the EIR.
h) Wildland Fires. The Project site is already developed with urban land uses in an urbanized area.
Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact related to wildland fire danger.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 42
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste [ J']
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or [ J']
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table leva (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing land uses
or panned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern [ J']
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern [ J']
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner, which would result
in looding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would [ J']
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of poll uted
runoff?
D Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ J'] [ ]
g) Place housing within a 100-yearlood hazard [ ] [ J']
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
lood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 1 DO-year lood hazard area [ J']
structures, which would impede or redirect lood
lows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk [ J']
of loss, injury or death involving looding,
including looding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudlow? [ J']
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 43
a) Water Quality Standards. Demolition of one building, removal of asphalt parking areas,
grading, and other Project construction activities could increase sedimentation and increase water
quality concerns for stormwater runoff. The ElR will evaluate the extent to which water quality
would be affected, and will recommend measures to reduce the Project's impact.
b) Groundwater Supply. The Project's impact on groundwater recharge rates at the Project site
would be less than significant. A majority of the site's surface area is currently impervious, paved
over with concrete, asphalt, or covered with building structures, so no recharge currently occurs on
the site.
c) - f) Alteration of Drainage Patterns. Some localized changes in drainage patterns could occur
as a result of the Project, due to grading and excavation activities undertaken during construction.
These drainage pattern changes would be considered minor in the context of drainage patterns in
the area. However, the Project may cause site runoff changes within the Calma Creek Flood Control
Zone, a flood prone area. The ElR will evaluate the extent of this potential impact and recommend
mitigation measures.
g) - j) Flood Hazards, Seiche, Tsunami. The Project site is located outside the FEMA 100 year
flood zone.!O However, the Project site is located within the designated Calma Creek Flood Control
Zone. The Calma Creek Flood Control Zone was created in 1964 to construct flood control
facilities in Calma Creek to alleviate flooding in the City of South San Francisco. The EIR will
evaluate the Project's potential impact on flooding and recommend mitigation measures.
10 City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, Figure 8-3.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 44
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the Project
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conlict with any applicable land use plan,
pdicy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not
limited to the general pan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conlict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation pan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
[ ]
[ J']
[ J']
[ ]
[ J']
a) Divide Established Community. The Project would involve construction of a
warehouse/ distribution facility located on an already urbanized site. The Project would not divide an
established community and, therefore, no impact would result.
b) Conflict with Policies or Plans. The Project would require a Use Permit, and Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Plan as well as Design Review. The Project is consistent with the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and is expected to have no impact related to a conflict with
policies and plans. However, this will be further evaluated in the EIR.
c) Conflict with Conservation Plan. As discussed above, the Project site is situated within an
urbanized area. Consequently, neither the Project site or surrounding area are subject to a
conservation plan. Therefore, no impact would result.
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 45
~
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the Project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
dejineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
[ J']
[ J']
a), b) Mineral Resources. No mineral resources of value to the region and the residents of the
state have been identified at the Project site. The Project site has not been delineated as a locally
important mineral recovery site on the City of South San Francisco General Plan, on any specific
plan, or on any other land use plan, therefore the Project would have no impact on mineral
resources.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 46
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
XI. NOISE - Would the Project
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise [ J']
levels in excess of standards estatJished in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of [ J']
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient [ J']
noise levels in the Project vicinity above leves
existing without the Project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in [ J' ] [ ]
ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity
above levels existing without the Project?
e) For a Project located within an airport land use [ J']
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a putJic airport or
public use airport, would the Project expose
people residing or working in the Project area to
excessive noise levels?
D For a Project within the vicinity of a private [ J']
airstrip, would the Project expose peope
residing or working in the Project area to
excessive noise levels?
a), b) Excessive Noise or Vibration. During construction, noise levels at the Project site would
exceed current levels, due to the operation of construction equipment. The EIR will recommend
noise attenuation measures to be implemented during construction, in order to reduce construction
noise /vibration impacts.
c), d) Ambient Noise Levels. Current ambient noise perceived at the Project site comes mainly
from nearby automobile traffic. Ambient noise levels would increase during the Project's operation
period, due to the increase in automobile traffic traveling to and away from the site. The EIR will
analyze impacts to ambient noise levels.
e) Airport Land Use Plan. The Project site is located about 1/2-mile northwest of the San Francisco
International Airport. Flights leaving from and arriving at the airport can be heard at the Project site.
The EIR will analyze noise impacts related to airport land use to determine if future workers would
be exposed to excessive noise levels.
f) Private Airstrip. There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the Project site and, therefore, no
impact would result.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 47
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the Project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
exampe, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing esewhere?
c) Dispace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
[ J']
[ J']
[ J']
a) Substantial Population Growth. The Project would not lead to substantial population growth
although the Project would result in an incremental increase in the number of employees at the
Project site. It could be expected that some of these future employees may decide to live within the
City of South San Francisco, but their numbers would be considered to result in a less than
significant impact.
b), c) Displace People and Housing. The Project would not displace any residents or housing
units since none exist at the site.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 48
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES-
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schods?
iv) Parks?
v) Other putJic facilities?
[ J']
[ J']
[ J']
[ J']
[ J']
a)i) Fire Protection. The South San Francisco Fire Department is staffed by 79 sworn and 15 non-
sworn personnel. The department provides residents and local businesses with protection from fire,
natural disasters, hazardous materials and emergency medical incidents through direct response,
public education, code development and enforcement. The Fire Department is the only department
in San Mateo County presently providing emergency medical care via its own fire rescue
ambulances. Minimum on duty staffing is 20 persons.l1
Two South San Francisco fire stations are situated within approximately 1.5 miles of the Project site.
Station #61 is located at 480 North Canal Street, and Station #63 is located at 249 Harbor Way.
Response times to the Project site from either station would be approximately 3.99 minutes for fire
suppression personnel and approximately 4.99 minutes for emergency medical personnel. This IS
within the time frame compliant with Fire Department standards.
The Project site is not located in any of the City's fire hazard management unit areasl', and adequate
access would be possible via San Mateo Avenue. The Project's design would be required to comply
with the City's Fire Code (Chapter 15.24 of the Municipal Code) and the city Fire Marshall's code
requirements regarding on site access for emergency vehicles as is a standard condition for any
Project approval. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact on the city's fire
protection services.
11 City of South San Francisco web site (http://ssf.net/depts/fire)
12 City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, p.265
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 49
a)ii) Police Protection. The South San Francisco Police Department's jurisdictional area includes
the entire city. The Department currently has a total of 79 sworn officers and 35 civilian employees
covering a city of approximately 65,500 residents with a daytime population around 72,587 people.13
That's a ratio of 1.2 sworn officers for every one thousand residents. The Department is generally
able to respond to high priority calls within two to three minutes. These times are within the
Department's response time goals.
The Department typically works a four-beat system, but the watch supervisor has the discretion to
deploy his personnel as he sees fit to accomplish daily goals and objectives. Each beat is typically
staffed by a one officer unit with between six and nine other officers consisting of traffic, K-9,
training, float, and supervisory units available for backup and overlap.!4
It is not expected that the Project would lead to an increase in Police Department service call
response times. Though the Project would bring more people to the city, it is expected that the
proposed warehouse/distribution land use would lead to a less than significant increase in service
calls to the Police Department.
a)iii) Schools. The City of South San Francisco is served by the South San Francisco Unified
School District. It is possible that some users of the Project site would relocate to the City, thereby
generating a small student population increase. However, because the Project would not involve
construction of new residences, it is not expected that the school district would experience a
significant growth in student population. Therefore, the impact on the South San Francisco Unified
School District would be less than significant.
a)iv) Parks. The proposed Project would not place a significant demand on the City's public parks.
Though some users of the Project site would use the City's parks, this use would be considered less
than significant.
13 2000 u.s. Census, Table PHC-T-40.
14 City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999, p.268
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 50
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for
Detennination of Environmental Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. RECREATION-
a) Would the Project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accEJerated?
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
[ J']
[ J']
a), b) Recreational Facilities. The proposed Project would not place a significant demand on the
City's public parks. Though some users of the Project site could be expected to use the City's parks,
this use would not significantly increase demand for or use of recreational facilities and would be
considered less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 51
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the Project
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial [ J']
in rEJation to the existing traffic load and capacity
of the street system (Le., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a [ J']
level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, [ J']
including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design [ J']
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatitJe uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ J']
D Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ J']
g) Conlict with adopted policies, plans, or [ J']
programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
a) Traffic Increase. The Project would, when compared to the existing and historic site use, result
in a substantial increase in vehicle trips. This is attributable to the proposed use of the entire existing
building floor area totaling 571,748 square feet. 237,47715 square feet of the building is presently and
has historically been used. Also, new building floor area totaling 52,300 square feet would be added
to the Project site.
In the vicinity of the Project site, San Mateo Avenue is a two lane roadway with sufficient width to
allow on-street parking generally on both sides. However, the availability of on-street parking along
San Mateo Avenue is limited by an abundance of curb-cuts. This parking situation is also
exacerbated during business hours when commercial vehicles related to nearby warehouse or
automobile repair businesses frequently park both within and outside San Mateo Avenue travel
lanes. The nearest intersection, San Mateo Avenue and Scott Street, is not signalized.
Therefore, the level of traffic associated with the Project could be considered significant. The EIR
will evaluate this potentially significant impact.
15 160,000 square feet is utilized on a part-time basis of approximately five (5) months per year.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 52
b) Congestion Management Agency LOS Standards. Project related traffic could lead to a
decrease in Level of Service standards for the area. The EIR will further evaluate potential Levels of
Service impacts in the Project area.
c) Air Traffic Patterns. The Project would have no impact on air traffic patterns in the area since
the maximum building height is below that established by the San Francisco International Airport -
Airport Land Use Plan.
d) Design Hazards. The EIR will evaluate whether the Project would lead to any hazards resulting
from Project design features.
e) Inadequate Emergency Access. The proposed Project would have to be designed in a manner
that allows free and clear circulation for emergency vehicles that would respond to an emergency on
site. Proposed circulation patterns for the site will be evaluated in the EIR, in the context of the
need for emergency access.
f) Parking Capacity. Though the Project appears compliant with South San Francisco Municipal
Code parking requirements, he EIR will evaluate whether the proposed Project includes parking
capacity commensurate with its demand.
g) Policy, Plan Conflicts. The traffic analysis for the EIR will determine whether the proposed
Project would conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative
transportation.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 53
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the
Project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of [ J']
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new [ J']
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new [ J']
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve [ J']
the Project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater [ J']
treatment provider, which serves or may serve
the Project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the Project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
D Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted [ J']
capacity to accommodate the Project's solid
waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes [ J']
and regulations rEJated to sdid waste?
a), b) Wastewater. The proposed Project would contribute both domestic sewage and industrial
wastewater to the City of South San Francisco's municipal sewer system. The EIR will evaluate the
Project's impact on South San Francisco's wastewater facilities.
c) Storm Drainage. Periodic flooding occurs in South San Francisco, but is confined to certain
areas along Calma Creek. Calma Creek handles much of the urban runoff generated in the city;
since South San Francisco is highly urbanized, runoff levels are high and there is increased potential
for flood conditions during periods of heavy rainfall. Localized flooding is also known to occur
along the southeastern portion of the Project site and at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue and
Linden Avenue during rain events. While the Project site is not located in the vicinity of the creek
and would not be susceptible to flooding during a 100-year storm, site runoff may be within the
Calma Creek watershed. The EIR will evaluate the Project's impact on South San Francisco's storm
water drainage facilities.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 54
d) Water Supply. The Project would lead to an increase in demand for potable water provided by
CalWater. The EIR will evaluate the Project's impact on South San Francisco's water supply.
e) Wastewater Capacity. Though not expected to occur, the EIR will evaluate whether the Project
would cause the wastewater treatment plant, jointly operated by the City of San Francisco and City
of San Bruno, to exceed its capacity.
f), g) Solid Waste. The City of South San Francisco's solid waste is transported to the Ox
Mountain Landfill Facility by South San Francisco Scavenger Company, Inc. The EIR will evaluate
the Project's impact on solid waste service capacity.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 55
Environmental Factors and Focused Questions for Potentially Less Than Less Than
Detennination of Environmental Impact Significant Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE-
a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade [ J']
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wilcjife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
beow self-sustaining leves, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the Project have impacts that are [ J']
individually limited, but cumulatively
consideratJe? ("Cumulatively consideratJe"
means that the incremental effects of a Project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past Projects, the effects of
other current Projects, and the effects of
probable future Projects.)
c) Does the Project have environmental effects, [ J']
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) Environmental Quality. Project implementation could lead to development that adversely
affects the environment in terms of impacts to various CEQA issue topics, as discussed in this
Initial Study. These potential impacts will be described in the EIR, and mitigated to the extent
feasible.
b) Cumulative Impacts. It is possible that the Project could have cumulative impacts related to air
quality and traffic. These potential impacts will be described in the EIR, and mitigated to the extent
feasible.
c) Adverse Effects on Human Beings. Human beings could be affected by a variety of impacts
described above. The expectation is that most, but perhaps not all impacts will be mitigated through
the implementation of mitigation measures and adherence to applicable policies and plans. Policy
makers and decision makers will have to balance the potential benefits of the Project against
potential impacts as they consider whether to approve, modify, or reject the Project, following EIR
preparation and full public disclosure of impacts.
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 56
ApPENDIX A - REFERENCES
REPORT PREPARERS
Lamphier - Gregory
1944 Embarcadero
Oakland, Ca. 94606
510-535-6690
REFERENCES
Association of Bay Area Governments, www.aba~.ca.~ov. accessed November 2008.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, 1996 (Revised 1999).
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Annual Bay Area Air Quality Summaries, 2003-2005.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Earthquake Fault Zone Map of the South San Francisco
Quadrangle, 1982.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas,
1994.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Evaluation Reports Prepared Under the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, CGS CD 2002-01, 2002.
Land America, Environmental Site Assessment- SFO Logistics 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue, South San
Francisco, California 94080, dated July 11, 2008.
Land America, Property Condition Report - SFO Logistics 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Avenue, South San
Francisco, California 94080, dated July 9,2008.
City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan, 1999.
City of South San Francisco, Municipal Code (including Title 20, Zoning Ordinance)
INITIAL STUDY
~
PAGE 57
ApPENDIX C
AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J 81 '" 81 m m m 81 "
m <D
"2 <0 "' '" c:i ('oj
0 <D 0 <D "-
f5 '" '" <D <D
:J <D- ",- <D-
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
0 ~I 0 ~I m m '" ~I m
C- o m "- 0 m
(f) c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
-' ~I ~I ~I
E 0 " "- <D "
~ 0 <D <D 0 <D
ro 2 c:i oi o:i c:i oi
Q) C
~ Q)
(f) 0
c
0 -
(f)
C- o @I 0 @I <D '" "- @I <D
(f) Q) 0 0 0 <D 0
" c 0 c:i c:i c:i <0 c:i
('oj 0 0::
oi 'w -
c (f) ro
0 E OJ 81 <D 81 " "- "- 81 0 ro
'w c (f) m '" "- '" :8
0; w 0 D c:i <0 oi c:i '"
> ro 'w D <D '" <D "
"- :J ill '" Q)
0 c > ~ 1il
0 c - > m
('oJ <( (f) "'
E 0 E
Vl ~ z ~I c;; ~I 0; "- m ~I ('oJ
E .2 Q) ('oJ ('oJ "
Q) -2 (') c:i <0 "' c:i (j) '" Q)
-2 to ::J C'i w c
0 > ~ 15
::J CL -
Q) ro '" E
[t: ro D :;; 0
0 D >= 0
c '" (j) '"
c
ro 0 () '" ~I '" ~I <D "- '" w ~I ~ 1i)
E ~ ~ D <D " co ~ m
E E D c:i <0 "' oi z '" .8
,g '" a
:J w 0 Uj c
(fJ (i <( 0
CL (j) (j)
<( c 0 :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= '0 (j) '0 a '0 ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) Q) Q) 0 Q) "'
0 ro c c w 1il w 1il '0 z 1il :>'
(f) 0 0 .l!l
C -' Q) Z m W m <( m
E ~ 'w 'w a "' "' '" "' ro
Q) (f) (f) E -' E m w E c
E 2 E E Uj u "' u
>- c c E c 0
:;: :J C ro W W (j) " I " [t: " ~
0- () m :;; w ::J
Q) ro- ro- ro- ro- O;
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w c- c a <:L
~ 0 c (j (j Q) Q) Q) 0 (j) Q)
.;; - 0 E E w >- -' >- >- :e <( >- a
0 Q) ~ U 'in <( 'in 'in 'in "
~ E Q) Q) [t: c Z c c " W c c
~ ro () > > ::J 0 a 0 0 " [t: 0 '"
Q) 0 "'" "'" "'" Q) <( "'"
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a 0; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
<D
'"
.;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Ol
-2
::J
ro
Q)
~
(f)
c
o
C.
(f)
c
o
'i)j
(f)
E
w
u
Q)
ro
Ol
'"
E
c
::J
ro
c
o
~
ill
"-
o
ro
:J
C
C
<(
o
~
~
o
"-
Q)
[t:
ro
ill
o
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
C.
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
C
Q)
o
-
(f)
-0
Q)
o
0::
-
ro
OJ
c
o
'i)j
ill
>
-
(f)
E
Q)
-2
::J
-
ro
ro
o
c
o
~
,g
(i
"-
<(
-
c
'>
Q)
-'"
-
(f)
Ol
C
'"
ill
(fJ
u
c
ro
(f)
C
Q)
E
:J
()
o
o
-
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
-0
Q)
.0' t5
D= "<::
t)
~ (5
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
C
Q)
o
Q)
E
ro
z
-0
Q)
o
0::
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
~ ~
ro c
Q) 0
~ .~
>-E
&l w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
c
o
~
()
o
--'
-0
Q)
o
0::
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
'"
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
'"
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'i)j
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0
Ol
1il
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
ro-
Ol
>-
Q;
D-
Vl
c
o
f-
ro
"
c
c
:'S
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
-'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
o
u
><
o
z
c.?
o
[t:
JI
('oJ
'"
'"
"'
"'
"-
c:i
'"
co
c:i
o
c:i
"
'"
o
<D
ro
c:i
2
oS
Ol
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
co
r--.:
"
o
~
'"
'"
c:i
10
o
o
(0
c:i
o
co
('oj
'"
Ol
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
"
('oJ
o:i
co
('oJ
",-
"
o
('oJ
o
"'
'"
o
c:i
"-
"
"
'"
'"
"-
o:i
'"
('oJ
'"
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Ol
c.?
~
o
<ri
'"
...;r
...;f
o
~
<D
c:i
o
o
c:i
~
...;i
<D
co
'"
c:i
1i)
-'"
ro
::;;
Ol
U
C
Ol
c
~~
>
c
o
U
co
'"
'"
L(.i
o
'"
<D-
ro
'"
c;;
c:i
'"
'"
"'
'<;f
<D
oi
o
c:i
<D
o
c:i
0;
oi
"
"'
<ri
<D
('oJ
<D
('oj
~
'"
cd
"'
co
c:i
<D
"
cd
OJ
C
'(i
"-
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Ol
"-
tlj
>-
"'
Vl
Vl
'"
"-
.E
(If c
Ol 0
~ t5
c ~
.8::0 0
-.....,....(1) ()
U)'E (/)
~..O) Q)
<(:;;:::; "'0
~ E ~
o c '-'
~:::l C
"
c
'"
~ Ol
~ 0
o:1i5
Vl
"-
E
Vl
"-
E
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Ol
E
1i5
"
'6'
'"
OJ
C
"'
C
"
o
u
Ol
:0
"
o
"
Ol
"
"
"
,~
-0
c
Vl
Ol
o
o
ro
"
c
c
<(
c
o
Vl
'"
Ol
(j)
o
o
('oJ
~
Ol
>-
Vl
'Uj
>-
ro
c
<(
<D
o
o
('oJ
>
o
Z
'"
('oj
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
u
'"
E
w
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Ol
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
-'
(;
ro
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
'"
'"
c:i
'"
"'
('oJ-
Vl
"-
~
ro
-0
f-
co
"
cd
0;
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Ol
"-
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Ol
1il
[t:
"-
'co
f-
o
o
cd
;::
Ol
OJ
'"
Ol
"
<(
Ol
"-
>-
f-
Ol
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
-'
2
oS
Ol
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- '" " m '" " is
:;; 0 '" '" " m
> " C;; ('oj ro <D
('oJ m 0 "
ro 0 <D 0 "- 0
-0 ",- ",- ('oJ- ,,- c:i
f- '"
Vl ('oJ 0 0 ('oJ ('oJ
<:L '" CO 0 '"
~ " ('oj <D ro ro 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
" CO 0 CO '" >- ro " oi c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro "- '" <D CO ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO ('oJ '" 10
0 <D CO
c oi M c:i "'
::J 0 C;;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D <D 0 '" m
c 1il '" m 0 "- Q)
'" M <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
m 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
<D -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
'" " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
.;; :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
<D Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
.;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
N
'"
.;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
(f) C
:5 Q)
'u; 0
(f) u;
"E t5
w .~
~ D=
ro ro
Ol OJ
:e c
o
'u;
ro Qj
c >
o _
~ .~
Q) Q)
CL -2
o ::J
ro ro
~ 10
c 0
<(
ro
Q)
~
(f)
c
o
C.
::;;
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
C.
c
o
~
t .g
8- li
Q) CL
[t: :>
c
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
o
~
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0
Q)
1il
OJ
:E
:;;
(tj- ><
Q) 0
>- z
Q;
D-
Vl
c
o
f-
ro c.?
~ 0
c [t:
:'S
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
'"
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
o
u
JI
<D
'"
<0
'"
"
<D
c:i
'"
"-
c:i
o
o
c:i
('oJ
"
<0
'"
"
'"
"-
c:i
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
('oJ
'"
c:i
"
'"
o
'"
c:i
'"
"
o
o
'"
LO
oi
~
'"
('oj
"
o
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
0J LO
C0(o
f2 0;
(J) (0
('oJ-
('f) (\J
'"
o 0
"'
"
'"
o
c:i
<D
'"
c:i
'"
"
co
'"
'"
'"
('oj
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
o
<D
c:i
o
o
c:i
<D
'"
M
:"t
o
:"t
'"
c:i
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E
1i5
"
:0 ro
'" "
c
OJ c
E <(
S'>>c
2 ~ 6
~ ~ ()
'';::; c... Q)
"E .E :g
(if c .g
~ 0 Q)
~ t5 -g
11'
g 0 U
:t::::- () .~
Vl
Q)
"
"
"
c
"
('oJ
'"
<D
(")
<D
<D
",-
ro
co
co
('oJ
c:i
'"
f"-.;
<D
'"
f"-.:
<D
o:i
o
c:i
'"
o
c:i
o
'"
o:i
r-s
I'-
cr)
'"
'"
'"
('oj
r-s
to
"-
"-
c:i
I'-
co
to
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
Vl
<:L
E
Vl
<:L
E
-0
c
Vl
Q)
o
o
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
o
o
('oJ
~
Q)
>-
Vl
'Uj
>-
ro
c
<(
<D
o
o
('oJ
>
o
Z
'"
('oj
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
u
'"
E
w
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
'" 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
.;; :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> ('oJ a> "' "' 0 is
:;; " '" '" " co "'
> <D ('oj ai ai ro <D
('oJ "' '" "- ('oJ co
ro '" 0 CO ('oJ a>
-0 ('oJ- ,,- ,,- ,,- <O-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "' "- '" a> '"
<:L " CO '" '"
~ M ro c:i " ro "' 1i5 '" <0 "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
('oJ <0 <0 "- 10 " >- ro " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro co <0 a> ('oJ '" ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO CO ('oJ "' 10
('oJ 0 <0 CO
c ai M c:i "'
::J 0 10
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <0
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) "- 0 "' '" '" 1i)
c 1il 0 ('oJ ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" M M <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; <0 '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <0 " " ('oJ <0
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 a> 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
'" 1: " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
.;; Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
.;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
"
'"
OJ 81 m 0 <D l()
-2 co 0 ('oJ
:J " 0 <ri
"2 <D <D
'" '"
0
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;; ~I 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
c. 0 0 0 0
~ (f)
ro
Q) ()
~ ~
Ol
C 0
0 --'
C. E ~I 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
(f) 2 0 0 0 0
c C
0
'u; Q)
(f) 0
E -
(f)
w -0
u Q)
" 0 @I 0 0 0 0
('oj Q) 0 0 0 0
oi ro 0:: 0 0 0 0
Ol -
c "" ro
0 E OJ
'Uj C (f)
C 0 ~
Q; ::J 'u; D 0
> D D
"- Q) ill '" ,g) .8
0 2 > ~ 81 <D 0 0 <D " ~
0 :J - > '0 ('oJ 0 "- m '" 0 ~
('oJ (f) Q; D 0
0 E 0 Q) 0 0 0 0 ~ co
Vl (fJ z 1il 0 0 .8 co
E Q) D
ro -2 (') m .8 ~ E
Q) Q) C'i "' .8 0 e
-2 .0: ::J E Vl D
> Q)
::J - c ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 u
m ro "- ::J c 0 co E
D '" D (') Q)
:J 0 D Ci;- -'" .8 e Ol
c ~I 0 0 0 ~ u E c
c c '" Q) '" 0 '" ~ ro
<( 0 () "- >- 0 0 0 0 Q) ~ e u -<::
~ 2 0 Q)
~ D Q; D ~ ()
0 E D " (f) u Ol (f)
~ ,g W '" D- o Q) c Q)
to "- 0 Vl (j) E Ol ro ()
0 <( c '" e c -<:: ro
CL ()
CL <( C 0 0 Q) ~ ro "-
Q) f- -< -<:: (f)
[t: - 0 [t: u () Q) ~
c .~ ro Q)
'> LL ~I ('oJ 0 <D 0 "- LO () '"
" Ol (f) ro
Q) Q) LL c 0 0 0 0 LO <D C Q) (f)
ro -'" > 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro > "- ro
ill - -0 :'S -<:: 0 ~ Ol
0 (f) Q) 11)
Ol 0 -0 c c (j) () '" m
c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"" 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; lii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol
0 ro c c W c
(f) --' Q) 0 0 z (f) (f) (f)
c .0: 'u; 'u; Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) 0 c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j 'u; c c c
:;: ro (j) Vl :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w W m U U U
0- () Q) :;; JI Vl c ro- m 'u; 'u; 'u;
0 Q) Q) t
0 0 0 c (j (j w ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~
'" "
.;; - 0 E E w -0 0 0>- Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u 0 U ill u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: 0: c 'u;
~ ro () > > Vl Iii 0."'-'" Q) Q) Q)
Q) 0 ::J '" Q) .........."'0 ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z --' u u 0 <:L Q; " ,--:,.(1) ro ro ro
~ 0 ro ro (j) c.? '" E t UJ1\j C C C C
0 ro -0 -0 0 0 Iii " .:...J.O)
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( -'" Vl " ..m <(:.p Q) Q) Q) Q)
1:: -0 Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w " '" c -'" I'-'- E
ro '" [t: 1il Q) c 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
0:: 0:: '" -< c
D- Ul u: 0 <( Z I -' U f- " D- D- D- D-
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J 81 ('oJ 81 m "- m 81 10
" ('oJ
"2 oi "' oi c:i "
0 m "' '" "'
f5 m "' ('oJ "'
('oJ- m- ,,-
:J '" ('oJ '"
u
Q)
[t:
::;;
0 ~I 0 ~I "' '" '" ~I "'
C- o m co ('oJ m
(f) c:i c:i oi c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
-' ~I ~I ~I
>: E 0 "- 0 <D "-
0 co "' co
ro 2 c:i ('oj '" c:i ('oj
0 "' " "'
- c
(f) Q)
u
c 0
:J -
(f)
0 0
~ @I 0 @I ('oJ m co @I ('oJ
Q) 0 '" ('oJ '" '"
" (f) 0 c:i c:i c:i oi c:i
('oj c 0::
oi 0 -
c 'u; ro
0 (f) OJ 81 0 81 <D <D co 81 <D ro
'Uj E c (f) " "- :8
0 o:i o:i c:i c:i
Q; w 'u; D
> D m "' 0 "
ill ill '" '" '" " Q)
"- 1il
0 C > ~
0 - m
('oJ :s: (f) > "'
E 0 E
Vl z ~I "- ~I <D <D 0 ~I '"
E 0 Q) <D "- " ('oJ " "
Q) ~ -2 (') c:i oi c:i (j) ('oj Q)
-2 to ::J C'i ~ m W ~ c
::J 0 - > ~ ~ ~ 15
CL ro "- E
Q) ro D :;; 0
[t: 0 D >= 0
>- '" (j) '"
ro c () ~I ('oJ ~I " '" co ~I <D 1i)
0 ~ "- ('oJ " <D W <D
E ~ D '" '" '" c:i z c:i m
E D .8
E ,g '" '" '" a "
:J W 0 Uj c
(i
(fJ CL <( (j) 0
<( c 0 (j) :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= (j) a ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) '0 '0 0 '0 "'
0 ro c c W W z :>'
(f) -' Q) 0 0 Q) Q) '0 Q)
C z 1il W 1il <( 1il
E ~ 'u; 'u; a Q) ro
Q) (f) (f) m -' m 1il w m c
E 2 E E Uj "' u "' u "'
>- E E m E 0
:;: :J C ro (j) I "' [t: ~
0- () m w w :;; c W c E ::J c
Q) " " " Q;
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w C- c a <:L
'" 0 c (j (j ,.:; ,.:; ,.:; 0 (j) ,.:;
N - 0 E E w '" -' '" '" :e <( '" a
0 Q) ~ u " <( " " " "
~ E Q) Q) [t: 'in z 'in 'in " w 'in c
~ ro () > > ::J "' a "' "' " [t: "' '"
Q) 0 = = = Q) <( =
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a Q; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
"
'"
OJ 81 ('oJ 0 (\J
-2 " 0 "
:J oi 0 cr:i
"2 m m
m m
0 ~
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;; ~I 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
C- o 0 0
>:
ro (f)
0 ()
- ~
(f)
u Ol
C 0
:J --'
0 E ~I 0 0 0
~ 0 0 0
2 0 0 0
(f)
c C
0 Q)
'u; 0
(f) -
E (f)
-0
w Q)
" u 0 @I 0 0 0
('oj 0 0 0
Q) 0:: 0 0 0
oi ro -
c Ol ro
0 "" OJ
'Uj E c (f)
0 ~
Q; c 'u; 0 0
> 0 0
::J ill '" ,g)
"- Q) > .8
0 ~ '0 81 0 0 0 " ~
0 () - > " 0 :<:t '" 0 ~
('oJ :s (f) Q) Q; 0 0
E 0 ro 0 ~ co
Vl 0 Z m 0 0 .8 co
E (fJ Q) "' .8 0 E
Q) -2 (') E .8 ~
ro C'i 0 e
-2 Q) ::J Vl 0
> C Q)
::J .0: - ::J ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 u
ro "- c 0 co E
ill 0 ,.:; '" 0 (') Q)
0 0 '" ~I -'" .8 e Ol
c 0 "- 0 I"-' U E c
c '" <D 0 <D ~ ro
:s: 0 () "- Q; 0 Q) ~ e u .c
~ t' 0 Q)
~ 0 D- o ~ ()
0 E 0 " (f) u Ol (f)
,g '" Vl 0 C
~ W 0 " (j) E Q) ro Q)
to (i c Ol .c ()
0 C>- <( " '" e c () ro
<( c 0 0 Q) ~ ro (i
C>- D- -< .c (f)
Q) - 0 [t: U () Q) ~
C .~ 2 Q)
[t: '> LL ~I ('oJ 0 0 0 ('oJ () '"
Ol (f) ro
Q) Q) LL c 0 0 ('oJ c Q) (f)
ro -'" -0 > 0 s 0 0 0 '" '" ro > (i ro
ill - .c 0 ~ Ol
(f) Q) 11)
0 Ol 0 -0 c c (j) () '" ro
c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"" 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; [Ii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol '0
0 ro c c w c
(f) --' Q) 0 0 z Q) (f) (f) (f)
c .0: 'u; 'u; 0 ro Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) m c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j .l!l "' 'u; c c c
:;: ro (j) c Vl E :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w W m c U U U
0- () Q) :;; JI s Vl c " ro 'u; 'u; 'u;
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'" 0 c (j (j 0 " :>:
N - 0 E E w z " 0 '" Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u 0 u " u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: D:: 'Ul 'u;
() > > m Iii Q) Q) Q)
~ Q) ro 0 ::J Vl c "' ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z --' u u 0 '" ,- Vl Q; " = ro ro ro
c.? "-c
~ 0 ro -0 -0 ro ro (j) ~ .Q E t (j) C C C C
0 0 0 Iii -'" " ..m --.J Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( 1:: Vl Vl <(
" Vl Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ .Q! 0 0 c 8 w " '" c -'" I-'-'
ro '" [t: ro Q) C "E 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
D- Ul u: 0:: 0:: 0 <( Z I ."lw u -< f- D- D- D- D-
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
..,.
o
.;;
~
~
..,.
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
c.
>:
ro
o
-
(f)
u
C
:J
o
Do-
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
~ C
o Q)
'u; 0
(f) u;
"E t5
W Q)
"'0 .0'
Q) 0::
ro -
Ol ~
:.;:::::; c
E 0
c "00
::J Qj
ro :::
C (f)
oE
~ Q)
CD -e
CL ::J
o ro
ro
o
~
Q)
c
s: :5
.... ~
.2 .g
to (i
o CL
CL <(
Q) -
[t: C
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
W
C
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
C
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
C
o
'u;
(f)
E
W
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0 0
Q) U
1il
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
2 (9
c 0
S [t:
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
U
'"
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
('oJ
<D
oi
'"
co
('oJ-
'"
'"
c:i
<D
'"
"
'"
o
c:i
co
<D
<0
..,.
'"
..,.
c:i
c;;
"'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
l()
co
(')
o
..,.
LO-
'"
co
..,.
co
cO
'"
o
o
5
"
<D
('oJ
'"
cO
oc;
Lri
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
<D (f)
0J 0J
cO 0
"- '"
(J) 0J
(6 ('\1-
o
"-
"'
"'
'"
('oJ
"-
c:i
'"
"-
o
('oJ
('oJ
('oJ
'"
'"
"'
cO
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
(f)
"'"'"
o
co
<D
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
<D
'"
(()
('oJ
('oJ
<D
~
o
..,.
0i
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
o
('oJ
'"
<D
o
",-
;::
co
('oJ
cO
'"
o
c:i
<D
"-
oi
'"
'"
'"
:;:
"'
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
'"
L(.i
'"
'"
('\1-
'"
'"
'"
o
f"-.:
co
('oj
'"
('oJ
'"
c:i
<D
I'-
cO
'"
'"
<D
"-
d
,..,...,
~
Vl
<:L
E
2
c
S
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E 0
1:;) o;:;t >
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
'O>.:.;:::::;-ro>
,*~~~8
OlroUE0J
:.;:::::; c... Q) Q) ()
"E ::c I- ro
c .E::::l E
:::l C .g 0 w
:>; 0 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
:<:t
..,.
r-....:
'"
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
(;
ii;
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
'"
'"
c:i
'"
'"
('oJ-
Vl co
<:L ..,.
~ cD
ro a;
-0
f-
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Q) 0
1il 0
[t: <0
<:L ;::
'co
f-
Q)
OJ
'"
Q)
"
<(
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- '" " m '" " is
:;; 0 '" '" " m
> " C;; ('oj ro <D
('oJ m 0 "
ro 0 <D 0 "- 0
-0 ",- ",- ('oJ- ,,- c:i
f- '"
Vl ('oJ 0 0 ('oJ ('oJ
<:L '" CO 0 '"
~ " ('oj <D ro ro 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
" CO 0 CO '" >- ro " oi c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro "- '" <D CO ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO ('oJ '" 10
0 <D CO
c oi M c:i "'
::J 0 C;;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D <D 0 '" m
c 1il '" m 0 "- Q)
'" M <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
m 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
" -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
0 " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
.;; :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
0 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
.;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
o
.;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
>: (f)
ro ()
o ~
- Ol
(f) 0
~ --'
is E
Q:. 2
C
(f) Q)
6 0
"00 en
(f) -0
E Q)
w .0'
u 0::
Q) -
10 ~
Ol c
:e 0
'u;
ill
ro >
c _
o (f)
~ "E
ill Q)
"- -2
o ;!
ro
ro
o
::;;
~
Q)
c
s:
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
C.
c
~ 0
.E ~
t .g
o (i
"- "-
Q) <(
[t: c:
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
o
'0 u
Q)
1il
OJ
E
:;;
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
w
c-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
"' "
'" "
cO (')
<D LO
"' ro
0.T o;:;t-
"' "
ro <D
c:i
o
"
'"
o
c:i
'"
'"
:;:
ro
'"
oi
"-
"-
"
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
"
'"
'"
"'
o
o
'"
"
~
"'
LO
"
<0
('oJ
('oJ
Lri
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
('f) (f)
'" 0
~ 0j
0J 0
1.0- ('\1-
0J co
<D
Lri 0
;::
"
('oJ
"'
c:i
o
('oJ
ro
'"
'"
"'
('oJ
<D
<0
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
c;:;
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
<D
ro
M
('oJ
:"t
ro
<0
<D
0i
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
'"
"
'"
"
"'
,,-
"
"'
o;:;t 0
" "'
r---: r---:
'<;f
" '"
o 0J
o 0
ro <D
<D
o cO
"' "'
'"
o
"
"'
<D
ro
"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
"-
('oJ
cr:i
'"
('oJ
",-
('oJ
('i')
ro
cr:i
<D
"
oj
'"
Vl
<:L
E
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E 0
1:;) o;:;t >
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
>.:.;:::::;-ro>
:P~Vl~~t30
Q) ro () E 0J
ro c... Q) Q) ()
,E L- ::c I- ro
.E::::l E
"E .g 0 w
>; 5 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
('f)
<D
'"
'"
2
c
s:
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
0 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
.;; :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> ('oJ a> "' "' 0 is
:;; " '" '" " co "'
> <D ('oj ai ai ro <D
('oJ "' '" "- ('oJ co
ro '" 0 CO ('oJ a>
-0 ('oJ- ,,- ,,- ,,- <O-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "' "- '" a> '"
<:L " CO '" '"
~ M ro c:i " ro "' 1i5 '" <0 "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
('oJ <0 <0 "- 10 " >- ro " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro co <0 a> ('oJ '" ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO CO ('oJ "' 10
('oJ 0 <0 CO
c ai M c:i "'
::J 0 10
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <0
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) "- 0 "' '" '" 1i)
c 1il 0 ('oJ ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" M M <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; <0 '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <0 " " ('oJ <0
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 a> 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
0 1: " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
.;; Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
0 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
.;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J 81 <D 81 '" ('oJ m 81 m
" " ('oJ co
"2 '" ('oj c;; c:i "'
0 0 '" <D
f5 '" m '"
('oJ- ",- c;; "--
:J '" '"
u
Q)
[t:
::;;
0 ~I '" ~I '" '" '" ~I co
C- o m co ('oJ m
(f) c:i c:i oi c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
>: -' ~I ~I ~I
E '" "- 0 <D 0
ro 0 co '" m
0 2 c:i ('oj '" c:i ('oj
()j c '" " '"
u Q)
c 0
:J -
0 (f)
~ 0 @I 0 @I " C;; ('oJ @I "
(f) Q) 0 '" co '"
" 0 c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i
('oj c
0 0::
oi 'u; -
c (f) ro
0 E OJ 81 '" 81 '" '" m 81 <D ro
'Uj c (f) '" <D :8
Q; w 0 D oi '" ('oj c:i <0
> ~ 'u; D " c;; '" "
Q) ill '" '" '" Q)
"- E 1il
0 > ~
0 E - > m
('oJ (f) "'
:J E 0 E
Vl (fJ z ~I "- ~I " '" m ~I c;;
E 0 Q) "- '" 0 "
Q) -2 (') '" "' c:i (j) "' Q)
-2 ~ ::J C'i co "- W co c
::J to - > ~ 15
0 ro "- E
CL ro D :;; 0
Q) 0
[t: 0 D >= '"
'" (j)
c c () ~I '" ~I "- '" ~I " 1i)
0 ~ "- co :;: '" co W ('oJ
ro ~ D '" " o:i z o:i m
E E D c;; .8
,g '" '" a '"
E w 0 Uj c
:J (i <( 0
(fJ CL (j) (j)
<( c 0 :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= (j) a ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) '0 '0 0 '0 "'
0 ro c c W W z :>'
(f) -' Q) 0 0 Q) Q) '0 Q)
C z 1il W 1il <( 1il
E ~ 'u; 'u; a Q) ro
Q) (f) (f) m -' m 1il w m c
E 2 E E Uj "' u "' u "'
>- E E m E 0
:;: :J C ro (j) I "' [t: ~
0- () m w w :;; c W c E ::J c
Q) " " " Q;
<D 0 0 Q) Q) w C- c a <:L
'" 0 c (j (j ,.:; ,.:; ,.:; 0 (j) ,.:;
N - 0 E E w '" -' '" '" :e <( '" a
0 Q) ~ u " <( " " " "
~ E Q) Q) [t: 'in z 'in 'in " w 'in c
~ ro () > > ::J "' a "' "' " [t: "' '"
Q) 0 = = = Q) <( =
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a Q; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
"
'"
OJ 81 ('oJ " <D
-2 " 0 "
:J oi " (')
"2 m 0
m
0 ('oJ-
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;; ~I 0 '" '"
0 0 0 0
>: C- o 0 0
ro (f)
0
- ()
(f) ~
u
c Ol
:J 0
0 -' ~I
~ E 0 '" '"
0 0 0
(f) 2 0 0 0
c C
0
'i)j Q)
,,!! 0
-
E (f)
w 0
u Q)
" 0 @I 0 0 0
('oj Q) 0 0 0
oi ro 0:: 0 0 0
Ol -
c :e ro
0 OJ
'Uj E c (f)
Q; c 0 D ~
'i)j 0
> ::J D D
"- Q) ill '" '0 ,g) E
0 2 > ~ Q) 81 0 '" '" " ~
- ~
0 :J (f) > 1il " "- Ol 0 0
('oJ Q; D
0 E 0 m '" oi ~ co
Vl (fJ Z "' 0 0 E co
E Q) E D
Q) ro -2 (') c .8 E ~ E
Q) C'i 0 e
-2 ::J ::J Vl D
::J ~ - > Q) ~ ~ ~ ~
ro ,.:; 0 u
~ ro "- Ol c 0 co E
Q) D 0 Ol D (') Q)
E 0 D -'" E e Ol
~I "- 0 I'- U E c
E c '" Q; <D "- ~ ro
() D- o Q) ~ e u
:J 0 ~ "- 2 0 Q) -<::
(fJ ~ D Vl D ~ ()
E D " " (f) u Ol
c (f)
0 ,g W '" c 0 Q) Q)
0 " (j) E ro
~ (i 0 Ol -<:: ()
~ CL <( D- Ol e c () ro
0 <( c 0 Q) ~ ro (i
Q; ~ -<:: (f)
CL - 0 [t: u () Q) ~
Q) c .~ E Q)
[t: '> LL ~I ('oJ 10 0 0 '" Ol (f) () '"
LL E 0 co ro
Q) Q) c Q) (f)
-'" 0 > 0 " 0 0 0 '" '" ro > (i ro
ro - ~ -<:: 0 ~ Ol
ill (f) Q) 11)
Ol 0 0 c c (j) () '" ro
0 c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"' 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; lii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) Vl ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol c '0'
0 ro c c W 0 c
(f) -' Q) 0 0 z "w Q) (f) (f) (f)
c ~ 'i)j 'i)j 0 Vl 1il Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) E m c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j ::;:::::; 'i)j c c c
:;: ro (j) W Vl E :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w W m c U U U
0- () Q) :;; JI Q; Vl C " ro 'i)j 'i)j 'i)j
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w E t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'" 0 c (j (j E " :>:
N - 0 E E w " 0 Ol Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u " 0 u " u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: (j) 0: in 'i)j
~ () > > Vl Iii Ll Q) Q) Q)
Q) ro 0 ::J Ol 0 Q) = ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z -' u u 0 c.? Z <:L Q; " ro ro ro
~ 0 ro ro (j) Ol E t (j) C C C C
0 ro 0 0 0 0 Iii " --'
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( -'" Vl " ..m <( Q) Q) Q) Q)
1:: " Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w " Ol c -'" I'-'-
ro '" [t: 1il Q) c 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
0:: 0:: Ol -<
D- Ul u: 0 <( Z I --' U f- D- D- D- D-
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
..,.
N
~
~
..,.
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
c.
>:
ro
o
()j
u
C
:J
o
~
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
(f) C
6 Q)
u; S2
(f) (f)
"E t5
Q)
w .0'
~ D=
10 ro
Ol OJ
~ 6
'u;
ro CD
c >
o _
~ .~
ill Q)
CL -2
o ::J
CD ro
E ro
E 0
:J
(fJ
c
o
o ~
:: .g
o D-
CL CL
Q) <(
[t: c:
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
o
'0 u
Q)
1il
OJ
E
:;;
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
w
c-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
('oJ
..,.
c:i
o
co
('oJ-
"'
co
c:i
o
"
'"
o
c:i
"-
"-
c;;
'"
o
'"
o
<D
'"
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
l()
"'
(')
o
'"
LO-
..,.
<D
..,.
'"
'"
"'
o
o
"'
LO
oi
..,.
~
..,.
('oj
0;
Lri
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
(J) ...;f
'" "'
a:i cO
..,. 0
<D 0J
(6 ('\1-
('oJ
"'
;::
"
('oJ
<D
c:i
'"
co
'"
<D
..,.
"-
o:i
'"
"-
('oJ
<0
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
ro
<D
o
c;:;
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
'"
"'
d
('oJ
""
"'
;::
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
('oJ
'"
oi
<D
'"
..,.-
..,.
"'
..,.
..,.
'"
"'
o
c:i
'"
'"
<0
..,.
('oJ
<D
~
~
co
co
'"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
(\J
('oJ
c;;
'"
~
'"
('i')
co
a:i
o
"'
'"
'<;f
(0
c:i
'"
N
(0
'"
o
"'
r-s
Vl
<:L
E
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E "'
t)CO>
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
>.:.;:::::;-ro>
:P~Vl~~t30
Q) ro () E 0J
ro c... Q) Q) ()
,E L- ::c I- ro
.E::::l E
"E .g 0 w
>; 5 0
~ t5 ~ (\J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
I'-
'"
(0
Q;
E
E
"
(j)
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
" 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
N :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> ('oJ a> "' "' 0 is
:;; " '" '" " co "'
> <D ('oj ai ai ro <D
('oJ "' '" "- ('oJ co
ro '" 0 CO ('oJ a>
-0 ('oJ- ,,- ,,- ,,- <O-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "' "- '" a> '"
<:L " CO '" '"
~ M ro c:i " ro "' 1i5 '" <0 "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
('oJ <0 <0 "- 10 " >- ro " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro co <0 a> ('oJ '" ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO CO ('oJ "' 10
('oJ 0 <0 CO
c ai M c:i "'
::J 0 10
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <0
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) "- 0 "' '" '" 1i)
c 1il 0 ('oJ ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" M M <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; <0 '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <0 " " ('oJ <0
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 a> 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
" 1: " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
N Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
N c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
..,.
..,.
N
~
~
Qj
E
E c
:J 0
~ ~
o .g
~ "-
to CL
o <(
CL _
Q) C
n::: S
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~O~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
..,.
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
"
'"
OJ
-2
:J
"2
o
f5
:J
U
Q)
[t:
::;;
o
>:c
ro
o
-
(f)
u
C
:J
o
~
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
(f) 2
6 c
"00 Q)
(f) S2
"E ~
W Q)
~ .0'
10 9;:
Ol ro
:.;:::::; m
E 6
c "00
::J Qj
ro >
c _
o (f)
~ .~
Q) -2
CL ::J
o _
ro
ro
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
W
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'i)j
(f)
E
W
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0
.l!l
'"
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
W
f-
<(
::;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
'"
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
o
u
><
o
z
JI
o
o:i
~
~
",-
'"
'"
c:i
<D
'"
"
'"
o
c:i
"-
'"
"'
'"
o
'"
'"
o
"
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
o
to
o
'"
1.0-
'"
co
..,.
co
cO
<D
o
o
I"-
to
'"
('oJ
co
'"
co
'"
cD
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
('f) 0
'" 0
r---: 0)
'" '"
LO ...;r
CfJ- ('\1-
o
"-
"'
"'
'"
('oJ
co
c:i
"-
..,.
('oj
co
'"
'"
..,.
ro
'"
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
(D
I'-
o
co
<D
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
(11
'"
N
('oJ
'"
"-
"'
o
'"
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
co
co
('oj
'"
'"
",-
;::
co
('oJ
o:i
'"
o
c:i
'"
'"
"'
..,.
'"
('oj
c;;
"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
('i')
..,.
N
'"
'"
",-
'"
'"
'"
o
I"-
co
('oj
'"
..,.
'"
c:i
'"
'"
r-...:
..,.
'"
:"t
'"
'"
co
Vl
<:L
E
Q;
E
E
"
(j)
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E '"
t)CO>
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
'O>.:.;:::::;-ro>
,*~~~8
OlroUE0J
:.;:::::; c... Q) Q) ()
"E ::c I- ro
c .E::::l E
:::l C .g 0 w
:>; 0 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
~
-.:i
'"
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
(;
ii;
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
'"
'"
c:i
'"
'"
('oJ-
Vl co
<:L ..,.
~ cD
ro a;
-0
f-
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Q) 0
1il 0
[t: cD
<:L ;::
'co
f-
Q)
OJ
'"
Q)
"
<(
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- '" " m '" " is
:;; 0 '" '" " m
> " C;; ('oj ro <D
('oJ m 0 "
ro 0 <D 0 "- 0
-0 ",- ",- ('oJ- ,,- c:i
f- '"
Vl ('oJ 0 0 ('oJ ('oJ
<:L '" CO 0 '"
~ " ('oj <D ro ro 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
" CO 0 CO '" >- ro " oi c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro "- '" <D CO ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO ('oJ '" 10
0 <D CO
c oi M c:i "'
::J 0 C;;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i ro c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D <D 0 '" m
c 1il '" m 0 "- Q)
'" M <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
m 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
" -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
" " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
N :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
N c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'T
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c 81 'T 81 'T m m 81 co
0 "-
'u; <0 '" '" c:i '"
C <D 0j co co
Q) '" '" '"
C <D- ",- <D-
U
Q)
()
:J
U
Q) ~I 0 ~I "- "- '" ~I "-
~ 0 m "- m
(f) c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
-' ~I ~I ~I
E 0 ('oJ <D co ('oJ
~ 0 '" '" 0 '"
ro 2 c:i oi o:i c:i oi
Q) C
~ Q)
(f) 0
c
0 -
(f)
C- o @I 0 @I '" '" 0 @I '"
(f) Q) 0 0 0 0 0
'T C 0 c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i
('oj 0 0::
oi 'u; -
c (f) ro
0 E OJ 81 <D 81 m "- "- 81 '" ro
'Uj c (f) m 0 'T 0 :8
0; w 0 D c:i "' o:i c:i <0
> ro 'u; D <D '" <D "
"- :J ill '" Q)
0 c > ~ 1il
0 c - > m
('oJ <( (f) "'
E 0 E
Vl ~ z ~I c;; ~I '" '" ('oJ ~I 'T
E .2 Q) <D m ('oJ m "
Q) -2 (') c:i <0 " c:i (j) <0 Q)
-2 to ::J C'i w c
0 > ~ 15
::J CL -
Q) ro '" E
[t: ro D :;; 0
0 D >= 0
c '" (j) '"
c
ro 0 () '" ~I 10 ~I 'T '" <D w ~I '" 1i)
E ~ ~ D ('oJ <D 'T co m
E E D c:i <0 "' oi z <0 .8
,g '" a
:J w 0 Uj c
(fJ (i <( 0
CL (j) (j)
<( c 0 :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= '0 (j) '0 a '0 ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) Q) Q) 0 Q) "'
0 ro c c w 1il w 1il '0 z 1il :>'
(f) 0 0 .l!l
C -' Q) Z m W m <( m
E ~ 'u; 'u; a "' "' '" "' ro
Q) (f) (f) E -' E m w E c
E 2 E E Uj u "' u
>- c c E c 0
:;: :J C ro W W (j) " I " [t: " ~
0- () m :;; w ::J
Q) ro- ro- ro- ro- O;
..,. 0 0 Q) Q) w c- c a <:L
0 0 c (j (j Q) Q) Q) 0 (j) Q)
<D - 0 E E w >- -' >- >- :e <( >- a
0 Q) ~ U 'in <( 'in 'in 'in "
~ E Q) Q) [t: c Z c c " W c c
~ ro () > > ::J 0 a 0 0 " [t: 0 '"
Q) 0 "'" "'" "'" Q) <( "'"
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a 0; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
.....
~
<D
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
.....
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
ro
Q)
~
(f)
c
o
C.
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
(f) 2
6 c
"00 Q)
(f) 0
"E en
w -0
Q)
-g .0'
10 D=
Ol ro
:.;:::::; m
E C
o
:5 "00
ill
ro >
C _
o (f)
~ "E
ill Q)
CL -2
o ;!
ro
ro
o
ro
:J
C
C
<(
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
C
2
<(
.c
'u;
C
Q)
C
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
~
C
o
o ~
:: .g
o D-
CL CL
Q) <(
[t: c:
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
.....
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
.....
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
o
'0 u
Q)
1il
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
(tj- ><
Q) 0
>- z
Q;
D-
Vl
c
o
f-
ro c.?
~ 0
c [t:
:'S
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
JI
o
"
'"
co
'"
('oJ
c:i
co
"'
c:i
o
o
c:i
"'
'"
"
~
~
<D
"'
c:i
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
co
"
<ri
"'
'"
~
'"
"
c:i
'"
o
('oj
o
o
"
.....
M
('oJ
<D
'"
co
'"
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
<D
<D
10
o
",-
.....
'"
c:i
.....
<D
"
'"
o
c:i
o
('oj
'"
'"
o:i
.....
o
'"
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
~
o
<ri
'"
...;r
...;f
o
~
<D
c:i
o
o
c:i
~
...;i
<D
co
'"
c:i
1i)
-'"
ii;
:;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
'"
"
oi
.....
'"
c;;
c:i
"'
o
c:i
'"
co
oi
10
('oj
"'
co
c:i
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
"
c
'"
~ Q)
~ 0
o:1i5
'<;f
o
~
0j
<D-
.....
'"
('oJ
"'
oi
"'
o
c:i
'"
o
i.ri
<D
'"
<D
cD (/)
<:L
E
:<:t
('oJ
<0
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E
1i5
"
'6'
'"
OJ
c
"'
>- C
"' "
Vl 0
g; U
<:L Q)
:0
"
o
"
Q)
"
"
"
,~
-0
c
Vl
Q)
o
o
Vl
<:L
E
.E
(If c
Q) 0
~ t5
c ~
.8::0 0
-.....,....(1) ()
U)'E (/)
~..O) Q)
<(:;;:::; "'0
~ E ~
o c '-'
~:::l C
ro
"
c
c
<(
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
o
o
('oJ
~
Q)
>-
Vl
'Uj
>-
ro
c
<(
<D
o
o
('oJ
>
o
Z
'"
('oj
>
.....
o
o
('oJ
u
'"
E
w
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
(;
ii;
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
"'
co
"
'"
.....
Vl '"
<:L 0
~ L[j
'"
ro <D
-0
f-
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Q) ('oJ
1il
[t: <0
<:L ~
'co
f-
Q)
OJ
'"
Q)
"
<(
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> 0 a> " "- is
:;; a> " "' 0 CO
> '" " ('oj c:i ai
0 "' a> 0 "
ro "' "' 0 "- <D
-0 <D- ,,- ('oJ- ,,- a>-
f- ('oJ
Vl "- CO 0 a> "-
<:L '" 0 ('oJ CO
~ " ('oj <D '" " 1i5 '" <D "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
<D '" 0 CO ('oJ >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro a> 0 '" <D <D ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ a> a> "' 0
'" "' CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J a> 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D "- 0 '" m
c 1il a> a> 0 "- Q)
'" " <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
a> 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
..... -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
~ " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
<D :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
..... Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
~ 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
<D c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
N
N
<D
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
(f) C
:5 Q)
'u; 0
(f) u;
"E t5
w .~
~ D=
ro ro
Ol OJ
:e c
o
'u;
ro Qj
c >
o _
~ .~
Q) Q)
CL -2
o ::J
ro ro
~ 10
c 0
<(
ro
Q)
~
(f)
c
o
C.
::;;
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c
'u;
c
Q)
C
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
~
c
o
~
t .g
8- li
Q) CL
n:: :>
c
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
n::
C
o
o
~
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
n::
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
n::
8
'0
Q)
1il
OJ
:E
:;;
(tj- ><
Q) 0
>- z
Q;
D-
Vl
c
o
f-
ro c.?
~ 0
c n::
:'S
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
n::
w
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
'"
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
o
u
JI
'"
'"
"
"
'"
~
~
c:i
('oJ
'"
c:i
o
o
c:i
'"
"
"
'"
'"
c:i
o
'"
c:i
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
c;:;
cO
0j
~
'"
'"
c:i
ro
ro
o
o
"
'"
('oj
LO
('oJ
'"
(f)
('oJ
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
ro
oi
"
"-
('oJ-
"-
ro
c:i
o
('oJ
"
'"
o
c:i
'"
ro
o:i
('oJ
o
'"
'"
ro
"-
('oj
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
LO
(f)
0;
'"
('oJ
o
o
(f)
c:i
o
o
c:i
(f)
'"
M
:"t
o
:"t
'"
c:i
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E
1i5
"
:0 ro
'" "
c
OJ c
E <(
S'>>c
2 ~ 6
~ ~ ()
'';::; c... Q)
"E .E :g
(if c .g
~ 0 Q)
~ t5 -g
11'
g 0 U
:t::::- () .~
Vl
Q)
"
"
"
c
"-
(f)
oi
"-
ro
'"
f"-.;
(")
ro
'"
",-
ro
('oJ
c:i
"-
f"-.;
(f)
'"
(f)
'"
o:i
o
c:i
'"
o
c:i
'"
ro
o:i
r-s
:<:t
cO
'"
'"
'"
('oj
'"
'"
o,;f
"-
"-
c:i
'"
(f)
<ri
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
Vl
<:L
E
Vl
<:L
E
-0
c
Vl
Q)
o
o
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
o
o
('oJ
~
Q)
>-
Vl
'Uj
>-
ro
c
<(
(f)
o
o
('oJ
>
o
Z
'"
('oj
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
u
'"
E
w
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
n::
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
n::
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
'" 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
<D :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- " ('oJ '" '" C;; "- is
:;; 0 m " CO
> ('oj "' ;:: ai 0j ai
10 " "- ('oJ
ro co 0 CO ('oJ <D
-0 ",- ",- ,,- <D-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "- "- '" CO 0
<:L '" m '" CO ('oJ CO
~ c:i "' "' " '" M 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
"- <D ('oJ "- 10 '" >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro '" co co ('oJ ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO m m '" 0
('oJ '" '" CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J m 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) m '" <D '" '" 1i)
c 1il '" " ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" "' " <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; " '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 m 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
'" 1: " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
<D Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
<D c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c 81 " 81 <D 0 m 81 0
'" '" "'
'u; oi " "' c:i '"
c m m '" m
Q) m 0 co 0
C ",- co- ,,-
'" '" '"
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q) ~I 0 ~I ro ;:: co ~I ro
~ 0
(f) c:i c:i oi c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
-' ~I ~I ~I
>: E 0 co "- co co
0 co
ro 2 c:i ('oj <0 c:i ('oj
0 "' " "'
- c
(f) Q)
u
c 0
:J -
(f)
0 0
~ @I 0 @I C;; co co @I C;;
Q) 0 '" <D
" (f) 0 c:i c:i c:i oi c:i
('oj c 0::
oi 0 -
c 'u; ro
0 (f) OJ 81 0 81 " co m 81 " ro
'Uj E c (f) " '" <D "- :8
0 oi oi c:i c:i
Q; w 'u; D
> D co " m "
ill ill '" '" '" '" Q)
"- 1il
0 C > ~
0 - m
'" :s: (f) > "'
E 0 E
Vl z ~I "- ~I co "- m ~I "'
E 0 Q) <D m co <D "
Q) ~ -2 (') o:i '" c:i (j) c:i Q)
-2 to ::J C'i 0 m W ~ c
::J 0 - > ~ ~ 15
CL ro '" E
Q) ro D :;; 0
[t: 0 D >= 0
>- '" (j) '"
ro c () ~I ~I " "' co ~I "' 1i)
0 ~ '" 0 '" "' w '"
E ~ D '" <0 ('oj c:i z oi m
E D .8
E ,g '" '" '" a '"
:J W 0 Uj c
(i
(fJ CL <( (j) 0
<( c 0 (j) :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= (j) a ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) '0 '0 0 '0 "'
0 ro c c W W z :>'
(f) -' Q) 0 0 Q) Q) '0 Q)
C z 1il W 1il <( 1il
E ~ 'u; 'u; a Q) ro
Q) (f) (f) m -' m 1il w m c
E 2 E E Uj "' u "' u "'
>- E E m E 0
:;: :J C ro (j) I "' [t: ~
0- () m w w :;; c W c E ::J c
Q) " " " Q;
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w C- c a <:L
..,. 0 c (j (j ,.:; ,.:; ,.:; 0 (j) ,.:;
,;; - 0 E E w '" -' '" '" :e <( '" a
0 Q) ~ u " <( " " " "
~ E Q) Q) [t: 'in z 'in 'in " w 'in c
~ ro () > > ::J "' a "' "' " [t: "' '"
Q) 0 = = = Q) <( =
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a Q; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
'T
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<( 81 'T 0 '<;f
'" 0 '"
.c oi 0 cr:i
'u; m m
c m m
Q) ~
c
u
Q)
()
:J
u ~I 0 0 0
Q) 0 0 0
~ 0 0 0
>:
ro (f)
0 ()
- ~
(f)
u Ol
c 0
:J --'
0 E ~I 0 0 0
~ 0 0 0
2 0 0 0
(f)
c C
0 Q)
'u; 0
(f) -
E (f)
-0
w Q)
'T U 0 @I 0 0 0
('oj 0 0 0
Q) 0:: 0 0 0
oi ro -
c Ol ro
0 "" OJ
'Uj E c (f)
0 ~
Q; c 'u; 0 0
> 0 0
::J ill '" ,g)
"- Q) > .8
0 ~ '0 81 0 0 0 " ~
0 () - > 'T 0 :<:t '" 0 ~
('oJ :s (f) Q) Q; 0 0
E 0 ro 0 ~ co
Vl 0 Z m 0 0 .8 co
E (fJ Q) "' .8 0 E
Q) -2 (') E .8 ~
ro C'i 0 e
-2 Q) ::J Vl 0
> c Q)
::J .0: - ::J ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 u
ro "- c 0 co E
ill 0 ,.:; '" 0 (') Q)
0 0 '" ~I -'" .8 e Ol
c 0 "- 0 I"-' U E c
c '" <D 0 <D ~ ro
:s: 0 () "- Q; 0 Q) ~ e u .c
~ t' 0 Q)
~ 0 D- o ~ ()
0 E 0 " (f) u Ol (f)
,g '" Vl 0 C
~ W 0 " (j) E Q) ro Q)
to (i c Ol .c ()
0 C>- <( " '" e c () ro
<( c 0 0 Q) ~ ro (i
C>- D- -< .c (f)
Q) - 0 [t: u () Q) ~
c .~ 2 Q)
[t: '> LL ~I ('oJ 0 0 m 0 () '"
Ol (f) ro
Q) Q) LL c 0 0 co c Q) (f)
ro -'" -0 > 0 s 0 0 0 ('oj en ro > (i ro
ill - .c 0 ~ Ol
(f) Q) 11)
0 Ol 0 -0 c c (j) () '" ro
c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"" 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; [Ii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol '0
0 ro c c w c
(f) --' Q) 0 0 z Q) (f) (f) (f)
c .0: 'u; 'u; 0 ro Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) m c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j .l!l "' 'u; c c c
:;: ro (j) c Vl E :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w W m c U U U
0- () Q) :;; JI s Vl c " ro 'u; 'u; 'u;
0 0 0 Q) Q) w t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'" 0 c (j (j 0 " :>:
,;; - 0 E E w z " 0 '" Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u 0 u " u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: D:: 'Ul 'u;
() > > m Iii Q) Q) Q)
~ Q) ro 0 ::J Vl c "' ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z --' u u 0 '" ,- Vl Q; " = ro ro ro
c.? "-c
~ 0 ro -0 -0 ro ro (j) ~ .Q E t (j) C C C C
0 0 0 Iii -'" " ..m --.J Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( 1:: Vl Vl <(
" Vl Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ .Q! 0 0 c 8 w " '" c -'" I-'-'
ro '" [t: ro Q) C "E 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
D- Ul u: 0:: 0:: 0 <( Z I ."lw u -< f- D- D- D- D-
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
'"
,;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
~
>:
ro
o
-
(f)
u
C
:J
o
Do-
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
~ C
o Q)
'u; 0
(f) u;
"E t5
W Q)
"'0 .0'
Q) 0::
ro -
Ol ~
:.;:::::; c
E 0
c "00
::J Qj
ro :::
C (f)
oE
~ Q)
CD -e
CL ::J
o ro
ro
o
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
C
2
<(
.c
'u;
C
Q)
C
~
Q)
c
s: :5
.... ~
.2 .g
to (i
o CL
CL <(
Q) -
[t: C
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
W
C
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
C
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
C
o
'u;
(f)
E
W
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0 0
Q) U
1il
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
2 (9
c 0
S [t:
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
U
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
"
"
ro
m
<D
<D
c:i
<D
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
"'
'"
('oj
'"
"
('oJ
'"
co
<D
'"
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
I"-
m
oi
m
m
<D-
I"-
'"
('oj
"'
"
~
~
I"-
o
o
('oJ
m
('oj
co
'"
"-
'"
('oJ
'"
"'
rs.:
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
c;:; ~
cO 0
o "'
co 0J
1.0- ('\1-
c;;
"'
('oJ
<D
"'
('oJ
"'
c:i
"'
co
'"
co
"-
('oJ
'"
"'
'"
('oJ
'"
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
co i:D
o;;f o;;f
"' m
o 0
1.0- ('\1-
'"
(D
l"-
e
~ oc;
o
co
<D
'"
"- co
('oJ
cO N
"'
('oJ
o
c:i
~ c;:;
o 0
<D
"'
(()
('oJ
<D v
<D ('f)
a:i cr)
"' co
'"
('oJ
<D
rs.:
('oJ
'"
o
"
0i
o
"
"'
1i)
-'"
ii;
:;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
co
m
cO
o
Vl
<:L
E
2
c
S
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E 0
1:;) v >
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
'O>.:.;:::::;-ro>
,*~~~8
OlroUE0J
:.;:::::; c... Q) Q) ()
"E ::c I- ro
c .E::::l E
:::l C .g 0 W
:>; 0 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
v
('oJ
<0
'"
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
(;
ii;
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
"'
co
"
m
"-
Vl '"
<:L 0
~ L[j
'"
ro <D
-0
f-
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Q) ('oJ
1il
[t: <0
<:L ~
'co
f-
Q)
OJ
'"
Q)
"
<(
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> 0 a> " "- is
:;; a> " "' 0 CO
> '" " ('oj c:i ai
0 "' a> 0 "
ro "' "' 0 "- <D
-0 <D- ,,- ('oJ- ,,- a>-
f- ('oJ
Vl "- CO 0 a> "-
<:L '" 0 ('oJ CO
~ " ('oj <D '" " 1i5 '" <D "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
<D '" 0 CO ('oJ >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro a> 0 '" <D <D ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ a> a> "' 0
'" "' CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J a> 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D "- 0 '" m
c 1il a> a> 0 "- Q)
'" " <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
a> 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
'" -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
'" " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
,;; :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
,;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
'"
,;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
>: (f)
ro ()
o ~
- Ol
(f) 0
~ --'
is E
Q:. 2
C
(f) Q)
6 0
"00 en
(f) -0
E Q)
w .0'
u 0::
Q) -
10 ~
Ol c
:e 0
'u;
ill
ro >
c _
o (f)
~ "E
ill Q)
"- -2
o ;!
ro
ro
o
::;;
~
Q)
c
s:
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c
'u;
c
Q)
C
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
~
c
~ 0
.E ~
t .g
o (i
"- "-
Q) <(
[t: c:
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
o
'0 u
Q)
1il
OJ
E
:;;
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
w
c-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
LO (J) (f)
('oJ "'
2: 0 f\i
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
('oJ
<D
oi
"-
"-
"
'"
('oj
('oJ
o
c:i
"'
o
oi
('oJ
o
"'
<0
o
'"
'"
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
'"
'"
<ri
'"
('oJ
<D-
'"
('oJ
o
<D
o
o
'"
"
"
I'-'-
~
'"
0j
<D
"-
<0
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
LO (D
o
~ 0j
o
o;:;t- ('\1-
I'- co
1'-<0
o;;f 0
o
'"
('oJ
"
c:i
;::
o:i
<D
"'
'"
'"
"
'"
"
"'
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
c;:;
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
<D
'"
M
('oJ
:"t
'"
<0
<D
0i
1i)
-'"
ii;
::;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
'"
'"
oi
'"
"'
,,-
"
"'
('f) I"-
" '"
r---: cD
'<;f
" '"
o 0J
o 0
'" '"
LO <D
c0 cr)
LO '<:f
'"
"-
'"
"'
"'
'"
"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
o
('oJ
L(.i
('oJ
'"
",-
('oJ
~
cr:i
I'-'-
'"
r---.:
'"
Vl
<:L
E
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E 0
1:;) o;:;t >
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
>.:.;:::::;-ro>
:P~Vl~~t30
Q) ro () E 0J
ro c... Q) Q) ()
,E L- ::c I- ro
.E::::l E
"E .g 0 w
>; 5 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
"'
"'
('oj
'"
2
c
s:
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
'" 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
,;; :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- " ('oJ '" '" C;; "- is
:;; 0 m " CO
> ('oj "' ;:: ai 0j ai
10 " "- ('oJ
ro co 0 CO ('oJ <D
-0 ",- ",- ,,- <D-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "- "- '" CO 0
<:L '" m '" CO ('oJ CO
~ c:i "' "' " '" M 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
"- <D ('oJ "- 10 '" >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro '" co co ('oJ ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO m m '" 0
('oJ '" '" CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J m 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) m '" <D '" '" 1i)
c 1il '" " ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" "' " <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; " '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 m 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
'" 1: " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
,;; Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
,;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'T
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<( 81 co 0 <D ..-
co 0 ('oJ
.c " 0 <ri
'u; <D <D
C '" '"
Q)
c
u
Q)
()
:J
u ~I 0 0 0 0
Q) 0 0 0 0
~ 0 0 0 0
~ (f)
ro
Q) ()
~ ~
Ol
C 0
0 --'
C. E ~I 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
(f) 2 0 0 0 0
c C
0
'u; Q)
(f) 0
E -
(f)
w -0
u Q)
..- 0 @I 0 0 0 0
('oj Q) 0 0 0 0
oi ro 0:: 0 0 0 0
Ol -
c "" ro
0 E OJ
'Uj C (f)
C 0 ~
Q; ::J 'u; D 0
> D D
"- Q) ill '" ,g) .8
0 2 > ~ 81 <D 0 0 <D " ~
0 :J - > '0 ('oJ 0 "- Q) '" 0 ~
('oJ (f) Q; D 0
0 E 0 Q) 0 0 0 0 ~ co
Vl (fJ z 1il 0 0 .8 co
E Q) D
ro -2 (') Q) .8 ~ E
Q) Q) C'i "' .8 0 e
-2 .0: ::J E Vl D
> Q)
::J - c ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 u
m ro "- ::J c 0 co E
D '" D (') Q)
:J 0 D Ci;- -'" .8 e Ol
c ~I 0 0 0 ~ u E c
c c '" Q) '" 0 '" ~ ro
<( 0 () "- >- 0 0 0 0 Q) ~ e u -<::
~ 2 0 Q)
~ D Q; D ~ ()
0 E D " (f) u Ol (f)
~ ,g W '" D- o Q) c Q)
to "- 0 Vl (j) E Ol ro ()
0 <( c '" e c -<:: ro
CL ()
CL <( C 0 0 Q) ~ ro "-
Q) f- -< -<:: (f)
[t: - 0 [t: u () Q) ~
c .~ ro Q)
'> LL ~I ('oJ 0 <D 0 '" () '"
" (0 Ol (f) ro
Q) Q) LL c 0 0 0 0 LO C Q) (f)
ro -'" > 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro > "- ro
ill - -0 :'S -<:: 0 ~ Ol
0 (f) Q) 11)
Ol 0 -0 c c (j) () '" m
c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"" 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; lii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol
0 ro c c W c
(f) --' Q) 0 0 z (f) (f) (f)
c .0: 'u; 'u; Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) 0 c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j 'u; c c c
:;: ro (j) Vl :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w w Q) u u U
0- () Q) :;; JI Vl c ro- m 'u; 'u; 'u;
0 Q) Q) t
~ 0 0 c (j (j w ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~
~ "
<D - 0 E E w -0 0 0>- Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u 0 U ill u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: 0: c 'u;
~ ro () > > Vl Iii 0."'-'" Q) Q) Q)
Q) 0 ::J '" Q) .........."'0 ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z --' u u 0 <:L Q; " ,--:,.(1) ro ro ro
~ 0 ro ro (j) c.? '" E t UJ1\j C C C C
0 ro -0 -0 0 0 Iii " .:...J.O)
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( -'" Vl " ..m <(:.p Q) Q) Q) Q)
1:: -0 Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w " '" c -'" I'-'- E
ro '" [t: 1il Q) c 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
0:: 0:: '" -< c
D- Ul u: 0 <( Z I -' U f- " D- D- D- D-
'T
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c 81 co 81 m co m 81 "-
'" "- '"
'u; '" "' ro c:i "'
c 0 <D
Q) 0 'T 0
C "f ",- c;; "--
'" '"
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q) ~I '" ~I ro ;:: co ~I 'T
~ 0 co
(f) c:i c:i oi c:i c:i
()
~
Ol
0
>: -' ~I ~I ~I
E '" co "- co 0j
ro 0 co
0 2 c:i ('oj <0 c:i ('oj
()j c '" 'T '"
U Q)
C 0
:J -
0 (f)
~ 0 @I 0 @I 'T C;; ('oJ @I 'T
(f) Q) 0 '" co '"
'T 0 c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i
('oj c
0 0::
oi 'u; -
c (f) ro
0 E OJ 81 '" 81 0 ('oJ m 81 '" ro
'Uj c (f) '" <D 'T :8
Q; w 0 D oi c:i "' c:i oi
> ~ 'u; D 'T 0 'T "
Q) ill '" '" '" '" Q)
"- E 1il
0 > ~
0 E - > m
('oJ (f) "'
:J E 0 E
Vl (fJ z ~I "- ~I 0 '" co ~I "-
E 0 Q) "- ('oJ co m "
Q) -2 (') ('oj '" c:i (j) '" Q)
-2 ~ ::J C'i co "- W co c
::J to - > ~ 15
0 ro '" E
CL ro D :;; 0
Q) 0
[t: 0 D >= '"
'" (j)
c c () ~I ('oJ ~I <D '" 'T ~I co 1i)
0 ~ '" <D ('oJ co W "-
ro ~ D '" '" c:i o:i z <0 m
E E D .8
,g '" '" '" a '"
E w 0 Uj c
:J (i <( 0
(fJ CL (j) (j)
<( c 0 :;; "
- 0 [t: w Q)
c .~ ~ w E
'> LL -' .a
Q) Q) LL :;; <(
-'" 0 > 0 z Q)
- tn "'
(f) Q) c c a 1iJ
Ol 0 0 (j) w >=
c 0 0 "
"' 0:: 'c u u w z <( E
ill t) f- a [t:
Q) Q) <( c
(fJ (f) is (f) (f) Uj w 0
() ro ro :;; D-
U ~ ~ m m >= (j) a ~
c <( (j) :>' m
ro Ol (f) (f) '0 '0 0 '0 "'
0 ro c c W W z :>'
(f) -' Q) 0 0 Q) Q) '0 Q)
C z 1il W 1il <( 1il
E ~ 'u; 'u; a Q) ro
Q) (f) (f) m -' m 1il w m c
E 2 E E Uj "' u "' u "'
>- E E m E 0
:;: :J C ro (j) I "' [t: ~
0- () m w w :;; c W c E ::J c
Q) " " " Q;
'" 0 0 Q) Q) w C- c a <:L
~ 0 c (j (j ,.:; ,.:; ,.:; 0 (j) ,.:;
,;; - 0 E E w '" -' '" '" :e <( '" a
0 Q) ~ u " <( " " " "
~ E Q) Q) [t: 'in z 'in 'in " w 'in c
~ ro () > > ::J "' a "' "' " [t: "' '"
Q) 0 = = = Q) <( =
'" E z -' u u a >= [t: '"
~ 0 ro ro (j) (j) (j) (j) ~ LL (j) Q)
0 ro 0 0 0 0 -' <( -' -' c a -' -<
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( <( [t: <( <( Q) <(
Ol ~ ~ 0 0 c 8 w f- W f- f- 0 :;; f- -'"
ro '" 0:: 0:: [t: a D- a a Q; ::J a -0
D- Ul u: 0 <( f- a f- f- D- (j) f- m
'T
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<( 81 'T 'T t<J
'" 0 '"
.c oi " (')
'u; m 0
m
c 0'-
Q)
C
u
Q)
()
:J
u ~I 0 '" '"
Q) 0 0 0
>: ~ 0 0 0
ro (f)
0
- ()
(f) ~
U
C Ol
:J 0
0 --' ~I
~ E 0 '" '"
0 0 0
(f) 2 0 0 0
c C
0
'u; Q)
,,!! 0
-
E (f)
w -0
u Q)
'T 0 @I 0 0 0
('oj Q) 0 0 0
oi ro 0:: 0 0 0
Ol -
c :e ro
0 OJ
'Uj E c (f)
Q; c 0 D ~
'u; 0
> ::J D D
"- Q) ill '" '0 ,g) .8
0 2 > ~ Q) 81 0 '" '" " ~
- ~
0 :J (f) > 1il 'T "- Ol 0 0
('oJ Q; D
0 E 0 m '" oi ~ co
Vl (fJ Z "' 0 0 .8 co
E Q) E D
Q) ro -2 (') c .8 .8 ~ E
Q) C'i 0 e
-2 ::J ::J Vl D
::J ~ - > Q) ~ ~ ~ ~
ro ,.:; 0 u
~ ro "- Ol c 0 co E
Q) D 0 Ol D (') Q)
E 0 D -'" .8 e Ol
~I "- 0 I'- U E c
E c '" Q; <D "- ~ ro
() D- o Q) ~ e u
:J 0 ~ "- 2 0 Q) .c
(fJ ~ D Vl D ~ ()
E D " " (f) u Ol
c (f)
0 ,g W '" c 0 Q) Q)
0 " (j) E ro
~ (i 0 Ol .c ()
~ C>- <( D- Ol e c () ro
0 <( c 0 Q) ~ ro (i
Q; ~ .c (f)
C>- - 0 [t: u () Q) ~
Q) c .~ E Q)
[t: '> LL ~I ('oJ 10 0 m ('oJ Ol (f) () '"
LL E 0 t<J <D ro
Q) Q) c Q) (f)
-'" -0 > 0 " 0 0 0 ('oj c0 ro > (i ro
ro - ~ .c 0 ~ Ol
ill (f) Q) 11)
Ol 0 -0 c c (j) () '" ro
0 c 0 0 (f)
0:: 'c w u u :s
"' 11) u U f- ro 0 0
ill Q) Q) <( Ol 0 0 ro
(f) is (f) (f) 5: 5:
(fJ () ro ro :;; [Ii c
u ~ ~ m m >= :J oS oS oS
c <( (f) (f) (j) Vl ro '3' 3' 3'
ro Ol c '0'
0 ro c c W 0 c
(f) --' Q) 0 0 z "w Q) (f) (f) (f)
c ~ 'u; 'u; 0 Vl 1il Ol Q) Q) Q)
Q) E (f) (f) E m c () () ()
E 2 >- E E i]j ::;:::::; 'u; c c c
:;: ro (j) W Vl E :J Q) Q) Q)
:J C m w W m c U U U
0- () Q) :;; JI Q; Vl C " ro 'u; 'u; 'u;
0 0 0 Q) Q) w E t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'" 0 c (j (j E " :>:
,;; - 0 E E w " 0 Ol Q) ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ~ u " 0 u " u 0 0 0
~ E Q) Q) [t: (j) 0: in 'u;
~ () > > Vl Iii Ll Q) Q) Q)
Q) ro 0 ::J Ol 0 Q) = ~ Ol Ol Ol
'" E z --' u u 0 c.? z "- Q; " ro ro ro
~ 0 ro ro (j) Ol E t (j) C C C C
0 ro -0 -0 0 0 Iii " --'
Q) !::' z Q) Q) [t: [t: <( -'" Vl " ..m <( Q) Q) Q) Q)
1:: " Vl 2 2 2 2
Ol ~ .Q! 0 0 c 8 w " Ol c -'" I'-'-
ro '" [t: 1il Q) c 0 " 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
0:: 0:: Ol -<
D- Ul u: 0 <( Z I --' U f- D- D- D- D-
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
'"
,;;
~
~
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
~
>:
ro
o
()j
u
C
:J
o
~
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
2
(f) C
6 Q)
u; S2
(f) (f)
"E t5
Q)
w .0'
~ D=
10 ro
Ol OJ
~ 6
'u;
ro CD
c >
o _
~ .~
ill Q)
CL -2
o ::J
CD ro
E ro
E 0
:J
(fJ
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c
'u;
c
Q)
C
c
o
o ~
:: .g
o D-
CL CL
Q) <(
[t: c:
'>
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~o~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
ro
ill
o
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
w
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
w
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
o
'0 u
Q)
1il
OJ
E
:;;
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
w
c-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
"'
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
><
o
z
JI
'"
"
c:i
"
'"
'"
"'
c:i
"
co
('oj
('oJ
o
c:i
o
('oj
('oJ
0;
"
o
"'
('oj
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
l()
o
c:i
"-
co
(0-
'"
('oj
co
('oJ
o
I"-
o
o
co
"
(0
co
o
<0
o
o
rs.:
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
o ...;f
"'
C\i cO
o 0
LO 0J
1.0- ('\1-
"-
"-
"
o
'"
('oJ
"'
c:i
'"
"'
('oj
"'
"-
o
<0
'"
"'
"'
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
ro
(0
o
c;:;
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
'"
"'
d
('oJ
""
"'
r:
1i)
-'"
ii;
:;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
(0
"
c:i
(0
'"
,,-
~ ~
cr:i
('f) I"-
" co
rs.: cD
'<;f
~ (0
o 0
"' ('oJ
0J <D
<ri i.ri
" 0
'"
o
(0
~
~
"-
co
'"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
co
"'
ro
'<;f
~
'"
'"
co
'"
r-s
Vl
<:L
E
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E "'
t)CO>
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
>.:.;:::::;-ro>
:P~Vl~~t30
Q) ro () E 0J
ro c... Q) Q) ()
,E L- ::c I- ro
.E::::l E
"E .g 0 w
>; 5 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
('f)
('oJ
c:i
'"
Q;
E
E
"
(j)
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
(0
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
"
Q)
-0
Q)
(j)
(j)
Vl
C
o
"'
E
:;;
ro
c
o
~
Q;
o
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Vl
11'
"
Vl
'"
Q)
:;;
c
o
~
OJ
E
:;;
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
(;
,~
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
[t:
Co
o
z
c
o
~
:E
:;;
ro
"'
c
Q)
"
'Uj
Q)
c
o
Z
c:i
0
"'
Q) ,!i)
oS B'
Vl Q)
" '5' Q)-
<i "- :0
0- Q) .~
Q) oS "
'5' (; (j)
"- " >R
Vl Q) 0 Q)
Q) 0 0 Q;
" ,~ C 0
oS " Q) 0 >R -'"
" (j) ~ 0 5:
(; <D i" 0 ,!i)
Vl
Q) ~ OJ ,!i) Vl (;
Vl ro Vl "' Q)
,~ E ~ :>' Q) " Vl
" 0 0 " Uj Q)
i" l' X Vl Uj C
Q) C Vl ,!i) '"
~ '5' ~ 0 0 Q) Q) -'" -'
"' ~ -0
"- '" ~ -'" C C ~
E " :>' 0 []]
Q) c OJ Q) " m
l' E c c c
oS oS -'" Q) Q) 0 0
:;; " ro oS
~ ,~ I ~ gl gl
'" '0; " '3:
Vl >R ,~ " '" '0; 1i) Q) <Y ~ ~
0 1i) (j) Vl
~ OJ Q) Q) "
oS " ~ (; >R
" ro ~ >R >- >R Q; Q) Q) 0
Vl "' 3: " 0 OJ " 0 " " 0 0
" OJ ('oJ '" "-
'" >- c @ Uj Uj ~ ,!i)
Q) ,!i) .l!l ,~ " ,~ ,!i) '~ ,!i) Vl
:;; Vl 'c .~ " 20 Vl c Vl c oS oS 0 1i5
1i5 Q) '" 0 u
"- " Q) "- 'f! '", "- tj 3: 3: 'x
c ~ c Q) 'f! ~ 1i5 ~ 'in w
0 OJ "
:;: ~ c oS ro ro Q) Q) Vl Vl ro Vl
0- c 'iij ro c " " c Vl 1i) 1i) '", 2
.E " 2
" "' 0 0 Q) Q) Q) 2
'" :E c c -' c -' D- c c\j c\j "
'" 0 0 ~ 0 0 c -< 0
:;; -'" Q) (;
,;; :e " " c ro :e " ro :e " ~
ro Q) (; 'iij Q) "' Q) "' Q) (; (; (; (;
~ " E " Q) " ~
"' " 0 ~ c " 0 " c " 0 Q; ~ ~ ~
~ c Q) Q) Q; >- Q) Q) Q) c Q) Q) Q) c c c ro
'" Q) ~ (j) "' (; 0 " ~ (j) Q) " ~ (j) "' Q) Q) Q) ro
" <i 'iij Vl 'iij E " " "
'" 0 ~ (j) E ~ (j) Q) ~ (j) Q; Q; Q; D-
o 'iij c " Q; E Q) c Q) c "
Q) !::' Q) Q) .l!l c "' Q) ~ Q) .l!l D:: ~ Q) .l!l z D- D- D- o
Ol ~ C " " Q) E Q) Co " " Q) Co " " Q) Q) Q) Q) ~
ro '" 0 Q; "- -'" " -'" 0 Q; "- -'" 0 Q; "- -'" -'" -'" -'"
D- Ul Z D- c f- c f- Z D- c f- Z D- c f- f- f- f- 0
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ '" CO 0 0 0 0
f- " ('oJ '" '" C;; "- is
:;; 0 m " CO
> ('oj "' ;:: ai 0j ai
10 " "- ('oJ
ro co 0 CO ('oJ <D
-0 ",- ",- ,,- <D-
f- ('oJ
Vl '" "- "- '" CO 0
<:L '" m '" CO ('oJ CO
~ c:i "' "' " '" M 1i5 '" <D '" 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
"- <D ('oJ "- 10 '" >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i C;; c:i M
ro '" co co ('oJ ro m m m 0 "- '" ('oJ CO
-0 ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ CO m m '" 0
('oJ '" '" CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J m 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) m '" <D '" '" 1i)
c 1il '" " ('oJ '" ('oJ Q)
'" "' " <D M c:i u::
-' ~
<:L " ('oJ ~ Q)
(; " '" ~ :"Q
'CO Q) '" "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" m Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
2 m 0 ,,- '? 0
oS c Vl Vl c:i ~
Q) '(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: > <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
'co ~ E '" '" 0 0 ,,- '"
0- " 1i) (j) "- 0 '" c:i -'"
1i5 '"
'" 0 -'" 0 ") '1 co -'" "
'" 1: " ro Vl '" -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
,;; Q) c :;; Q) '" " " 2
~ <:L 1i5 "- "- "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" '" > Q)
~ f- 11' Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) " Q) " > > " "
(') 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J .8 -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c 1i5 ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) m m m Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' LL c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
,;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
" 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
'"
o
o
Q) !::'
Ol ~
ro '"
Do- Ul
~
:;:
0-
'"
'"
,;;
~
~
Qj
E
E c
:J 0
~ ~
o .g
~ "-
to CL
o <(
CL _
Q) C
n::: S
Q)
~ t5
(f) Q) C
~ .0' t5 0
:.;:::::; D= ";:: "'0
ill W Q)
U)~O~
-g ~ ~ en
co 0) ~
(/) ..3 ~ 0
~ E ~ .~
E 2 ~E
:J C en W
() Q)
8 0 c ~
o ~ ~ ~
co g >
z --' u
ro
o
[t:
C
o
"
('oj
oi
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
"-
o
o
('oJ
Vl
E
Q)
-2
::J
u
Q)
()
:J
U
Q)
>:~
ro
o
-
(f)
u
C
:J
o
~
(f)
()
~
Ol
o
--'
E
(f) 2
6 c
"00 Q)
(f) S2
"E ~
W Q)
~ .0'
10 9;:
Ol ro
:.;:::::; m
E 6
c "00
::J Qj
ro >
c _
o (f)
~ .~
Q) -2
CL ::J
o _
ro
ro
o
ro
ill
o
"
'"
OJ
.0
:s
ill
>
~
c
2
<(
.c
'u;
c
Q)
C
Q)
E
ro
Z
.Q!
u:
t5 t5
Q) Q)
.0' .0'
D= D=
(f)
D
D
'"
~
>
o
Z
(')
C'i
>
"-
D
D
'"
()
~
E
W
c
o
.~
Q)
>
"-
D
D
'"
o
<(
o
[t:
LL
LL
o
c
o
u
Q)
(f)
ro
m
(f)
c
o
'u;
(f)
E
W
Q)
(j
E
Q)
>
u
ro
o
[t:
8
'0
.l!l
'"
OJ
"'
E
c
::J
,.:;
'"
o
Q;
D-
Vl
"
C
"
o
D-
Q;
E c.?
E 0
" [t:
~
(j)
W
f-
<(
:;;
>=
(j)
w
z
o
Uj
(j)
:;;
w
--'
<(
z
o
>=
<(
[t:
W
D-
o
('oJ
o
u
'"
('oJ
:;;
D-
o
~
:;;
D-
('oJ
o
(j)
o
u
><
o
z
JI
co
"
c:i
<D
('oJ-
<D
<D
c:i
<D
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
"'
"
('oJ
"-
"
"'
co
"-
('oj
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
<D
oi
"
<D
1'--
I"-
'"
('oj
'"
"
~
~
co
o
o
<D
"
iC
o
'"
r--;.:
o
<D
rs.:
Q)
Vl
"
o
-'"
11'
~
o;:;t 0
o
o 0)
<D '"
0J ...;r
1'-- ('\1-
c;;
"'
('oJ
<D
"'
('oJ
"-
c:i
o
'"
oi
<D
<D
c:i
"
co
'"
<0
~
1i5
"
"
c
~
-'"
,~
ro
Q;
c
Q)
c.?
(D
I'-
o
co
<D
'"
('oJ
o
c:i
(11
'"
N
('oJ
'"
"-
"'
o
'"
1i)
-'"
ii;
:;;
Q)
u
c
Q)
c
~~
>
c
o
U
o
'"
('oJ
'"
",-
;::
"-
('oJ
o:i
'"
o
c:i
o
'"
"'
('oJ
'"
('oj
o
'"
"
OJ
C
'(i
<:L
E
(j)
Vl
Vl
Q)
"-
tlj
" (j)
c ~
2 Q) <(
~ 0 I-'-'
A- '" 0
u... UJ I-'-'
'"
I'-
"'
o
",-
'"
oc;
o
co
('oj
'"
"
'"
c:i
o
(11
d
"
'"
o
('oJ
N
co
Vl
<:L
E
Q;
E
E
"
(j)
ro
c
2
,~
.E
~
c
Q)
E '"
t)CO>
" 0
:0 ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~
'O>.:.;:::::;-ro>
,*~~~8
OlroUE0J
:.;:::::; c... Q) Q) ()
"E ::c I- ro
c .E::::l E
:::l C .g 0 w
:>; 0 0
~ t5 ~ 0J
~ ~ ~ ~
cO 0 ,c_ Q)
:::=- () >-
(/) 0 (/)
Q) c "(j)
" Vl >-
:::l Q) ro
u 0 c
c 0 <(
<D
c
o
Vl
'"
Q)
(j)
'"
'"
<D
o
o
('oJ
c
o
'Uj
Q;
>
o
'"
E
w
Vl
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
(;
ii;
E
E
"
(j)
f-
:;;
>
ro
-0
f-
'"
co
"
'"
"-
Vl '"
<:L 0
~ L[j
'"
ro <D
-0
f-
.~
c
::J
o
Z
co
('oJ
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
'"
<Y
Vl
o
o
o
c
::J
Q) ('oJ
1il
[t: <0
<:L ~
'co
f-
Q)
OJ
'"
Q)
"
<(
Q)
<:L
>-
f-
Q)
Vl
::J
"
c
'"
--'
2
oS
Q)
>
'co
"
o
1:
1i5
11'
"
o
.E
1i5
'"
LL
(j) " 0 0 ('oJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "-
Vl c:i M c:i c:i ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i <D
Q) ('oJ "' CO 0 0 0 0
f- a> 0 a> " "- is
:;; a> " "' 0 CO
> '" " ('oj c:i ai
0 "' a> 0 "
ro "' "' 0 "- <D
-0 <D- ,,- ('oJ- ,,- a>-
f- ('oJ
Vl "- CO 0 a> "-
<:L '" 0 ('oJ CO
~ " ('oj <D '" " 1i5 '" <D "' 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 ('oJ 0 '"
<D '" 0 CO ('oJ >- o:i " ai c:i '" c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 10 c:i M
ro a> 0 '" <D <D ro a> a> a> 0 "- "' ('oJ CO
-0 ('oJ- ,,- 1il
f- U
.~ a> a> "' 0
'" "' CO <D
c " c:i "'
::J a> 0;
0 ('oJ
z 1i5
'" '" "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
>- ('oj c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i o:i c:i c:i
ro <D
Q) '" '" '" '" 1il
<:L
>- <Y <Y <Y <Y U
f- Vl Vl Vl Vl Co
~ 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 Z
Vl ::J 0 0 0 0
Q) ,~
Vl :;;
::J
" Q) <D "- 0 '" m
c 1il a> a> 0 "- Q)
'" " <D c:i ('oj u::
-' ~
<:L <D ('oJ Q)
(; '" :"Q
'CO Q) "' "- "- " ('oJ <D " " ('oJ <D
f- -'" <:L M c:i c:i <D M c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i M c:i c:i
ro Q) >- " ~ ~ ~ ~
E > f-
~
E Q) c
" a> Q)
"
(j) '" Q;
Q)
" D-
<(
Vl
Vl '"
Vl '" 0
Q) Vl '" 0
'" 0 0 0
(; 0 0 c:i
U5 0 0
0 0 ",- <q
a> 0 ,,- '? 0
c Vl Vl c:i ~
'(i '" '" ~ 0 0 0
:;: <:L Vl 0 0 0 ",-
~ E '" "' 0 0 ,,- '"
0- m (j) "- 0 "' c:i -'"
1i5 "'
'" -'" 0 ") '1 CO -'" "
'" " ro Vl "' -'" -'" "
" Vl "- "' "' " " " .=
,;; :;; Q) 2
Q) c "- '" "- " "
~ <:L "- .= .= f- >-
>- ~ Q) Q) v '" "' > Q)
~ f- Q) -'" " tlj <:L -'" -'" >- '" Vl E
'" Vl ,~ C >- .8 " " -'" >- >- > Q) Vl Vl Q) "
Q) Q) " > > " "
'" 0 Vl " " f- " " '" '" '" I " []] 0
0 0 ro c c " .= .= " Q) []] []] >- I
::J -'" ,!!1 '" Q) <( .= Q) Q) I >. " 0
Q) !::' Q; :"Q I I Q; c (; (;
" Q) > ~ ~ ~ ~ " ffi '" 0
Ol ~ c ~ c c c -'" -'" -'" -'" " 2 2 -'" -2 -0 -'" -0
ro '" '" Q) 0 (t Q) a> a> a> Q) Q) Q) 15 "
D- Ul -' c.? U > ~ ~ ~ :;; ~ ~ :;; I ::J :;; (j) :;;
Q; " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
E '" <0 "' ('oj '" "' '" '"
0 '" m m ('oJ m m
1iJ
"
u
-'" " <D 0 "' 0 0 0 0
ro ~ '" <0 "' ('oj "'
'" ('oJ
'0
Q; Co
0
E z
E
0
u
2 "' "- 0 0 0 0 0 0
" oi " "' "' ('oj c:i ('oj ('oj
E '" "'
E
0
U
Q; "' m 0
-'" '" '" "' oi .l!l
15 '" " -s
'"
" Q;
Vl E 0
c 0 .8
0 I
:e Vl
" Q)
c c
0
U o. '" 0 0 '"
0 '" '" "' o:i -'"
(j) ro -'" '" U
> (j) ro
'" "' "
.= c c
Q) E 0
" ~
'Uj 0
Q) I Q;
~
0
-'" CO CO 0 m
~ c:i <0 "' ('oj
'" '"
"
E
0
I
" Q)
c (;
.!'l U5
>- 2
e. oS OJ
Vi' c
Vi' ro Q) '(i
:;: 2 2 ro '0 > "-
I I "' 'co ~ E
0- c Q; " 1i) (j)
'" Q) E 0 1iJ -'"
-'" :2 " " ro Vl
'" 0, -'" E 1: Vl
0, o. 'Uj "
,;; c S Q) 0 c :;; Q)
~ Q) c ~ u 1i5 "-
Q) ~ Q)
~ --' --' Vl 11' -'" " tlj
Q)
'" o. o. " Vl Vl Vl ,~ C
(') 0 ~ 'co Q) o. o. " " Q) "
0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 ro c c
!::' c f- o. .8 -'" Q; ,!!1 '"
Q) '" Iii Vl Q) > ~
Ol ~ -2 o. (; OID 1iJ ~ c c c
ro '" " ~ Vl '" Q) 0 (t
Do- Ul ::J ~ >R >R " LL c.? U
0 0
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (East Grand Ave.) 2-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3: East Grand Ave. (1878), Airport Blvd. (1783)
Equation (East Grand Ave.) (14.04)(1878)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.96 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(3.3 )(1783)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.22 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.96 + 0.22 ~ 1.18 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.18 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.68 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.68 x 0.7 ~ 2.57 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.57 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (East Grand Ave.) 2-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3: East Grand Ave. (1878), Airport Blvd. (1728)
Equation (East Grand Ave.) (14.04)(1878)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.96 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(3.3 )(1728)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.21 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.96 + 0.21 ~ 1.17 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.17 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.67 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.67 x 0.7 ~ 2.57 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.57 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Mateo Ave.) 4-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Mateo Ave. (1013), Airport Blvd. (2430)
Equation (San Mateo Ave.)
(3.34)(1013)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.12 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(11.9 )(2430)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 1.06 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 1.06 + 0.12 ~ 1.18 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.18 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.68 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.68 x 0.7 ~ 2.58 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.58 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Mateo Ave.) 4-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Mateo Ave. (815), Airport Blvd. (2376)
Equation (San Mateo Ave.)
(3.34)(815)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.09 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(11.9 )(2376)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 1.03 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 1.03 + 0.09 ~ 1.12 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.12 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.62 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.62 x 0.7 ~ 2.53 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.53 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.03 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB On-Ramp - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 SB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume: San Bruno Ave. (1788)3, US 101 SB (713)4
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.95)(1788)(3.666) / 100,000 ~ 0.77 ppm
Equation (US 101 SB)
7
(3.7 )(713)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.10 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.77 + 0.10 ~ 0.87 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.87 + 2.5 ~ 3.37 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.37 x 0.7 ~ 2.36 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.36 + 2.5 ~ 4.86 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Figure 4, 2010 Background With Project Volumes, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by
DKS Associates, dated April 13, 2009, Traffic flow is one-way,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
7
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB On-Ramp - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 SB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume: San Bruno Ave. (1651)3, US 101 SB (650)4
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.95)(1651)(3.666) / 100,000 ~ 0.72 ppm
Equation (US 101 SB)
7
(3.7 )(650)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.08 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.72 + 0.08 ~ 0.80 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.80 + 2.5 ~ 3.30 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.30 x 0.7 ~ 2.31 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.31 + 2.5 ~ 4.81 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Figure 4, 2010 Background With Project Volumes, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by
DKS Associates, dated April 13, 2009, Traffic flow is one-way,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
7
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 NB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at 100 feet.
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Bruno Ave. (1403), US 101 NB (487)
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(3.84)(1480)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.21 ppm
Equation (US 101 NB)
6
(1.7 )(492)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.03 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.21 + 0.03 ~ 0.24 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.24 + 2.5 ~ 2.74 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 2.74 x 0.7 ~ 1.92 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 1.92 + 2.5 ~ 4.42 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed;
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 NB) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Bruno Ave. (1418), US 101 NB (446)
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.94)(1418)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.62 ppm
Equation (US 101 NB)
6
(3.3 )(446)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.05 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.62 + 0.18 ~ 0.67 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.67 + 2.5 ~ 3.17 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.17 x 0.7 ~ 2.22 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.22 + 2.5 ~ 4.72 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
US 101 Between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380 - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Mitchell Ave. and 1-380 ~ (15,170)
(8.54)(15,170)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.71 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.71 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.71 + 2.5 ~ 7.21 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 7.21 x 0.7 ~ 5.05 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 5.05 + 2.5 ~ 7.55 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
4
US 101 Between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380 - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Mitchell Ave. and 1-380 ~ (15,029)
(8.54)(15,029)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.68 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.68 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.68 + 2.5 ~ 7.18 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 7.18 x 0.7 ~ 5.03 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 5.03 + 2.5 ~ 7.53 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35
4
US 101 Between Grand Ave. and Ovster Pt. - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
US 101 between Grand Ave. and Oyster Pt.; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Grand and Oyster Pt. ~ (13,767)
(8.54)(13,767)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.28 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.28 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.28 + 2.5 ~ 6.78 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 6.78 x 0.7 ~ 4.75 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 4.75 + 2.5 ~ 7.25 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed;
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 39,
4
US 101 Between Grand Ave. and Ovster Pt. - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
US 101 between Grand Ave. and Oyster Pt.; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Grand and Oyster Pt. ~ (13,591)
(8.54)(13,591)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.23 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.23 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.23 + 2.5 ~ 6.73 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 6.73 x 0.7 ~ 4.71 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 4.71 + 2.5 ~ 7.21 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
4
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (East Grand Ave.) 2-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3: East Grand Ave. (1878), Airport Blvd. (1783)
Equation (East Grand Ave.) (14.04)(1878)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.96 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(3.3 )(1783)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.22 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.96 + 0.22 ~ 1.18 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.18 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.68 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.68 x 0.7 ~ 2.57 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.57 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (East Grand Ave.) 2-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3: East Grand Ave. (1878), Airport Blvd. (1728)
Equation (East Grand Ave.) (14.04)(1878)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.96 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(3.3 )(1728)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.21 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.96 + 0.21 ~ 1.17 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.17 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.67 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.67 x 0.7 ~ 2.57 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.57 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Mateo Ave.) 4-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Mateo Ave. (1013), Airport Blvd. (2430)
Equation (San Mateo Ave.)
(3.34)(1013)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.12 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(11.9 )(2430)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 1.06 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 1.06 + 0.12 ~ 1.18 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.18 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.68 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.68 x 0.7 ~ 2.58 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.58 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.08 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Mateo Ave.) 4-lane road and (Airport Blvd.) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Mateo Ave. (815), Airport Blvd. (2376)
Equation (San Mateo Ave.)
(3.34)(815)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.09 ppm
Equation (Airport Blvd.)
6
(11.9 )(2376)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 1.03 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 1.03 + 0.09 ~ 1.12 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 1.12 (intersection) + 2.5 (I-hr background) ~ 3.62 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.62 x 0.7 ~ 2.53 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.53 (intersection) + 2.5 (8-hr background) ~ 5.03 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
No Project ~ No Impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB On-Ramp - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 SB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume: San Bruno Ave. (1788)3, US 101 SB (713)4
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.95)(1788)(3.666) / 100,000 ~ 0.77 ppm
Equation (US 101 SB)
7
(3.7 )(713)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.10 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.77 + 0.10 ~ 0.87 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.87 + 2.5 ~ 3.37 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.37 x 0.7 ~ 2.36 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.36 + 2.5 ~ 4.86 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Figure 4, 2010 Background With Project Volumes, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by
DKS Associates, dated April 13, 2009, Traffic flow is one-way,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
7
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB On-Ramp - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 SB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume: San Bruno Ave. (1651)3, US 101 SB (650)4
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.95)(1651)(3.666) / 100,000 ~ 0.72 ppm
Equation (US 101 SB)
7
(3.7 )(650)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.08 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.72 + 0.08 ~ 0.80 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.80 + 2.5 ~ 3.30 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.30 x 0.7 ~ 2.31 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.31 + 2.5 ~ 4.81 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Figure 4, 2010 Background With Project Volumes, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by
DKS Associates, dated April 13, 2009, Traffic flow is one-way,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
7
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 NB) 2-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at 100 feet.
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Bruno Ave. (1403), US 101 NB (487)
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(3.84)(1480)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.21 ppm
Equation (US 101 NB)
6
(1.7 )(492)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.03 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.21 + 0.03 ~ 0.24 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.24 + 2.5 ~ 2.74 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 2.74 x 0.7 ~ 1.92 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 1.92 + 2.5 ~ 4.42 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed;
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
Intersection of (San Bruno Ave.) 4-lane road and (US 101 NB) 4-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic Volume3: San Bruno Ave. (1418), US 101 NB (446)
Equation (San Bruno Ave.)
(11.94)(1418)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 0.62 ppm
Equation (US 101 NB)
6
(3.3 )(446)(3.66) / 100,000 ~ 0.05 ppm
I-hour Local Concentration: 0.62 + 0.18 ~ 0.67 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 0.67 + 2.5 ~ 3.17 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 3.17 x 0.7 ~ 2.22 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 2.22 + 2.5 ~ 4.72 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-A, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
Secondary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
4
6
US 101 Between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380 - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Mitchell Ave. and 1-380 ~ (15,170)
(8.54)(15,170)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.71 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.71 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.71 + 2.5 ~ 7.21 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 7.21 x 0.7 ~ 5.05 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 5.05 + 2.5 ~ 7.55 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road - Year 2010 carbon monoxide value derived from Table 12, Average Exhaust Emission Rates,
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
4
US 101 Between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380 - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and 1-380; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Mitchell Ave. and 1-380 ~ (15,029)
(8.54)(15,029)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.68 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.68 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.68 + 2.5 ~ 7.18 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 7.18 x 0.7 ~ 5.03 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 5.03 + 2.5 ~ 7.53 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35
4
US 101 Between Grand Ave. and Ovster Pt. - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (with Project)
US 101 between Grand Ave. and Oyster Pt.; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Grand and Oyster Pt. ~ (13,767)
(8.54)(13,767)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.28 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.28 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.28 + 2.5 ~ 6.78 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 6.78 x 0.7 ~ 4.75 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 4.75 + 2.5 ~ 7.25 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed;
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 39,
4
US 101 Between Grand Ave. and Ovster Pt. - Carbon Monoxide Concentration Estimate
Analysis Year: 2010 (without Project)
US 101 between Grand Ave. and Oyster Pt.; 8-lane road, at grade.
Receptor at edge
Background I-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm1
Background 8-hour carbon monoxide ~ 2.5 ppm2
Hourly Traffic V olume3:
US 101 between Grand and Oyster Pt. ~ (13,591)
(8.54)(13,591)(3.665) / 100,000 ~ 4.23 ppm
Equation
I-hour Local Concentration: 4.23 ppm
I-hour Total Concentration: 4.23 + 2.5 ~ 6.73 ppm
8-hour Local Concentration: 6.73 x 0.7 ~ 4.71 ppm
8-hour Total Concentration: 4.71 + 2.5 ~ 7.21 ppm
I-hour Significance Threshold = 20 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
8-hour Significance Threshold = 9 ppm
Project ~ Less than significant impact
2
Since the project is located in an area below the 3,0 isopleth of Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines Figure 3 and Figure 4, a background concentration of 2,5 ppm is assumed; Page
46.
Ibid,
Derived traffic volumes are for both directions and include the highest value for each referenced roadway
segment See Table 13-B, Centrum Distribution Center Traffic ImpactAnalysis, by DKS Associates, dated
April 13, 2009,
Primary Road, Table 12, Reference Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, BAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Table 10, Average Exhaust Emission Rates, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 35,
4
ApPENDIX D
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Analysis
Administrative Draft fiR
Prepared for
City of South San Francisco
By
OKS Associates
1000 Broadway, Suite 450
Oakland, California 94607
(510) 763-2061
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary ...............................................................................................4
2 Introduction......................................................................................................... 13
2.1 Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................13
2.2 Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 15
2.3 Level of Service Calculations.................................................................................. 15
3 Existing Condition................................................................................................19
3.1 Roadway Network................................................................................................. 19
3.2 Existing Intersection Operating Conditions.............................................................. 20
3.3 Existing Roadway Segment Operating Conditions.................................................... 20
3.4 Existing Condition Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ................................................... 25
3.5 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations ............................................................. 26
3.6 Existing Parking .................................................................................................... 27
4 2010 Background Without Project Condition...................................................... 28
4.1 Intersection Operating Conditions ..........................................................................28
4.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions ................................................................28
4.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ..............................................................................33
4.4 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations ............................................................. 33
4.5 Parking ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... .... 33
5 2010 Background With Project Condition ........................................................... 34
5.1 Significance Criteria and Project Impacts ................................................................ 34
5.2 Trip Generation .................................................................................................... 35
5.3 Trip Distribution .................................................................................................... 38
5.4 15% TDM Reduction .............................................................................................39
5.5 30% TDM Reduction .............................................................................................45
5.6 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations ............................................................. 51
5.7 Site Plan and Area Circulation Analysis ...................................................................52
5.8 Parking ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... .... 53
6 2020 Cumulative Without Project Condition....................................................... 54
6.1 Intersection Operating Conditions ..........................................................................54
6.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions ................................................................54
6.3 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations ............................................................. 59
6.4 Parking ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... .... 59
7 2020 Cumulative With Project Condition ............................................................ 60
7.1 15% TDM Reduction ............................................................................................. 60
7.2 30% TDM Reduction ............................................................................................. 65
7.3 Parking ................................................................................................................ 70
Centrum Distribution Center 1 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
8 2030 Cumulative Without Project Condition....................................................... 71
8.1 Intersection Operating Conditions ..........................................................................71
8.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions ................................................................ 71
8.3 Signal Warrant Analysis .........................................................................................76
8.4 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations ............................................................. 76
8.5 Parking ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... .... 76
9 2030 Cumulative With Project Condition ............................................................ 77
9.1 15% TDM Reduction .............................................................................................77
9.2 30% TDM Reduction .............................................................................................82
9.3 Parking ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... .... 88
10 Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................... 89
10.1 Intersection Mitigation Measures............................................................................ 89
10.2 Roadway Segment Mitigation Measures.................................................................. 91
11 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 92
Appendix A Level of Service Calculations
Appendix B Signal Warrant Analysis
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Existing Volumes - Peak Hour Volumes ............................................................................. 24
Figure 2 - 2010 Background without Project Condition - Peak Hour Volumes ....................................... 29
Figure 3 - Peak Hour Project Trips - 15% TDM Reduction .................................................................40
Figure 4 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Peak Hour Volumes 15% TDM Reduction ............... 41
Figure 5 - Peak Hour Project Trips - 30% TDM Reduction .................................................................46
Figure 6 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Peak Hour Volumes 30% TDM Reduction ............... 47
Figure 7 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Traffic Volumes - Peak Hour Volumes ............................... 58
Figure 8 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition - Peak Hour Volumes - 15% TDM Reduction ........... 61
Figure 9 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition - Peak Hour Volumes - 30% TDM Reduction ........... 66
Figure 10 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Traffic Volumes - Peak Hour Volumes ............................. 75
Figure 11 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition - Peak Hour Volumes - 15% TDM Reduction .........78
Figure 12 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition - Peak Hour Volumes - 30% TDM Reduction .........84
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
2
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES 1 - AM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ................................................................................................... 7
Table ES 2 - PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ...................................................................................................8
Table ES 3 - AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Level of Service Summary........................................................................... 9
Table ES 4 - PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Level of Service Summary..........................................................................ll
Table 1 - Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds....................................................................................16
Table 2 _ Level of Service Criteria for Arterials..................................................................................................................18
Table 3 - Level of Service Criteria for Freeways 8ased on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios..........................................................18
Table 4 - Existing Condition Intersection Level of Service..................................................................................................21
Table S - Existing Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis ...........................................................................22
Table 6 - Existing Conditions Signal Warrant Analysis .......................................................................................................26
Table 7 _ 2010 8ackground without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service ............................................................30
Table 8 - 2010 8ackground without Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis......................................31
Table 9 - 2010 8ackground without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................33
Table 10 - Trip Generation Rates.....................................................................................................................................36
Table 11- Proposed Project Trip Generation - lS% TDM Reduction ..................................................................................37
Table 12 - Proposed Project Trip Generation - 30% TDM Reduction..................................................................................38
Table 13 - Proposed Project Trip Distribution ...................................................................................................................38
Table 14 - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - lS% TDM Reduction .............................42
Table IS - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction ......43
Table 16 - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction ....................................4S
Table 17 - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 30% TDM Reduction .............................48
Table 18 - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction ......49
Table 19 - 2010 8ackground with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction ....................................SI
Table 20 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service ...........................................................SS
Table 21 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis.....................................S6
Table 22 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis ..................................................................S9
Table 23 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - lS% TDM Reduction ..............................62
Table 24 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction .......63
Table 2S - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction .....................................6S
Table 26 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 30% TDM Reduction ..............................67
Table 27 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction .......68
Table 28 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction .....................................70
Table 29 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service ...........................................................72
Table 30 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis.....................................73
Table 31 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis ..................................................................76
Table 32 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - lS% TDM Reduction ..............................79
Table 33 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction .......80
Table 34 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - lS% TDM Reduction .....................................82
Table 3S - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 30% TDM Reduction ..............................8S
Table 36 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction .......86
Table 37 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TDM Reduction .....................................88
Table 38 - Summary of Mitigation Measures -IS% TDM Reduction ..................................................................................91
Table 39 - Summary of Mitigation Measures - 30% TDM Reduction ...................................................................................91
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
3
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this study is to determine the potential transportation impacts of the proposed
Centrum Distribution Center located in the City of South San Francisco. The proposed project
consists of approximately 368,969 square feet of light industrial space, 245,797 square feet of
warehousing space, 6,600 square feet for business and professional services, including a copy,
print, and express shipping store, 1,500 square feet for an eatery without a drive-through, and
1,000 square feet for a convenience market.
This report analyzed the traffic conditions of intersection and roadway segments during the
weekday AM and PM peak hours. The operation of these intersections and roadway segments
was evaluated for the following scenarios: Existing Condition, 2010 Background Condition, 2010
Background with Project Condition, 2030 Cumulative No Project Conditions and 2030
Cumulative with Project Condition. The "with project conditions" have been analyzed with both
a 15% and a 30% trip reduction in conjunction with a Transportation Demand Management
program. Table ES 1 and Table ES 2 provide a summary of the intersection operation Level of
Service (LOS) analysis.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
4
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table ES 3 and Table ES 4 provide a summary of the roadway segment operation analysis.
The project trips generated by Centrum Distribution Center were estimated based on the 8th
edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual with consideration given to Transportation Demand
Management and passenger car equivalents for truck trips.
Based on the analysis results and the threshold criteria, the proposed project would result in no
significant transportation impacts to the study intersections under the 2010 Background with
Project Condition due to the development of the Centrum Distribution Center. For the 2020
Cumulative with Project Condition one intersection impact would occur. Finally, during the 2030
Cumulative with Project Condition, three intersection impacts would occur.
Existing Condition
Under the Existing Condition, 12 study intersections would operate at acceptable Level of
Services (LOS D or better) during the AM and PM peak hours. All of the 16 roadway segments
would also operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS D or better for arterials, LOS E for US
101) during both of the peak hours.
2010 Background without Project Condition
During the AM and PM peak hours, all of the study intersections and roadway segments would
continue to operate at acceptable LOS.
2010 Background with Project Condition
During the AM and PM peak hours, all of the study intersections and roadway segments for the
15% and 30% Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs would continue to
operate at acceptable LOS.
2020 Cumulative without Project Condition
Three intersections during the AM peak hour and two intersections during the PM peak hour
would operate at unacceptable Levels of Service. During the AM peak hour, East Grand Avenue
intersections at Airport Boulevard, US 101 northbound off-ramps, and Gateway Boulevard would
all operate at LOS F. East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard and San Mateo Avenue and
Airport Boulevard would respectively operate at LOS E and F during the PM peak hour. No
roadway segments would operate at unacceptable Levels of Service.
2020 Cumulative with Project Condition
Three intersections would experience a significant impact under the 2020 Cumulative with
Project Condition during the PM peak hour for both the 15% and 30% TDM programs. The
impact at East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would be mitigated to a less than
significant level by lane restriping and modifications. At San Mateo Avenue and Airport
Boulevard, the impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level by lane restriping and
modifications to the intersections geometry. The impact at San Bruno Avenue and US 101
southbound ramps would be mitigated to less than significant level by restriping as well.
2030 Cumulative without Project Condition
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
5
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Four intersections during the respective AM and PM peak hours would operate at unacceptable
Levels of Service. For the AM peak hour, intersections of East Grand Avenue at Airport
Boulevard, US 101 northbound off-ramps, and at Gateway Boulevard would all operate at LOS
F. Additionally during the AM peak hour, San Bruno Avenue at US 101 southbound ramps would
also operate at LOS F. LOS F conditions would also exist during the PM peak hour at East Grand
Avenue and Airport Boulevard and at East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard. San Mateo
Avenue and Airport Boulevard and the northbound approach to the intersection of US 101
southbound ramps at San Bruno Avenue would operate at LOS F. All other intersections in both
peak hours would continue to operate at acceptable LOS. The roadway segment on Airport
Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court would operate at LOS F during the PM
peak hour. All other roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS.
2030 Cumulative with Project Condition
For the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition, one intersection during the AM peak hour and
three intersections during the PM peak hour would experience a significant impact for both the
15% and 30% TDM programs. During the AM peak hour, the impact at the intersection of
Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would be mitigated by lane restriping.
Three intersections would experience a significant impact under the 2030 Cumulative with
Project Condition during the PM peak hour. The impact at East Grand Avenue and Airport
Boulevard would be mitigated to a less than significant level by lane restriping and modifications
to the intersection geometry. At San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard, the impact would be
mitigated to a less than significant level by lane restriping and modifications to the intersections
geometry. The impact at San Bruno Avenue and US 101 southbound ramps would be mitigated
to less than significant level by restriping as well.
The study concluded that the proposed development of the Centrum Distribution Center would
also result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative project transportation impact to one
roadway segment, Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court, under the 2030
Cumulative with Project PM peak hour scenario.
One roadway segment, Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court would
experience a significant impact during the PM peak hour. This impact would be mitigated by
adding additional southbound capacity between these two streets. Even though the decrease in
travel speed would be minimal, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.
A Caltrans Peak Hour Signal Warrant analysis was performed at the single unsignalized study
intersection. Based on the signal warrant analysis, the intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US
101 northbound right-turn off-ramp satisfies the peak hour signal warrant under the 2020
Cumulative Condition PM peak hour. An AM peak hour signal warrant for this intersection would
be satisfied under the 2030 Cumulative Conditions.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
6
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
f;
.~ I
. 6
>:;::;:2:
:;::;'iJo
. c >-
~8~
a ~ g
o .0'
81>:
N
f;
.~ ~
. 0
>:;::;:2:
:;::;'iJo
. c >-
~8~
o u ~
U .-
o .0'
81>:
N
.
o~B
g:; 'iJ >-
N E Ei f\J
a u ~
f;
.~ ~
~ 0
c:;::;:2:
~-g~
~8~
. u 0
~ . M
:::;[
~
c
o
"'0:;::; Vl
~'g~g
" 0 _
~u >-
tit:-s-
~ .9l,LIl
0_
36: I
~f;
",
~
::: ~ g
~ ~'g >-
lil 8 f\J
to ~
~
"~
.
"'
~
o
..
>
~
c
o
'8
.
~
21
.!i
.
o
o
J:
"
.
~
>:
"
~
"'
w
.
:c
!!!.
u
.
~
.5
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
z z z z z z z z z z z
~
o u ~ ~ ~ u U to u u to u 0 ~
~
~ "TCDcDWN"-CDNMWCD"TcDcD
~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W
u
.
~
.5
00000000000 00
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
~
o u ~ ~ ~ u u w u u w u 0 ~
~
~ ~ CD cD W "T "- CD "- ~ 0 M "T cD cD
i ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W
~
"
~
u~~~UUtOtOUtOU 0<(
N~
g~
~~
cir..::
~~
r--M....LIl r--v 00 v <D<D
~~~~~~~uigjo:i
u
.
~
.5
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
~
o u 0 0 0 U U W W U W U W ~
~
~ M~"TWcD"TWcDcD"-..--<NMW
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 3 ~ ~ ~ M N W
u
.
~
.5
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
U 0 0 0 U U W W U W U
~ McD"TWW"TWcDW"-"TNMW
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 3 ~ ~ ~ M N W
~
c
ti
"x
w
~
"
~
U 0 0 0 U U W W U W U W ~
..--< "T "T W cD "T W "T "T CD cD N M W
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ M N W
D
~
"
~
UOOUUUtOtOUtOU to<(
~
.
."
"
OOMLIlO<DM,",,!a'lMN,",,!,",,!,,!a'l
~~~~gj~~~~~~M;:o:i
"
"
c
8
"'0"'0"'0"'0"'0"'0"'0
lL~ lL~ lL~ "~
~~~~~~"iii
~~~~~~~
c
o
13
~
1i
.!i
~
.
"'O~"E ~
:a ~ ~ ~ ~ cu
"'0 ~ tg "5 ~ ~ ~
~o~s~_gJi~
~~c:~~~Jii~
sa..... 2l 8. fi g.....
~~~&~6-"~
o-..-..-..-..~~
e- cu cu cu cu c
"- ::J ::J ::J ::J l!! cu
::. ~ ~ ~ lii E Ji
~ Ji Ji Ji Ji ~ ~
C "'0 "'0 "'0 0 to "'0
~~~~~z:S
~~~~~~'3
:E.1l.1l.1l~:J5:
ci
z
~
"'0 "'0 "'0 "'0 "~
~~lL~"iii
~ ~ ~ ~ c
c c c c C'l
C'lC'lC'lC'l"iii
ViViViViS
Ii!
~
z
.
o
c
.
il
o
"
.
:2:~~~
c
~ Vl Vl Vl
Vl:J:J:J
~-;;-;;-;;-;;
C ::J ::J ::J ::J
~ C C C C
Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ -5 -5
:;; <( <( <( <( ~ ~
~ 0 0 0 0 e 0
o c c ceo..
c::: ::J ::J ::J::J a.
:s: d:l d:l d:l d:l <(
~cccctOtO
..c~~~~ZVl
Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl
I'l . .
~~
E E E
!11!11!11
~~~
~zz
....NMVLll<Dr--OOa'l~;:~
o 0
z z
o 0
z z
o 0
z z
f;
"~ ~
~:8:2:8
~'g0...J
"5 0 I-
EU~
a lil g
o "0'
81>:
N
w ~
f;
"~~ Vl
. 0 "
>:;::;:2:...J
:;::;'iJo
~ l5 I-
EU~
a lil ~
o "0'
81>:
N
~ "~
g~:a
~ E l5 ~
aUQj
"
u
.
~
.5
o
*
~ 2'
~- i
~ 8
" z
u
n
e
o
o
j B-
e
" 0
i ~
o 0
o
o "
CD U1 (5
S b
! 0 ~ 8
6 ~ ~ !
HiH
U1 Q) ~ U1 ~
ooiS-
~ ~
~ '0
. 7
:9 ~ :9 :9 :9 :9 :9 :9 :9 :9 ~
o 0
7 7
uu-u-u-OUc:lOUUO
~ '"'! ~ ~
~~~~
u
.
~
.5
~<(
;;j~6~~~~;;;~~Lf1
g]MM.-I<:tNM~M;:::]cO
orrJooooooooo
7g:77777777Z
o 0
7 7
UU-U-U-DUc:lDUUO
~~::;
QjoO\
"M~
~
OULLLL
~
~~M
r..::Nr..::
N~~
"
"
c
8
~ ~ ~
"~ "~ "~
"iii"iii"iii
c c c
~ ~ ~
Vi Vi Vi
c
o
13
~
1i
.!i
~
"'0 ~
~ It:
. 0
"'0"5 to
~ ~ Z
~ ~ ~
s e- Vl
~~:J
0__
~. .
~ E E
- . .
~ Ji Ji
c ~ ~
. C c
Ji~~
~ rrJ rrJ
:E.1l.1l
ci
z
~<(
M ~
r-.: cO
~ ~
M N
.-I M Lf1 0 cD N ~ 00
~~;::j;a!~;;;j~~~~
LL 0 U to U U U 0 LL <(
; 0 N ~ v M M 0 00 ~ LIl
~ ~ gj ;: ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ o:i
"'0"'0"'0"'0"'0
~~~"~"~
~ ~ ~ "iii "iii
"~ "~ "~ "~I "~
VlVlVlVlVl
~
"'0 "'0 "'0 "~
~~~"iii
~ ~ ~ C
C C C C'l
C'lC'lC'l"iii
ViViViS
Ii!
~ ~
. z
"E ~ cu I'l . .
~"E~cu ::JE~E~E
.J,l ~ to E ~
S.J,l~~ Ji~~~
>- i3 8. <( ~ 0 Bl ~ ~
~~~Jiic~
~8.fig~:2:~~~
&~6-"~~~~~
-..-..~~~-..-..-..-..
CU CU rrJ C CU CU CU CU
E E a. ~ ~ ::J ::J ::J ::J
~ CU ~ <( Vl ~ ~ ~ ~
<(Jic:::c-"JiJiJiJi
~ 0 ~ ~ ] goo 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ::J 5 5 5
l.:) :2: ~ fi :s: d:l d:l d:l d:l
rrJ C ::J ~ C C C C
~ ~ Vl 0 ..c ~ ~ ~ ~
WVl:JVlVlVlVlVlVl
-5-5
. .
o 0
0..0..
!/-!/-
~~
z~
....NMVLll<Dr--OOa'l~;:~
~
~'
~
"
>-
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
f;
.~ ~
. 0
>:;::;:2:
:;::;'00
. c >-
~8~
3 ~ g
o '0'
81>:
N
f;
.~ C
~:8:2:
~'go
"'5 0 I-
EU~
3 ~ ~
o '0'
81>:
N
c
-g~
6 -g :2:
" 0 "
~~I-
~ .9L~
::: ~ ~ ~
~ fi ~
".
.
>
p
~ 6
E :;::;
::J'O
u 6
au
N
~
u
.
~
.5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
o w w w 0 ~ u ~ w u w u w w
~
~ "T"TOw"T,,-<w(Y)lf)WWo..-<(Y)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ If) If) ~ ~ ~ (Y) ~ ~
u
.
~
.5
o ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0
Z ~ Z Z ~ Z Z Z Z ~ Z
~
o w W w 0 ~ u ~ w u W u w w
~
~ "T~owlf)"-<~lf)"T"TU10"-<(Y)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ If) If) ~ ~ ~ (Y) ~ ~
~
o tOWtOOLLU<(UUOU tOtO
~
~ M,",,!OOOC!Oooooov,",,!o'""!f"'!
~ ~[ri~~~~<D~~~gM~:::
u
.
~
.5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
"
~
wOw U 0 U ~ W U U U W W
W 7
~ 7
7
~ 0 ~ U1 W N "T W U1 U1 0 "T
~ ~ 7 ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ S
u
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.[ zzzzzzzzzzz
6
-g:!:!
i3-g:2:
" 0 "
~~I-
lil ~ ~
to''='''LIl
:::~7 ~ Wlf)~O"-<~~"-<WN
~fi ~ ~~~~~~C()~~~
",
~
c c
::: ~ ~
a ~~
l"\I ~ 6 >-
. u .
~ .
"
.
u
"~
.
"'
~
o
~
~
c
o
~
~
21
.!i
.
,
o
J:
"
.
~
>:
0.
I
N
"'
W
.
:c
!!!.
D
~
~ "
c ~
ti
'x >-
w .
."
"
~
"
~
wOw U 0 U ~ W U U U
~
"
~
tOOtOUOU<(tOUUU tOtO
r-..r-..r-..O..-<LIlOO"lLll<DMO"lC!V
~~~g~~r..:~~gjgjN::::::
tOOtOUOU<(tOUUU tOtO
r-..,",,!O"lO"l<DM..-<O"lVO"lOOOOOOV
~~~gj~~r..:~~~~N::::::
"
"
c
o
u
~
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'CoLl
lL~ lL~ lL~ lL~ lL~ oLl N
f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J ~ ~
.~.~.~.~Ig .~.~.~.~.~.~.~
VlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVl:5
c
o
:e
~
>;
.!i
~
~
~~ oLl
"'C f\J f\J "'C "'5 oLl ~ l3.. l3..E "E
lii..... > liiS::J cE E
"'C~15~i!....~ ~f\J~~
lii~tO~::Jl:l~~o~tOtO
ijj z~S.e-....C21VlZZ
"'5~C::s:~<(~~~:::::::::
~!~~'ije~~~~~
~-;;-;;-;;-;;:;-2~-;;-;;-;;-;;
~~~~2~~lii2222
> > > oLl f\J - Vl oLl oLl oLl oLl
~<(<(<(~e:::~-"~~~~
~ ] ] ] ~ ~ ~ ] g g g g
<( .... .... .... f\J ~ e::: ::J ::J ::J ::J
l.:)l.:)l.:):2::::fi:s:totototo
~ ~ ~ ~ C ::J f\J C C C C
:E.1l.1l.1l~~5:6i~~~~
ci
z
....l"\IMVLll<Dr-..OOO"l::::::~
~ ~
~ N
Ii!
~
Z
o 0
Z Z
o 0
Z Z
~ ~
o 0
Z Z
f;
.~ ~
~:8:2:
:;::;'00
~ l5 I-
EU~
o u a
U . M
o '0'
81>:
N
u
.
~
.5
~ :.
~ ~
c
o
o
o
~
"
S
o
R
~
11
~'
~
"
~
B,:g
5 ~
~ 0
~
c
j ~
1:
i ~
o S
B
1? B- :g
~ ~ 8
c ,~~
~ ~ ~ >-
- ,
~ ,S ] 0<
~ j II ~
~ ~ 9 ~
~
15
z
:. ~ ~ ~ ~
:. ~
~ ~
~
Oc:lU-uu-U-O<:l;c:lOU-O Uc:l
~
w w
7
~ S
~ ~
:;::; ~
~ ~ I :2:
E It 6 0
3fi;E!1-
0'- "'C
[2 :s: 6
N U
~~r--O\oo
- N,.,-i,.,-i
~~~N~
u
.
~
.5
:;~oo~0~~Lf1;:~
~M.;'.-I<:t~<:t,.,-i.-l.-l
0"'00"'0000"'000
7:'77:'7777:'7 77
~
Oc:lU-uu-U-O<:l;c:lOU-O Uc:l
~
~~MO\OO<:t
~~g~g~
~OO~~0~Lf1~~
M.;'.-ILf1~<:t,.,-i .-I
~ l5
o f\J:;::;
8"'5'0
NEe
o 0
UU
~
OtOLLULLLLO<(tOULLO UtO
~
~,,!V~~~MO<Dr-..,,"!OOLllOV
~~g[:::l:::Kl~ui~~l?3~M~d
-5-5
. .
o 0
"-"-
11-11-
~~
z~
"
"
C
o
U
"'C"'C"'C"'C
.~ .~ .~ .~
"iti"iti"iti"iti
C C C C
C'lC'lC'lC'l
Vi Vi Vi Vi
C
o
:e
~
>;
.!i
~~
~ . .
lii ..... >
> ..... .J,l
. - 0
~~~~
> to Z >-
. - .
"'5 00 :s:
o a..... 2l
to .!: Vl f\J
""CO
o -.. -..-..
.e- ~ oLl oLl
<( C 2 2
-.. oLl oLl oLl
~ ~ ~ ~
C"'C"'C"'C
oLl C C C
~~~~
~ '" '" '"
:E.1l.1l.1l
ci
z
~
"'C "'C "'C "'C "'C "'C "'C .~
.~ .~~~~lL~"iti
~ftj~~~~~~
C'l .!2l.!2l.!2l.!2l.!2l'~
Vi Vi VlVlVlVlVl:5
~
~
.
~ "S
~ S
~ ~
S "
o f;
~ 0
~ 5:
- -
~ .
C E
~ !Ii
o ~
" z
.
:E ~
C
. ~
~ "
Ii!
~
z
.
. 0
o C
C .
. "
~ ~ 0
lii ~ ~
8<(:2::::::::::
o C
-;;~~~~~
2:2:-;;-;;-;;-;;
~ lii 2 2 2 2
~~~~~~~~
"'C]OOOOI~o
.!90CCCC l:i..
~ e::: ::J ::J ::J::J a.
fi:s: to to to to <(
6 ~ lii lii lii lii ~ Bl
Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl
. . .
~~~
E E E
~~~
~~~
~zz
....l"\IMVLIl<Dr-..OOO"l::::::~
~
~'
~
'"
>-.
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
~ ~
~~g
::J....., I
~ ~ 5 is
;;E~f-
N . C
a 0
N U
~ ~
:;::; ~
-s ~ I :E
E It Ei Cl
afj;E!f-
0.- "'C
g :s: Ei
N U
.
>
p
. C
"S 0
E :;::;
::J'iJ
U 0
~U
a
N
" ~
::Jt:O
~.9l, 7
-t:l ~ 5 is
t'8 fj ~ f- CD
3 .~ c
~ 8
" ~
i3t:~
l5l.5- I:E
~ It.~ ~
~E:a
_ . C
a 0
N U
~
C
o
e C
~~
u~
. C
38
~
i:"
.
E
E
,
"'
.
u
"~
.
"'
~
o
~
~
~
c
.
E
~
.
"'
,.
~
~
.
&
.
,
o
J:
"
.
~
>:
"
M
"'
w
.
:c
!!!.
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUUClCl
~
"
OOOOMv~O~~Oro~O~O~ONorooONro M~OMv
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicici~cicici~ci
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ClUUUClClUClClCl
~
"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ci~~ci~~~ci~~
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUUClCl
~
"
OOOOM~~O~~OO~O~O~ONoroO~N~OOM~~MM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicici~cicici~ci
g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUClClCl
ooooro~oo~oo~~OOOOO~O~O~M~N~MMN~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicicicici
:E
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUClClCl
~
"
ooooro~~o~oo~~ooooO~O~OroM~N vMNro~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicici~cicicicici
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUClClCl
~
ooooro~~o~ooO~OOOOO~OOO~MV roMN ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicicicici
:E
~
C
ti
"x
w
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUClClCl
~
ooooro~~o~ooOOOOOOO~OOO~MV roMN ~ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicicicici
:E
w-
"
ob
. m
~ ~
. .
. >
:EB
~
w
C
o
p
.
.9
'0,,"
v=
~u
~.
>-~
~-
. C
. .
] 6,
o .
"'~
ci
z
~~~
. . .
. . .
~ ~ ~
QjQjQj
> > >
. . .
~~~
. . .
. . .
OJ OJ OJ
~~~
u .
~ ~ ftj ~
V V ~ ~ c 0
~~~"'C.~~
C"'C f\J Ri ~ :E
~ lij:E B B ,~
~ l5 16 v v y,
BBVl~~B
v vB 0 0 U
~~~~B~
-g lii ~:E f .E
~~~~~~
EEEEEE
000000
at at at at at at
. .
~ ~
C 0
] ~
c :E
{5!. 16
B ~
. B
~ ~
o "
" c
f ~
c c
~ {5!.
E E
o 0
at at
.
~ ~ ~
~ '1ii 0
v -e 5
.~ 8. to
3 ~ 16
BB~
] ~ B
tO~OJ
" . 0
o .;:: C
a.:s: ftj
~S:5:
E E E
000
iI:atiI:
l3.. l3.. ~ 0
E E 0 l?-
v ~ ~ ~ 5 <(
g-]~~ ~Blt'll~
OJ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ v C u
t5~f.~~~g-~33~lij
2 - - Ii ~ fj Vl Vl B at ~ ~
ftj 3 ~ lij 5 0 to B~ B~ B~ to ~ ~ ~
:5: B Vl I B ~ Vl y, _ 0 ~
B~ a.BB v:E3l3..l3..l3...g.BB 5
B~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ij~~~~~i.~i S~~
~i~j~:~~~~~~~~
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
iI:atatatatatatiI:atatatatiI:iI:
.
il
o
c
o
III 0
c ~
~~
E E
o 0
""
~~~ssssss
~ .
ffi ~
~
V V C C
~~&~
~]]BB
~ ,'r; :!:! ~ "'C
...., b.:i!:.
BB:EB~
v vB c
~~~~&
~ ]"'C "'C ~
_ :!:! 16 16 y,
:E:El5l5b
EEEEE
00000
at at at at at
~~ssssssss~~~~~~~~~~
:s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s:
v v v V V V V V V V
V V V V V V V V V v
at at at at at at at at at at
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
~ ~
~.
.= "'5
"S
c .
. 0
~ c
c .
:::i~
N
o
" .
. 0
:E .
lij ~
~
~ .
c 0
. .
l5~
o
c .
o 0
to lii
lij ~
~
M
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~'
~
'"
,
"
~
,
~ ~
, 0
~ ]
" ~
II II
w w
00
" ~
~ "
~
15
z
>-
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
~ ~
~~g
::J....., I
~ ~ 5 is
;; E ~ f- CD
M . C
a 0
N U
~ ~
:;::; ~
~ ~ I :E
E It Ei Cl
afj;!;1f-
0.- "'C
8 :s: Ei
N U
.
>
p
. C
"S 0
E :;::;
::J'iJ
U 0
au
M
a
N
i:"
.
E
E
,
"'
.
u
"~
.
"'
~
o
~
~
~
c
.
E
~
.
"'
,.
~
~
.
&
.
,
o
J:
"
.
~
>:
"
M
"'
w
.
:c
!!!.
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ClUClUClClUUClU
~
oo~o~~~roNroo~_o~o~~OOVOM ONM~~~O
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~cicicici~cicici~ci
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ClUClUClClUUWU
~
"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cici~~~~~~~
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClClUUClCl
~
"
OOOOMv~O~~Oro~O~O~ONorooONro M~OMv
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicici~cicici~ci
w-
"
ob
. m
~ ~
. .
. >
:EB
~
w
C
o
p
.
.9
'0,,"
oLl=
~u
~.
>-~
~-
. C
. .
] 6,
o .
"'~
ci
z
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
oLloLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BQQQQQQQQo
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~uuuuuuuuuu
l~oLloLl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
liilfIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ
OJ OJ ~ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ ~ OJ OJ OJ OJ ~ OJ OJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~
~~~~.E
~ ~ 1l"'C1i .
~ -g ~ f-
~ ~ Iii ~ ~
B B Vl ~ ~
oLl oLl Boo
~ ~ ~ 2l 2l
-g ~ ~ f f
fIJ"'C"'C C C
l5 c'8 ~ ~ ~
EEEEE
00000
at at at at at
. .
u oLl ~ ~
~ C 0
o ~ 2l
2l,E fIJ
. c :E
:E ~ Iii
~BVl
. B
B ~ oLl
U 0 ~
ftj 2l C
C ~ ~
.E C ~
~~~
E E E
000
at at at
.
~ ~ ~
~ '1ii 0
oLl -e 5
.~ 8. to
3 ~ Iii
BB~
] ~ B
~~Ol
.... oLl:;
l~~
E E E
000
at at at
l3.. l3.. ~ 0
E E 0 e-
a."'C~~ ~~S<(
E.2:~~ ~Bld:l~ "'CoLl
Ol~~o~oLl lIIoLl C.u ffi~
t5~*lCl~oLlg-~::::::~1ii oLloLlC-g
E e-:EE~~~fjVlVlBatOoLl ~~&fIJ
~~~~~~I~i~~!~~~~~!~i~
oLlB~~~~ liiVl ~ ~ ~~ ~ oLltO]BB:E B~
i~8ijl~~iiilii~!~~;~~
d:l~:::Eflii~~:::::::::atd:ld:l@@~]"'C-g~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~22~~~~b
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at at
...............1=1
I=II=ISSSSSS
I=II=ISSSSSSSS~~~~~~~~~~
:s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s:
oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
at at at at at at at at at at
~~~~~~ftjftjftjftjftjftj~~ftjftjftjftjftjftjftjftj
~~~~~~!!!!!!~~!!!!!!!!
~
~ ~
~.
.= "'5
"S
c .
. 0
~ c
c .
:::i~
N
o
" .
. 0
:E .
Iii ~
~
o
c .
o 0
to ~
Iii ~
~
~ .
c 0
. .
l5~
~
~
=>
M
~
~
~
~
~'
~
"
~
c
jJ
~
o ~
c 0
! ~ ~
~ ~ 9
~ ~
~ '0
00 Z
>-
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
~ ~
~~g
::J....., I
~ ~ 5 is
;;E~f-
N . C
a 0
N U
~ ~
:;::; ~
-5 ~ I :E
E It Ei Cl
afj;E!f-
0.- "'C
g :s: Ei
N U
.
>
p
. C
"S 0
E :;::;
::J'iJ
U 0
~U
a
N
" ~
::Jt:O
~.9l, 7
-t:l ~ 5 is
t'8 fj ~ f- CD
3 .~ c
~ 8
" ~
i3t:~
l5l.5- I:E
~ It.~ ~
~E:a
_ . C
a 0
N U
~
C
o
e C
~~
u~
. C
38
~
i:"
.
E
E
,
"'
~
"~
.
"'
~
o
..
~
~
~
c
.
E
~
.
"'
,.
~
~
.
&
.
,
o
J:
"
.
~
i!:
..
"'
w
.
:c
!!!.
8~~~~Cl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUWUClClCl
~
"
~o~o~o~o~v~oo~o~roro~~O~MM~ro~ MM~N
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicici~~~
8~~~~Cl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUWUClClCl
~
"
~O~OvO~O~M~OO~O~rororovO~MM~ro~ M$~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicicicici
8~~~~Cl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUWUClClCl
~
"
w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ro
~MMMM~MNNNNNNM'-'MMMMMMMMcicicicicicicicioci
g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUClUClClCl
~o~ooo~o~~rooo~oo~~~rooro~ro~V~$O~ v
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicici~ci
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUClUClClCl
~
"
~o~ooo~o~~~oo~oo~~~rooro~ro~vro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicici
$~~ro;t
cicicicici
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUClUClClCl
~
"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~$~~~~~
:EMMMMNMNNNNNNMMMMMMMMMMcicicicicicicicicici
~
C
ti
"x
w
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUUClUClClCl
~
~O~O~O~oo~ooorooooooroO~~~~MMNro~~N
~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cicicicici~cicicici
:E
w-
"
'Cb
. m
~ ~
. .
. >
:Et;
~
w
C
o
p
.
.9
'C""
v=
~u
~~
~-
. C
. .
~ E
. ~
o .
"'~
ci
z
~~~
. . .
. . .
~ ~ ~
OJ OJ OJ
> > >
. . .
~~~
. . .
. . .
OJ OJ OJ
~~~
.
V V ~
~~~
C ~ .
~ 16:E
. " C
~".
BB~
. . B
~~~
~ C ~
16~"'C
l5c'8A
. .
~ ~
C 0
" "
.e .
C :E
~ 16
B ~
V V vB
~~B~~
oouo~
*l *l ~ *l16
~~.E~~
f\J f\J OJ f\J f\J
VlVlf-Vlf-
666nn6
aI:aI:aI:aI: aI: aI: aI: aI:
u .
v ftj ~
ceo
~ .E *l
~~:E
BB~
.
v ~ ~
~ tii 0
.~ t:: 5
~ .~ ~
" .
BB~
~ vB
tii ~ Ol
.....!!l ::J
o " C
~~~
~ 6 ~
"""
. .
~] ~ ~
Ol~~~~
::J5~~E~
~3~~~~
B~a.BBB
~B~~~~
g~5~~~
~~oE~~
16 .g.; 5 16 16
Vl~ZIVlVl
~ 6 ~
"""
l3. l3. ~ ~
E E 0 e-
~ ~ 5 :;x:
~ Bl to ~
III V C .u
v~~33~16
~~fjVl~BaI:ov
~Bl~~B"g~2~~
:E3l3.l3.l3.~BBS
16 Vl E E E 0 V v ~
~~~~~.~~~
~~333attOtO&l&l
~i€~~~~~~22
6 6 6 6 6 6 ~ 6 6 6 6 ~ ~
aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:
l=ll=ll=ll=ll=ll=l......................... .....1=11=1
..
~
c "
~ :E
B B
~ ~
V V C -g
~ ~ & f\J
o "'C _ l5
M_~, ~1!BB
'" l:l III"'C
BB:E5'ffi
v vB B c
~~~~&
OJ OJ"'C"'C....
..c ..c c c ~
~~~~b
6nn
aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:
~~~~~~ftjftjftjftjftjftj~~ftjftjftjftjftjftjftjftj
BBBBBB~~~~~~BB~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>->->->->->->->->->-
f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J f\J
:s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s:
v v v V V V V V V V
V V V V V V V V V v
aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:aI:
t::~
8.~
.= "'5
"S
c .
. 0
~ c
c .
:::i~
N
o
" .
. 0
:E .
16 ~
~
~ .
c 0
. .
l5~
M
..
o
c .
o 0
to ~
16 ~
~
~
~
~
=>
~
~
~'
~
~
~
>-
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
~~
.~ ~
(j:;;
~~
~n
c:i~
~ ~
~~g
::J....., I
~ ~ 5 is
;; E ~ f- CD
M . C
a 0
N U
~ ~
:;::; ~
~ ~ I :E
E It Ei Cl
afj;E!f-
0.- "'C
8 :s: Ei
N U
.
>
p
. C
"S 0
E :;::;
::J'iJ
U 0
au
M
a
N
i:"
.
E
E
,
"'
~
"~
.
"'
~
o
..
~
~
~
c
.
E
~
.
"'
,.
~
~
.
&
.
,
o
J:
"
.
~
i!:
..
"'
w
.
:c
!!!.
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClWUWWW
~
~oroo ~~o~o~oo~~~~~ro~o~~roN Mro~ 00
~~~~~;~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicicicici
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClWUWWW
~
"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ci~~~ci~~
:E
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UUUUClWUWClW
~
"
~oroo ~~oro~~oo~~roro~~~o~ro~ ON~~ ro~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~cicicicicicicici~~
w-
"
'Cb
. m
~ ~
. .
. >
:Et;
~
w
C
o
p
.
.9
'C""
oLl=
~u
~~
~-
. C
. .
~ E
. ~
o .
"'~
ci
z
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
oLloLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]jjjjjjjjjj
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~uuuuuuuuuu
l~oLloLl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
liilfIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ
OJ OJ Q:j OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ Q:j OJ Q:j ~ OJ OJ Q:j OJ ~ Q:j Q:j
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
l3. l3. ~ ~
E E 0 e-
oLl oLl fIJ fIJ C <(
oLloLl g-]~~ tCIz"-~~~
UoLl~~ flJtClOC y,
~co oLlOlC:::t21B lS..~ c.u
o~21oLl"'C~ .....ofIJC'l~~E~33~16
2lSfIJ~~oE~e-:EE~~flJfj ~B~o
~ 16:E oLlt S~3<( 16~~~~B~~B:J~15~~
cf-16.~8.d:l:>tCIB~BB." ~ ~
flJB~S~16Bz~B :E~l3.l3.l3.~BB
~oLlB oLl EoLloLloLlC EEEooLloLl
~u~~BBB~B~~~~~~~~~~~~
o~]~Olo~"",cooBB""''''''''''' 00
l~j~~E~~~t~~~~;;~~~~oo
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~22
6666666666666666666666666 6 ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~
~~~~.E
~ ~ 2l"'C Q:j
lij-g f ~ f-
~ ~ 16 ~ ~
BB~~~
oLl oLl Boo
~ ~ ~ *l 2l
"'C C ~:E ~
16 ~"'C C C
l5 c'8 A ~ ~
..
~
C "
~:E
BB
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
t~
8.~
.= "'5
"S
>->->->->->->->->->-
fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ fIJ
:s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s: :s:
oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl oLl
~~~~~~~~~~
C .
. 0
~ C
C .
:::i~
o
" .
. 0
:E .
16 ~
~
~
~
=>
o
C .
o 0
rLi lij
16 ~
~
~ .
C 0
. .
l5~
N
M
..
~
~
~
~'
~
'"
~
>-
i'i
it;
>I '"
a I:i:
~ t,~
~~~
j;:!tj~
" .-
"
h~
t::'ii5~
a.::~
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
2 INTRODUCTION
The report provides an evaluation of the potential transportation impacts due to the proposed
Centrum distribution center in the City of South San Francisco. The proposed project consists of
a 245,797 square foot warehousing facility, a 368,969 light industrial center, 6,600 square feet
of copy, print, and express shipping store, a 1,500 square feet eatery without a drive-through,
and a 1,000 square feet convenience market. Currently, 50,000 square feet of active
warehousing space exists on the site.
The project site is located on the southern edge of South San Francisco approximately 1.5 miles
south of downtown, 0.25 miles west of US 101, and a tenth of a mile north of I-380. The
project site fronts San Mateo Avenue to the west and Hornet Avenue, a service road, to the
north. Based on the 1999 City of South San Francisco General Plan update, the project site is
designated for "Mixed Industrial" land uses and is part of the "Loft Overlay District".
The transportation analysis represented in this study incorporates data provided by traffic
counts performed by WIL TEC in January, 2009, the City of South San Francisco, and the County
of San Mateo.
2.1 Analysis Methodology
The following intersections and roadway segments were evaluated to determine the traffic
conditions during the weekday AM and PM peak hours:
Study Intersections:
1. Miller Avenue and Airport Boulevard
2. East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard
3. East Grand Avenue and Industrial Way / US 101 northbound off-ramp
4. East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard
5. San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard
6. US 101 northbound on/off-ramp and South Airport Boulevard
7. South Linden Avenue and Dollar Avenue
8. Shaw Road and San Mateo Avenue
9. San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue
10. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 southbound on/off-ramp
11. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 northbound on/off-ramp (signalized)
12. San Bruno Avenue and US 101 northbound-right off-ramp (unsigalized)
It should be noted that intersections 11 and 12 are analyzed as different intersections. San
Bruno Avenue and US 101 northbound on/off-ramp is a signalized intersection which provides
traffic control for the northbound off-ramp left and through movements. The San Bruno Avenue
and US 101 northbound-right off-ramp provides traffic control for the northbound off-ramp right
movement and is also analyzed for signal warrant criteria.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
13
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Roadway and Highway Segments:
1. Airport Boulevard between Grand Avenue and Baden Avenue
2. Airport Boulevard between 2,d Lane and San Mateo Avenue
3. Airport Boulevard between San Mateo Avenue and Terminal Court
4. San Mateo Avenue between Airport Boulevard and Lowrie Avenue
5. San Mateo Avenue between Tanforan Avenue and Atlantic Avenue
6. San Mateo Avenue between Walnut Street and San Bruno Avenue
7. Grand Avenue between Airport Boulevard and NB US 101 off-ramp
8. San Bruno Avenue between Huntington Avenue and San Mateo Avenue
9. San Bruno Avenue between San Mateo Avenue and 2,d Avenue
10. San Bruno Avenue between 7'h Avenue and SB US 101 on/off-ramp
11. San Bruno Avenue between SB US 101 ramps and NB US 101 ramps
12. US 101 between San Francisco Airport and San Bruno Avenue
13. US 101 between San Bruno Avenue and I-380
14. US 101 between I-380 and Mitchell Avenue
15. US 101 between Mitchell Avenue and Grand Avenue
16. US 101 between Grand Avenue and Oyster Point Boulevard
Intersections and roadway segments have been evaluated for the following traffic scenarios:
Existing Condition - Operation analysis based on existing peak hour volumes and
existing intersection and roadway segment lane geometry.
2010 Background Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from the County
of San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2010 Background with Project Condition - 2010 Background Condition plus
project-generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center. The two "with
project" conditions are analyzed with a 15% and 30% trip generation reduction with the
implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program.
2020 Cumulative No Project Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from
the County of San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2020 Cumulative with Project Condition - 2020 Cumulative No Project Condition
plus project generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center. The two
"with project" conditions are analyzed with a 15% and 30% trip generation reduction
with the implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program.
2030 Cumulative No Project Condition - Based on growth factors estimated from
the County of San Mateo's Transportation Demand Model.
2030 Cumulative with Project Condition - 2030 Cumulative No Project Condition
plus project generated traffic estimated for the Centrum distribution center. The two
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
14
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
"with project" conditions are analyzed with a 15% and 30% trip generation reduction
with the implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program.
2.2 Data Collection
2.2.1 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Intersection Volumes: Intersection turning movement volumes for the study intersections
were performed by WIL TEC in January, 2009. AM and PM peak hours were included for analysis
since it is expected that daily staff shift changes would occur during these two periods.
Freeway Volumes: Existing peak hour traffic volumes on US-101 were obtained from the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 4, and from California Freeway
Performance Measurement System (PeMS) data for Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays
between March 1, 2008 and March 1, 2009.
2.2.2 Intersection and Roadway Configuration
Site visits were conducted in January, 2009, to confirm lane configuration and traffic control at
study intersections and roadway segments.
2.3 Level of Service Calculations
The Level of Service (LOS) at the selected study intersections and roadway segments was
determined on methodology described below.
2.3.1 Intersection Level of Service
Intersection analysis was conducted using the criteria described in the City/ County Association
of Governments (C/CAG) 2007 Congestion Management Program and utilized the Highway
Capacity Software (HCS 2000) for the analysis where appropriate. For reference purposes, LOS
as defined in the HCM is a quality measure describing operating conditions within a traffic
stream. It is generally described in terms such as service measures as speed and travel time,
freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and convenience. LOS at study
intersections was calculated using TRAFFIX software for signalized and unsignalized
intersections.
Level of Service (LOS) Definition:
The LOS evaluation indicates the degree of congestion that occurs during peak travel periods
and is the principal measure of roadway and intersection performance. Level of Service can
range from "A" representing free-flow conditions, to "F" representing extremely long delays.
LOS Band C signify stable conditions with acceptable delays. LOS D is typically considered
acceptable for a peak hour in urban areas. LOS E is approaching capacity and LOS F represents
conditions at or above capacity. The correlation between average stopped delay and level of
service for both signalized and unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 1.
Centrum Distribution Center 15 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 1 - Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds
Level Vehicle Delay (seconds/vehicle) Description
of Signalized Unsignalized
Service Intersections Intersections'
Free Flow/Insignificant Delays: No approach
A Delay ~ 10.0 Delay ~ 10.0 phase is fully utilized and no vehicle waits
longer than one red indication.
Stable Operation/Minimal Delays: An
8 10 < Delay ~ 20.0 10.0 < Delay ~ lS.0 occasional approach phase is fully utilized.
Many drivers design to feel somewhat
restricted within platoon of vehicles.
Stable Operation/Acceptable Delays: Major
C 20.0 < Delay ~ 3S.0 lS.0 < Delay ~ 2S.0 approach phases fully utilized. Most drivers
feel somewhat restricted.
Approaching UnstablefTolera ble Delays:
Drivers may have to wait through more than
D 3S.0 < Delay ~ SS.O 2S.0 < Delay ~ 3S.0 one red signal indication. Queues may
develop but dissipate rapidly, without
excessive delays.
Unstable Operation/Sig n ifica nt Delays:
E SS.O < Delay ~ 80.0 3S.0 < Delay ~ SO.O Volumes at or near capacity. Vehicles may
wait through several signal cycles. Long
queues from upstream from intersection.
Forced flow/Excessive Delays: Represents
F Delay> 80.0 Delay> SO.O jammed conditions. Intersection operates
below capacity with low volumes. Queues
may block upstream intersections.
Unsignalized Intersections
At unsignalized intersections, each approach to the intersection is evaluated separately and
assigned a LOS. The level of service is based on the delay at the worst approach for two-way
stop controlled intersections. Total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a
vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. This time
includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-in-
queue position.
Signalized Intersections
At signalized intersections, level of service is evaluation on the basis of average stopped delay
for all vehicles at the intersection.
Centrum Distribution Center 16 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
2.3.2 Roadway Segment Level of Service
Roadway segment analysis was conducted using the criteria described in the City/ County
Association of Governments (C/CAG) 2007 Congestion Management Program and utilized the
Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2000) for the analysis where appropriate. For the purposes of
the traffic analysis, two types of roadways were identified: arterials and freeways.
Arterials
Arterials are generally larger capacity roads tying smaller residential streets to areas of
commercial and retail activity and also connect to freeways. In the area of the project site,
Airport Boulevard, Linden Avenue, San Mateo Avenue, Grand Avenue, and San Bruno Avenue
are considered arterials.
Under the 2007 Congestion Management Program, levels of service for arterials are dependent
on the arterial class denoted as Type I, II, or III. Type I arterials are principal arterials with
suburban design, 1 to 5 signals per mile, no parking and free-flow speeds of 35 to 45 miles per
hour. Type III arterials have urban designs, with 6 to 12 signals per mile, parking permitted and
are undivided with free-flow speeds of 25 to 35 miles per hour. Type II arterials fall between
Type I and II and have free-flow speeds of 30 to 35 miles per hour.
The LOS for arterials is based on maneuverability, delays, and speeds, As the volume increases,
the probability of stopping at an intersection due to a red signal indication increases and the
LOS decreases. The specific LOS criteria from the HCM is presented in Table 2.
Freeways
According to the 2007 Congestion Management Program, a freeway is defined as a "divided
highway facility with two or more lanes in each direction and full control of access and egress.
It has no intersections; access and egress are provided by ramps at interchanges." As an
example, US 101 is considered a freeway.
For freeway segments, a calculation method based on the v/c ratio was selected for the 2007
Congestion Management Program. Volumes on each roadway segment in each direction are
divided by the capacity, estimated to be 2,200 vehicles per hour per lane on freeways. For this
report, the freeway free-flow speed was determined to be 65 miles per hour. The v/c ratio for
freeways with a 65 mile per hour free flow speed is related to LOS based on the information in
Table 3. It should be noted that LOS E and LOS D are the operating standards for US 101 and
I 280 near the study area.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
17
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 2 - Level of Service Criteria for Arterials
Average Travel Speed (miles per hour)
Arterial Class
I II III
Range of Free Flow 3S to 4S 30 to 3S 2S to 3S
Speeds
Typical Free Flow Speed 40 33 27
A 2. 3S 2. 30 2. 2S
8 2. 28 2. 24 2. 19
C 2. 22 2. 18 2. 13
D 2. 17 2. 14 2.9
E 2. 13 2. 10 2.7
F < 13 < 10 < 7
Source: San Mateo County Congestion Management Agency, 2007
Table 3 - Level of Service Criteria for Freeways Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios
6S mph
Free-Flow Speed
Level of Service Density' Speedb Maximumc MSP'
(pcjmijln) (mph) VjC (pcphpl)
A 10.0 6S.0 0.29S 6S0
8 16.0 6S.0 0.473 1,040
C 24.0 64.S 0.704 I,S48
D 32.0 61.0 0.887 1,9S2
E 39.3 S6.0 1.000 2,200
F Variable Variable Variable Variable
Notes: a Density in passenger cars per mile per lane
b Average travel speed in miles per hour
C Maximum volume-to-capackty ratio
d Maximum service flow rate under ideal conditions in passenger cars per hour per lane
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209 (Washington, D.C., 1994), pp. 3-9
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
18
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
3 EXISTING CONDITION
The following section presents an analysis of the existing conditions of various transportation
system components.
3.1 Roadway Network
The roadway network surrounding the project site includes areas of the City of South San
Francisco and the City of San Bruno and is comprised of freeways, highways, arterials,
parkways, collector streets and local streets.
Regional access to the project site is provided by I-280, I-380, and US 101 while locally, the
project site is along San Mateo Avenue north of San Bruno Avenue. Additionally, small collector
and local streets connect the project site to I-280, I-380, and US 101.
1-280 - This eight-lane freeway generally runs in the north-south direction 1.25 miles west of
the project site. It is one of two major regional freeways on the peninsula and has its northern
and southern termini respectively in San Francisco and San Jose. In the vicinity of the project
site, I-280 supports four mixed use lanes in each direction. I-280 has an Annual Average Daily
Traffic (AADT) of approximately 107,000 vehicles south of I-380 including 11,200 during the
peak hour; and approximately 175,000 north of I-380 including 13,400 during the peak hour.
Additionally, access to and from I-280 from the project site is via interchanges with San Bruno
Avenue.
1-380 - This eight-lane spur freeway runs in the east-west direction for 1.5 miles between I-
280 and US 101 and is approximately a tenth of a mile south of the project site. I-380 has an
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of approximately 124,000 vehicles west of SR 82 with
9,300 vehicles during the peak hour; and approximately 145,000 vehicles east of SR 82 with
10,900 vehicles during the peak hour. Access to and from I-380 from the project site is most
nearly accessed from EI Camino Real / SR 82.
US 101 - An eight-lane freeway running in the north-south direction, US 101 is approximately
half a mile east of the project site. US 101 is over 1500 miles long and runs between Los
Angeles and Olympia, WA, and is a major regional freeway on the peninsula. The freeway has
an AADT of approximately 240,000 vehicles south of I-380 including 16,700 vehicles during the
peak hour. Additionally, north of I-380 the AADT is approximately 214,000 vehicles and 15,200
vehicles during the peak hour. The most direct route from the project site is via the interchange
with San Bruno Avenue.
State Route 82 (SR 82) - SR 82 (EI Camino Real) is an arterial which extends north from the
Santa Clara County line across the San Francisco County line. The arterial is approximately half
a mile west of the project site and has six lanes with three in each direction. In the vicinity of
the project site, the roadway has an AADT of approximately 37,500 vehicles south of I-380
including 3,000 during the peak hour. North of I-380, the AADT is 39,500 with 3,450 vehicles
during the peak hour.
Centrum Distribution Center 19 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
San Mateo Avenue - San Mateo Avenue is a two-lane arterial extending from Produce
Avenue north of the project site to SR 82 south of the project site. Generally running north-
south, it provides frontage for the project site and also allows for on-street parking for much of
its length. In addition to legal parking spaces, field observations indicated many illegally parked
vehicles.
San Bruno Avenue - This facility is a four-lane arterial running between South Airport
Boulevard to the east and SR 35 to the west. San Bruno Avenue intersects with US 101 and I-
280 and provides connections between the project site and these two freeway facilities. On-
street parking is not permitted along any segment of San Bruno Avenue.
3.2 Existing Intersection Operating Conditions
Level of service calculations were performed at 12 intersections for the weekday AM and PM
peak hours. The AM peak hour is the highest one-hour period between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM
while the PM peak hour is the highest on-hour traffic volume between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM.
Figure 1 illustrates the existing intersection traffic volumes at each study intersection. Table 4
summarizes the results of the intersection level of service for the existing condition. Based on
the LOS results, all of the 12 intersections currently operate at LOS D or better during the
respective AM and PM peak hours. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service
analysis sheets, including weekday AM and PM peak hours.
3.3 Existing Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Based on the classification of the roadway segments described earlier, 11 arterial roadway
segments and 5 freeway segments were evaluated for the existing AM and PM peak hour
operating conditions. Table 5 provides a summary of the roadway segments operational
condition under Existing Conditions. As shown in Table 5, all roadway segments currently
operate at or above LOS D with the exception of northbound US 101 between I-380 and
Mitchell Avenue during the AM peak hour. Detailed level of service calculations are included in
Appendix A.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
20
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 4 - Existing Condition Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control LOS b
Delay' Delay LOS
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 33.8 C 17.7 8
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 36.3 D 43.1 D
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 36.S D 18.9 8
4 East Signa lized 33.0 C 29.9 C
Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 29.6 C 37.6 D
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 26.3 C 32.3 C
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signa lized 13.1 8 7.1 A
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 14.9 8 13.9 8
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 20.3 C 22.4 C
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 19.2 8 28.9 C
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signalized 2S.1 C 28.8 C
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsignalized 3.1 2.8
N8 Approach 11.6 8 10.8 8
S8 Approach 8.9 A 10.4 8
~ DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is based on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
21
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
...
w
o
~ ~
ll.
~~~O.-l~~~~~~O~~
NMNMOMI.OI"'--.I"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.MN
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
CI
c
i
')ii
w
cu~
s.c'tt" 'tt" O"l 1.0 .-I CO M .-I I"'--. 'tt" N I"'--. LI) CO
='NCOO"lI.OI.O'tt"MNN~CO.-l~.-I
_.cN'tt".-IMO"lN'tt".-IM'tt"N.-IN~
o CLJ .-I .-I .-I T'"'""1
>~
III
O~ <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
...
~
<(
.
W OOO~COI"'--.O"lOO"lOO~OO
o MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.I"'--.MM
:[ MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
III
'Iii
>-
;;;
C
<(
cu
v
'~
cu
III
...
o
Qj
>
cu
...
...
C
cu
E
CI
cu
III
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
CI
c
i
')ii
w
III
... III
o cu
cuc......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
..tl~
cucu......
~=
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
o
...
III
III
..
U
III
cu
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: cu
"c:JE
lOCI
o cu
1% III
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
N'tt"I.OCO'tt"O"lLl)'tt"CON'tt"CONCO
~~~~~~~O'\~gJS~~3t;
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C ""C
Q) C
""C '"
~ 15
o 0
~ ~
~ ~
""C C
C Q)
'" ""C
... '"
" CO
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
u Q) ~ ~
Q) Q) ~ C 0
~~~o~2:l
o ....J "E 2 ..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
iO~~:E~ ~
::E 0 0 ::5 0 (/')
C +-' +-' (f) +-' 0
ctl Q) Q) 0 Q) +-'
(f) ~ ~ +-' ~ (J)
o ~ <(>
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) 2 2 ctl 2 c
~ ctl ctl C ctl ~
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
Q) ~
~ as
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
as ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Co ""C
~ ~
Q) U) a::: 1::
~ +oJ :t: 0
o ::l 0 e-
C~.-I<
2 ::> S 0
CO > ~
C 0
~ ~
o ~
~
~ 0
Cfl C
~ "
" Os
.!:
'" C
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
- ~
-0 C
C ~
ro 0
u
~ 0
v v
0. ro
~ '"
~
ro ffi
"C (/)
~ <I-
ro 0
~ OJ
o <(
~ u
vi 0
ID "
c 0
v 0
> N
:;:::; c
u 0
~ -a
w v
~ ~
~ ~
Q) Q) ~.!!!
c.. c.. :J Q)
~ ~ ~ Vl u
10 :B "2:
.u :2: ~
~ ~ a
<( 0 v
~ :2: ijj
o n:i ---l
~ "
u ~ '"
~ ~ 0
g 0 ~
VI Z ~
CO Co
Z E
o '"
~ c<
~i!::
as 0
t:: ,..,
o ~
Co
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q)
Co Co
~~
1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~~~
""C
>
as
t::
o
Co
...
:.;;:
Q)
"
C
Q)
~
C
Q)
""C
C
::J
Q)
~
o
Q)
~
'"
:E
C
'"
Cfl
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~
"u
ro
0.
ro
u
E
v
E
~
<5
2-
o
~
u
>
"~
~
>-
ro
~
v
J=
~
.E
-0 ro
Q) "C
2i 2
Vl "C
u
" c
~ ~
v C
0> V
~ E
v v
> 0>
ro ro
c c
ro
-0 '"
~ c
~ 0
Vl :;:::;
ro ~
v v
E 0>
C
o
w U
o ro
'" c
u:
~
~
Q)
~
""C
C
'"
15
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
III
'Iii
>
;;;
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
III
...
0
Qj
>
cu
...
...
c
cu
E
Cl
CU
III
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
~ ... C
Z
Q 0
:,j;l
.~ .... '6
~
...J C
(j Q 0
'" U
~ z Cl
C
Q i
...
<( ')(
.... W
IJ:
~ C
"- III
'" cu
z
Q <( :is
IJ: ..
l- I-
III
0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u u 0 u 0 0 0
...
w '" 0 0 '" '" "< '" ~ '" '" Lf"l '" '" N 00 Lf"l 0"> N
0 '" '" '" '" '" N '" N Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l '" 00 Lf"l "- "- "-
~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ll.
C CU~
0 E.coo 0 ,.., "- ... 00 0"> ... CO (') 00 ... ~ OJ CO N 0 N
:,j;l "'..... 0 '" '" '" "- '" ,.., 00 ... ... ~ CO CO ~ 0 (f) CO (f)
'6 _.c ... Lf"l '" '" '" 0"> Lf"l 00 OJ OJ 00 (f) OJ N ... CO OJ (')
o CU ... ... ... ... (f) "- (f) (f) (f) (f)
C > >
0 ......
U
Cl III
c 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( U U U U 0 0 U 0 0 0
i ...
')( w '" '" '" '" ~ '" '" '" '" '" ... ,.., 00 '" N ,.., '" 00
W
0 '" '" '" '" N '" '" '" '" Lf"l '" Lf"l "- "- '" ": "- ":
~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
c(
CU~
E.coo 0"> 0"> '" ... Lf"l "- N "- '" 0"> 0"> N 0 0"> Lf"l "- '"
'" ..... "- '" Lf"l "- '" Lf"l Lf"l ,.., "- ... 0 N 0 ,.., N '" N Lf"l
_.c '" N Lf"l '" "- ... '" ... "- '" '" Lf"l '" ... 00 N "- 00
o CU Lf"l ... Lf"l ... 00 '" '" '" '" '"
> >
......
""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
III Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
... III Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl
0 CU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C...... Qj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Qj ~
CU CUW > > ., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., .,
... CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
'" ,i!:O CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c<
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
III ...~ l- I- l- I- l- I- l- I- u u u u u u u u u u
..
CU V...... Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
~ ~ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
W ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III III Q) t::
0. 0. ~ 0
E E 0.
0 ...
Q) Q) CO CO <C
... ... c
~ ~ "
CO CO ... 0 ""C Q)
Z Cfl CO u
0 C III > ~
Q) 0 III Q) ,.., ,.., C 'w C1i
~ ~ Q) Q) 0. ~ 0 0 CO C ""C
CO C\ E ,.., Cfl CO Q) Q) ~
:E c ~ ~ ,.., ... ~ ~ C C
., CO ..c Cfl Cfl 0 LL 0 Q) '0 CO
C ... ~ ~ ...
C C ""C 0 CO "- => => C 00 ~ 0. "
CO " C Q) t:: '" Q) 0 ""C Qj
0 Cfl Cfl 0 0 0 CO C ...
I N ~ 0 Cfl , ~ 00 Q) 0
:,j;l CO ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 CO ..c ~
0 0 0 :E ,.., III III III 0. C '" ... u ~
.. ~ 0 ... 0 0 , ~ ""C
V ~ ~ ,.., 0. 0. 0. <C ~ ~ " Qj ~ " :E >- >
Q) ~ ~ c E E E ... 0
0 ~ Q) Q) CO 0 0 C1i
... CO Cfl CO 0 ~ ~ ..c ~ ~
Cfl CO CO U 0 0
=> ... ... ... u c ~ ~ ~
c 0 III CO "" ~ ~ .!:
0 0 0 CO CO CO 'w 0 0 :E Q) Q)
0 ~ Cfl 0
~ Q) Q) ~ Cfl Cfl Z c c c ~ ~
C\ ~ ~ Q) Q) CO " " 0 0 0.
C CO CO ~ ~ ,.., ,.., ,.., ... ... ... ~ ~ Qj Qj ...
., :E :E 0 0 0 LL CO CO 0 0 ..c ..c ""C ""C Q)
,.., ,.., ,.., c c ~
c c C ""C C C C 00 00 u u CO CO III
..c ~ ~
" CO CO C ~ Cfl Cfl Cfl CO CO CO '" '" :E :E ... ... {;
I Cfl Cfl N "- => => => Cfl Cfl Cfl , , " "
~ ~
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
III Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
>... 0
.. C c ,..,
:l: CU " Q) 0
E ... ,..,
"c:J CO ~
.. Cl c Cfl
o CU CO =>
1% III Cfl
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~
'u
ro
"-
ro
u
E
v
E
~
<5
2-
o
~
u
~
.~
~
>-
ro
~
v
v
J=
~
.E
-0 ro
Q) "C
2i 2
Vl ";::
U
"
> c
jg ~
v C
0> V
~ E
v v
> 0>
ro ro
.~ ffi
-0 '"
~ c
~ 0
Vl :;::;
ro ~
v v
E 0>
.!!! 5
w u
o '"
'" c
iI:
- ~
-0 C
C ~
ro 0
u
~ 0
v v
"- ro
~ '"
~
'" c
"C l\J
~ ~
ro 0
~ OJ
o <(
~ u
vi 0
~ "
c 0
v 0
> N
:;::; c
u 0
~ -a
w v
~ ~
o .:g
~
~ .!!!
~ v
ltl Vl U
10 lB "2:
.u :2: ~
5: II .......
~ w 0
<( 0 v
~ :2: ii;
o n:i ---l
cu II
u Vi (/)
~ v 0
S 0 ~
III Z _
~
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
I\,t:ler
,J I
Ave
(122) 129.
1
San
.~Ye (103) 45 J
(171) 139-
(200) 108.
5
MO_
MN~
San
Ave'llliest
(407) 374-
(1)4.
9
San Bruno
Ave East
(264) 267 J
(255) 390 -
11
'7'
'~
, ~
~"
,,~
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
M
~
'-1 (1)
- 145 (260)
r 530 ~~3d)s, 101
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate,""'ay3\'d
e
"
ro
'"
'- 79 (157)
-111 (260)
,199 (634)
Grand
- 336 (1,276)
,7(16)
~'"
N~
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (68) 126 J
(305) 1,460-
(58) 45 .
a N~
~ am
,"",..,-01
m
eo.
'- 60 (117)
- 227 (973)
,115 (359)
Grand
,J Il,
~ ~
co N
,..-,,"'-
~ ~.
~ "
~ ~
'-'~,
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(156) 227 J
(64) 102-
(85) 69.
(261) 953-
(14)29.
N
'"
N
1J1
4
"'l I
3:vd
I l,
'- 133 (246)
- 177 (200)
, 227 (758)
S,A:" oi
"'llr
MO
~N
6"
~
Produ:eA'Je
Sanl\,1ateo,Aye
I l,
'- 103 (59)
_ 196 (436)
,77 (172)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Eas:
e~
_ m
N
!CC
101
ro' G)
'S::!-
~o
~ N
'- 73 (181)
- 168 (557)
J l,
"'l I
MM
('f),,"",
01::.
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
DKS Associates
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'"III"
'"II r
"<:j"<.O!..."l
_ Nm
,"",('f)..,-
"
'"
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'d
San\/ateoAve
M
o
0) '- 11 (25)
<.0 _ 6(38)
Il, ,14(76)
'j\'aterc:o,p-
~"
mm
"N
..,- "--
~~
" 0
mN
_ 160 (233)
,28(51)
J l,
_ 94(121)
SLinden
\:BU,S
SLinden
EI.s
('T/'''ffPamn
v (352) 9D7 J
(24) 87-
(115) 377.
,Aye
'"I r
A"(134) 129J
(136) 120-
'"Ilr
o am
~ M"
~ N
6"
ro
!CC
(215) 204-
(106) 43.
ro "
m"
00 a:,
e'2
6
7
Do::ar,Aye
8
San Bruno
0;-
m
;?
m co
"a
~ N
- 306 (546)
, 106 (338)
,J l,
A'JeEast
(374) 452-
(300) 312.
10
101
Pr:vateRd
0;'
e
San Bruno
ro
'- 50 (10)
J - 225 (629)
Ave East
(300)416-
,.
ro
M
N
a
M
!CC
12
IJS
FIGURE 1
Existing Scenario Intersection Volumes
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
3.4 Existing Condition Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A traffic signal warrant analysis is a method which defines the minimum conditions where a
traffic signal may be applicable for an existing unsignalized intersection. While meeting the
warrant criteria does not ensure that a signal is justified at a certain location (since there are
many factors which influence the effectiveness of a traffic signal), it does establish the
minimum conditions under which a traffic signal can be considered. Conversely, not meeting the
signal warrant suggests that a traffic signal should not be installed and alternative traffic control
solutions should be explored.
A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted at all unsignalized intersections in accordance
with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) - Section 4C. The
unsignalized intersection was investigated if the signal warrants for the "Peak Hour" was met.
The signal warrant is met when either of the two following criteria is satisfied.
Criterion 1: The criterion is satisfied when all three of the following conditions exist in the
same one hour of an average day:
1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach
(one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: 4 vehicle-hours for a
one-lane approach; or 5 vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach, and
2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds
100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic of 150 vehicles per hour for two
moving lanes and
3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per
hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections
with four or more approaches.
Criterion 2: The criterion is satisfied when the plotted point representing the vehicles per hour
on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the
higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) for 1 hour (any four consecutive 150
minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable Peak Hour Warrant Curves
(illustrated in Appendix B) for the existing combination of approach lanes.
Table 6 summarizes the results of the signal warrant analysis. Detail analysis results are
contained in Appendix B. Based on the results, the intersection of San Bruno Avenue and NB
US-101 off-ramps northbound-right does not meet the signal warrant criteria for neither the AM
nor the PM peak hours.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
25
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 6 - Existing Conditions Signal Warrant Analysis
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No No No No No No
Source: DKS Associates
3.5 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations
3.5.1 Existing Transit Operations
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) operates a commuter rail public transit system with 43 stations
through San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Mateo Counties. The five lines provide
regular service between 4:00 AM and midnight with trains for each line arriving every 15
minutes. In the vicinity of the project site, the San Bruno Station is approximately on-third of a
mile west of the proposed Centrum Distribution Center. Between October 2007 and September
2008, the average weekday exits at this station was 2,574 riders.
The San Mateo County Transit District (Sam Trans) operates 55 bus routes throughout San
Mateo County and link to areas of San Francisco and Palo Alto. SamTrans buses connect to
BART and Caltrain Stations while providing local and express service to the county. The closest
SamTrans routes are near the San Bruno BART Station, approximately one-third of a mile near
west of the project site. The 133, 140, 141, 391, 38, and 43 bus routes all stop at the San
Bruno BART Station.
3.5.2 Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Existing sidewalks in the area are between five and twelve feet in wide and are provided in
most areas near the project site. Crosswalk striping is not provided at most unsignalized
intersections however, crosswalk striping is provided at signalized intersection including the
equidistant signalized intersections of San Mateo Avenue at San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo
Avenue at Linden Avenue.
The sidewalks in the vicinity of the project site are generally in acceptable condition with some
exceptions near auto repair shops. Some sidewalk furniture is present the area which includes
light poles, fire hydrants, street sign poles, trees in some areas, and mailboxes. Additionally, the
sidewalks are generally adjacent to the street with no parkways providing a buffer between the
two.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
26
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
3.5.3 Bicycle Facilities
In the City of South San Francisco, there are three different bicycle facility classifications:
. Bike Paths (Class I facilities) - Paved facilities that are physically separated from
roadways used by motor vehicles by space of a physical barrier and are designated for
bicycle use.
. Bike Lanes (Class II facilities) - Lanes on the outside edge of roadways reserved for the
exclusive use of bicycles designated with special signing and pavement markings.
. Bike Routes (Class III facilities) - Roadways recommended for use by bicycles and often
connect roadways with bike lanes and bike paths. Bike routes are designated with signs.
San Mateo Avenue, which serves as the access road for the project site, is classified as a bike
route in the City's General Plan. North of the project site, Airport Boulevard is also classified as
a bike route. No existing bicycle facilities near the project site are identified in the City of San
Bruno General Plan.
3.6 Existing Parking
Off-Street Parkino
Between the two lots, there are approximately 920 parking spaces available for use. Of these
spaces, 670 belong to an airport parking facility while the remaining 250 are on the current site.
Access to the two parking areas have separate entrance/exits off of San Mateo Avenue
approximately 0.4 miles north of San Bruno Avenue.
On-Street Parkino
On-street parking in the vicinity of the project site is generally scarce. Along San Mateo Avenue,
parking regulations and restrictions limit the number of potential parking spaces. The existing
parking supply is often highly utilized during weekday since many of the industrial uses in the
area do not have private parking areas and must use park along the curbside. During DKS field
visits, some vehicles were observed to be parking illegally due to the high on-street parking
demand (e.g. blocking driveways, in red curb zones, during street sweeping hours).
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
27
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
4 2010 BACKGROUND WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITION
This section discusses the traffic operating conditions of the study intersections and roadway
segments under the 2010 Background without Project Condition. The 2010 Background
Conditions includes the existing traffic volumes plus the additions of background growth traffic
derived from the CjCAG travel forecast model.
The background and cumulative growth volumes have been calculated by using the CjCAG
traffic forecast model which provides 2005 and forecasted 2030 traffic volumes. Using a furness
process between the 2009 existing field volumes, CjCAG 2005, and CjCAG 2030 traffic volumes,
2010 Background, 2020 Cumulative, and 2030 Cumulative traffic volumes were estimated.
4.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Figure 2 illustrates the 2010 Background without Project Condition intersection traffic volumes
at each study intersection. Table 7 summarizes the results of the intersection Level of Service
calculations for the 2010 Background Conditions. Detailed Level of Service calculations for the
Background Conditions are contained in Appendix A. Under 2010 Background Conditions, no
intersections would deteriorate from an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) to a deficient LOS
(LOS E or F) during either peak hour.
4.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 8 summarizes the analysis result of the study roadway segments under the 2010
Background Conditions. Based on the results, all of the study roadway segments would continue
to operate at acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) except for a northbound segment of US 101
between I-380 and Mitchell Avenue during the AM peak hour. Appendix A includes the
detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets, including weekday AM and PM peak hours.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
28
June 1, 2009
I\,t:ler
,J l
Ave
(89) 131.
1
San
.~Ye (104) 45J
(174) 146-
(201) 109.
5
m~,"
MNW
San
Ave'llliest
(428)413-
(2)4.
9
San Bruno
,J l.
Ave East
(260) 256 J
(233)410-
11
~
~"
l'
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
m
\.. 1 (5)
_ 118 (244)
r 514 (300)
SBUS,101
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate,""'ay3\'d
ro
M '"
c_ W
\.. 82 (167)
-118(278)
r 205 (636)
Grand
- 356 (1,348)
r 7(16)
roo
Nro
E. Grand,J t l.
A,,, (70) 143 J
(326) 1,579-
(58) 45 .
o M~
W M~
,,,",..,-(0
m
eo.
\.. 63 (131)
- 249 (1,056)
.'29 (420)
Grand
,J ll.
,"00
w'"
.~-
0.,,,",
M,"
_ W
'--~
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(166) 237 J
(70) 131-
(87) 69.
(274) 1,027-
(14)29.
"'l I
3:vd
\.. 139 (259)
- 184 (205)
.258 (913)
S,A:" oi
"'llr
,"0
WN
6i"
~
Produ:eA'Je
Sanl\,1ateo,Aye
l l.
\.. 107 (59)
_ 203 (450)
r 78 (184)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Eas:
0::0\
to'
~
101
SS
:::.-::!-
r- '- 78 (185)
:::: 01 _ 162 (289)
"'l I
row
(0.,,,",
01:::.-
m
;;;.
101
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
DKS Associates
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'\ r
00 ro
o 00
N ro
01(0
'" ro
~:::.-
"01
4
'\11"
'" roN
_ NW
,,,",(0..,-
c_
'"
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'d
San'/\,rteoAve
'"
ro
01 '- 11 (29)
((l -6(41)
ll. .'4(78)
'j\'aterc:o,p-
~W
wo
'"~
- ,.
~ "
woo
aN
_ 162 (235)
r 27(51)
,J l.
_115(124)
S, Unden
\:BU,S
SUnden
EI.s
Ave, (137) 132 J
(138) 117-
"T/'''ffPamn
v (358) 914 J
(24) 89-
(112)371.
,Aye
"'llr
""l r
0)"'<:j'1'-
W M"
~ N
EO
c_
~
(215) 213-
(105) 43.
OW
c_ "
~:: f=:'
ec
6
7
Do::ar,Aye
8
'C1
San
co
o
'"
a co
,"0
_N
- 306 (559)
r 106 (340)
l.
A'JeEast
(375) 483-
(310) 338.
10
101
Pr:vateRd
m
San Bruno
,J
- 218 (646)
Ave East
r
(318) 484-
M
'"
N
GO
M
~
12
IJS
FIGURE 2
2010 Background Without Project Volumes
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 7 - 2010 Background without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control
Delay' LOS b Delay LOS
1 Miller Avenue / Airport Boulevard Signalized 32.1 C 17.7 B
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard Signalized 37.4 D 43.7 D
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 NB off-ramp Signalized 46.4 D 18.7 B
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard Signalized 35.8 D 30.0 C
5 San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard Signalized 29.9 C 39.1 D
6 US 101 NB Ramps / South Airport Boulevard Signalized 26.3 C 32.5 C
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 13.0 B 7.0 A
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 15.4 B 13.9 B
9 San Bruno Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 20.3 C 22.5 C
10 San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 18.9 B 29.6 C
11 San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 25.2 C 29.3 C
12 San Bruno Avenue / US 101 NB Ramps - NB Rt Unsignalized 3.2 2.9
NB Approach 12.3 B 11.0 B
SB Approach 8.8 A 10.4 B
Source: DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is based on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
30
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
'Iii
>-
;;;
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
cu
E
CI
cu
UI
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
...
V
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
]I
V
..
III
o
..
o
N
c
o
:e
"c:J
C
o
U ::E
tl ll.
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
CI::E
~ c(
..
III
o
..
o
N
UI
o
...
0,
~
"J
,,<'
CJ.J
~
"'i
<( <( <( <( co <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
w
o
::E
~~~~t"'\j~~~~~~~~f'.:
NMNMO"lMI.OI"'--.I"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.MN
MMMMNMNNNNNNMM
cu~
S.c M LI) I"'--. T""'l N 'tt" 'tt" 'tt" 1.0 O"l I"'--. 0 CO 0
='MO"lOCONLI)'tt"NM~CONCOO"l
_.cN'tt"NMT""'lN'tt"T""'lM'tt"NT""'lN~
o CLJ T""'l T""'l N T'"'""1
>~
III
... III
o cu
CUC......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
.....::E
CLJ~""""
::Ell:
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
w
o
::E
~~~~~f'.:~~~~~O~~
MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.I"'--.NM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
T""'l'tt" LI) 'tt" O"l M M LI) O"l 0 T""'l T""'l
Ll)OO"lOO"lMO"lT""'lI"'--.OT""'lO
\'oLI)I"'--.NO"lLl)MT""'lMMT""'lN
'" N
Lf"l '"
~ Lf"l
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o 'C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: "t:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
co
cu
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: cu
"c:JE
..CI
o cu
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
III
'Iii
>
;;;
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
0
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
0
:,j;l
'6
c
0
U
...
V
CU
,-
0
...
ll.
...
'"
0
.c
...
~ ... '~
z "c:J
Q C
.... '"
.~ 0
~ ...
...J ]I
(j Q
~ '" V
..
z III
Q 0
... ..
<( 0
.... N
IJ:
~ C
"- CO
'" CU
z
Q <( :is
IJ: ..
l- I-
UI
c 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( U U U U U 0 U 0 0 0
0 ...
:e
"c:J W 0 '" '" 0 '" "< 0 ~ "- "- Lf"l '" ... '" 0"> Lf"l 0"> '"
C 0 '" '" '" '" '" N '" N Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l ~ "< Lf"l ": ": ":
0 ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
U
... ll.
V CU~
CU
,- E.c
0 0 0 00 '" Lf"l '" 0"> 0"> (f) "- (f) CO 00 ... (') 0 00 (')
... "'..... '" 00 ... 0"> 00 '" ,.., 0"> OJ 00 ... 00 OJ 00 ... (') 00 (')
ll. _.c ... Lf"l '" '" '" 0"> Lf"l 00 OJ OJ 00 (f) OJ N ... (f) OJ ...
... 0 CU ... ... ... ... (f) "- (f) (f) (f) (f)
'" >~
0
.c
... UI
'~ 9 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( U U U U 0 0 U 0 0 0
"c:J
C
'" W
0 '" 0 0 '" 0"> 0 '" '" '" '" ... ,.., 00 '" N ,.., "- "-
... 0 '" '" '" '" N '" '" '" '" Lf"l '" Lf"l "- "- '" "- "- "-
Cl ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
...
V c(
.. CU~
III
0 E.c "- 0 0 00 ,.., Lf"l 00 N ... '" ... 0"> 0"> 0 ,.., ,.., "- ...
.. "'..... ,.., Lf"l ,.., 00 N Lf"l 00 ,.., 0 '" '" ,.., ,.., ,.., '" N "- ,..,
0 _.c ... N '" '" 00 ... '" ... 00 '" '" Lf"l '" ... 00 N "- 00
N 0 CU Lf"l ... Lf"l ... 00 '" '" '" '" '"
>~
...... ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C
W
0 Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
...~ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
0...... Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl
CU III Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., .,
... III > > > > > > > > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
'" CU CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c<
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
III C l- I- l- I- l- I- l- I-
.. CU u u u u u u u u u u
CU > Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
~:,j;l C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
V ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
CU Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
W
III III Q) t::
0. 0. ~ 0
E E 0.
0 ...
Q) Q) CO CO c <c
~ ~ ... ...
CO CO " 0
... U ""C Q)
0 c Z Cfl CO III > ~
Q) 0 III ~ ,.., ,.., C '0 C1i
~ ~ Q) Q) 0. 0 0 CO C ""C
CO C\ E ,.., Cfl CO Q) Q) ~
:E c ~ ~ ,.., ... ~ ~ C C
CO ..c '0 CO
., ... Cfl Cfl 0 LL 0 Q)
C ~ ~ ...
C C ""C 0 CO "- => => C 00 ~ 0. "
CO " C Q) t:: '" Q) 0 ""C Qj
0 Cfl Cfl 0 CO ...
I N ~ 0 0 0 Cfl , ~ 00 c Q) 0
:,j;l CO ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 CO ..c ~
0 ,.., 0. ~
0 0 :E III III III C '" ... u ~
.. ~ 0 ... 0 0 , " ~ ""C
V ~ ~ ,.., 0. 0. 0. <c ~ ~ " Qj ~ :E >
Q) Q) Q) c E E E ... 0
0 ~ ~ ~ CO 0 0 C1i
~ ~ CO Cfl 0 ..c ~ ~
... Cfl CO CO CO U 0 0
=> ... ... ... u c "" Q) Q) ~ ~ ~
C III CO C
0 0 0 0 CO CO CO '0 0 0 :E ~ ~ Q) Q)
0 ~ Cfl '0
~ Q) Q) ~ Cfl Cfl Z c c c ~ ~
C\ ~ ~ Q) Q) CO " " 0 0 0.
C CO CO ~ ~ ,.., ,.., ,.., ... ... ... ~ ~ Qj Qj ...
., :E :E 0 0 0 LL CO CO 0 0 ..c ..c ""C ""C Q)
,.., ,.., ,.., c c ~
c c C ""C C C C 00 00 u u CO CO III
" CO CO C ..c Cfl Cfl Cfl CO CO CO '" '" ~ ~ ... ... {;
~ , , :E :E
I Cfl Cfl N "- => => => Cfl Cfl Cfl ~ ~ " "
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) ~ ~
.. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
>... 0
.. C c ,..,
:l: CU " Q) 0
E ... ,..,
"c:J CO ~
.. Cl c Cfl
o CU CO =>
1%U1 Cfl
0,
~
"J
,,<'
CJ.J
~
"'i
i:j
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
4.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A traffic signal warrant analysis screening was conducted as per the Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD), California Supplement. Detailed traffic signal warrant analysis sheets
are included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 9, at the single unsignalized intersection, the
signal warrant would not be met for either peak hour.
Table 9 - 2010 Background without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No No No No No No
Source: DKS Associates
4.4 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations
There are no anticipated changes to transit, pedestrian and bicycle operations for the 2010
Background without Project Condition. All of these operations would continue to function as
described in the Existing Conditions Section.
4.5 Parking
Off-street and on-street parking conditions would remain the same as under the Existing
Condition. No changes in parking would be expected.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
33
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
5 2010 BACKGROUND WITH PROJECT CONDITION
This section evaluates the 2010 background traffic conditions plus project-generated traffic
estimated for the proposed project.
5.1 Significance Criteria and Project Impacts
Intersection and roadway segment significance criteria has been adopted from the 2007 San
Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP). Based on the CMP standards, the
acceptable operating level of service (LOS) is defined at LOS D unless defined differently by the
2007 CMP. In the area of the project site the 2007 CMP establishes that the roadway level of
service standard for US 101 is LOS E. No CMP intersections are included in this study, based on
the location of the proposed project and study intersections. However the City of South San
Francisco also uses the criteria for the evaluation of local intersections.
5.1.1 Intersection Impact Criteria:
For an intersection that is currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
a. A project will be considered to have an impact if the project will cause the
intersection to operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted.
b. A project will be considered to have an impact if the cumulative analysis indicates
that the combination of the proposed project and future cumulative traffic demand
will result in the intersection to operate at a level of service that violates the
standard adopted and the proposed project increases average control delay at the
intersection by four (4) seconds or more.
For an intersection that is not currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
a. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will add any additional
traffic to the intersection that is currently not in compliance with its adopted level of
service standard.
5.1.2 Roadway Segment Impact Criteria:
Freeway Segments:
For freeway segments currently in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
a. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will cause the freeway
segment to operate at a level of service that violates the standard adopted
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
34
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
b. A project will be considered to have an impact if the cumulative analysis indicates
that the combination of the proposed project and future cumulative traffic demand
will result in the freeway segment to operate at a level of service that violates the
standard adopted and the proposed project increases traffic demand on the
freeway segment by an amount equal to one (1) percent or more of the segment
capacity, or causes the freeway segment volume-to-capacity (vjc) ratio to increase
by one (1) percent.
For freeway segments currently not in compliance with the adopted LOS standard:
a. A project is considered to have an impact if the project will add traffic demand
equal to one (1) percent or more or the segment capacity or causes the freeway
segment volume-to-capacity (vjc) ratio to increase by one (1) percent, if the
freeway is currently not in compliance with the adopted LOS standard.
Arterial Segments:
The CMP states that the analysis of arterial segments is only required when a jurisdiction
proposes to reduce the capacity of a designated arterial through reduction in the number of
lanes, adding or modifying on-street parking, or other actions that will affect arterial segment
performance.
A project is considered to have an impact if it causes mid-block queuing, parking maneuvers
resulting in delays or other impacts that result in any segment to operate at a level of service
that violates the adopted LOS standard set for the nearest intersection. Additionally, an impact
is determined if the average travel speed for the arterial segment is reduced by 4 miles per
hour or more. This criterion was used in evaluating arterial segments.
Although the project does not anticipate reducing the capacity of arterials through a reduction
in the number of lanes, adding or modifying on-street parking, or other actions that may affect
the segment performance, arterial segment analysis was performed for a more conservative,
comprehensive traffic analysis.
5.2 Trip Generation
The trip generation for the proposed project was based on the square footage of each land use
at the project site, and standard trip generation rates for a warehousing, light industrial,
convenience market, eatery without a drive-through, and print and shipping store land use, as
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the sth edition of the Trip Generation
Handbook. The trip generation rates from the ITE Handbook were then applied to the
respective square footages for each land use to develop the total number of trips generated by
the proposed project.
According to the information provided by Centrum Services, the proposed project would
approximately 573,000 square feet of new development. It should be noted that this includes a
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
35
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
50,000 square foot credit for existing warehousing space on the project site. The trip
generation also takes into account the number of heavy vehicle trips that would be part of the
project. Due to the different vehicle characteristics between heavy vehicles and passenger cars,
heavy vehicles were converted to passenger-car-equivalents (PCEs) by the ratio of 4 vehicle
trips per one (1) truck trip. The trip generation also accounted for a proposed Transportation
Demand Program, internal trip capture, and pass-by trips. The trip generation rates for each
land use are detailed in Table 10.
Table 10 - Trip Generation Rates
ITE Land Trip Generation Rate
ITE Land Use Size Use Code per 1000 square feet
AM PM
Liaht Industrial 368 969 sf 110 1.01 1.08
Warehousina 245 797 sf 150 0.42 0.45
Convenience Market 1,000 sf 852 33.00 36.00
CODV. Print and EXDress ShiD Store 6 600 sf 920 8.03 12.27
Eaterv w/o Drive- Throuah 1 500 sf 933 63.33 52.67
Notes: Land use sizes provided by Centrum.
Trip Generation Rates from ITE Trip Generation Handbook.
5.2.1 Transportation Demand Management Program
The City of South San Francisco requires that all nonresidential developments that generate
more than 100 vehicle trips per day or a development seeking a floor area ratio bonus
incorporate a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) into the site development. The TDM
requires a reduction of generated vehicles based on the land use of the site. The TDM
ordinance 20.120.010 encourages the following:
. Implement a program designed to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the new
development, and the expansion of existing nonresidential development pursuant to the
City's police power and necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and
welfare.
. Ensure that expected increase in traffic resulting from growth in employment
opportunities in the City of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated.
. Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of
services, incentives, and facilities.
. Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that
new developments are designed in way to maximize the potential for alternative
transportation usage.
. Establish minimum TDM requirements for all new nonresidential development.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
36
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
. Allow reduced parking requirements for projects implementing the requirements of this
chapter.
. Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that the measures
are implemented.
The "with project" conditions were analyzed with a 30% trip reduction and a more conservative
15% trip reduction. For the purposes of the TIA, 20% of generated trips would utilize transit
services (BART and Sam Trans) while the remaining 10% would participate in care share
programs. Theses reductions are reflected in Table 10. The trip reduction would be
accomplished through the support of alternative modes of transportation including transit,
carpooling. Site-specific improvements may include shuttle services to Caltrain and BART and
complimentary carpool parking. Additionally, providing amenities for pedestrians and bicyclists
including bicycle racks and lockers would encourage the use of alternative modes of
transportation.
5.2.2 Internal Capture and Pass-By Trip Reduction
An internal trip capture reduction and pass-by trip reduction were calculated as part of the trip
generation for the site. Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook Based provides related
information to calculate the overall internal capture for a mixed-use development. Using this
resource, a 12% internal trip capture rate was calculated and has been applied to the trips
generated by the project. Additionally, based on field observations and given the light-industrial
nature of the area surrounding the project site, an addition 5% trip reduction for pass by was
applied to the overall site-related trip generation. These reductions are reflected in Table 11
and Table 12.
Table 11 - Proposed Project Trip Generation - 150/0 TDM Reduction
Direction I Daily Trips I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour
I Trucks I Autos I Total I Trucks Autos Total I Trucks I Autos I Total
Expressed as Vehicles
Inbound 173 1542 1715 37 273 310 7 91 98
Outbound 173 1542 1715 9 86 95 41 292 333
Total 345 3084 3430 46 359 405 48 383 431
Passenqer Car Equivalent
Inbound 690 1542 2232 148 273 421 28 91 119
Outbound 690 1542 2232 36 86 122 164 292 456
Total 1380 3084 4464 184 359 543 192 383 575
Source: DKS Associates
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
37
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 12 - Proposed Project Trip Generation - 300/0 TDM Reduction
Direction I Daily Trips I AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour
I Trucks I Autos I Total I Trucks Autos Total I Trucks I Autos I Total
Expressed as Vehicles
Inbound 173 1369 1541 37 236 273 7 84 91
Outbound 173 1369 1541 9 77 86 41 251 292
Total 345 2737 3082 46 313 359 48 335 383
Passenqer Car Equivalent
Inbound 690 1369 2059 148 236 384 28 84 112
Outbound 690 1369 2059 36 77 113 164 251 415
Total 1380 2737 4117 184 313 497 192 335 527
Source: DKS Associates
5.3 Trip Distribution
The direction of approach and departure for project trips of the proposed Centum Distribution
Center were estimated from the existing traffic patterns in the vicinity of the project site. Table
13 shows the trip distribution patterns assumed for the proposed project. The project truck
trips having their origins or destinations on US-101 would be assumed to access the project site
via the interchanges at San Bruno Avenue, Mitchell Avenue, Wondercolor Lane, and Miller
Avenue. The remaining truck trips would access I-280 via San Bruno Avenue. It should be
noted that during the respective AM and PM peak hours, approximately 16 and 24 trucks would
pass through the intersection of San Mateo Avenue and San Bruno Avenue. For trucks, full site
access would be off of San Mateo Avenue at the existing driveway location. This location would
also serve as the employee and visitor entrance.
Table 13 - Proposed Project Trip Distribution
Origin I Destination Percentage of Total Traffic (Ufo)
Autos Trucks
North via US 101 30 4S
South via US 101 2S SO
North via Airport Slvd 3 -
West via Grand Ave 2 -
North via Linden Ave 10 -
South via San Mateo Ave IS -
West via San Sruno Ave IS S
Total 100 100
Source: DKS Associates
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
38
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
5.4 15% TOM Reduction
Figure 3 illustrates the project trips at each of the study intersections while Figure 4
illustrates the total 2010 Background with Project Condition traffic volumes at each of the study
intersections for the AM and PM peak hours.
5.4.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 17. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The study intersections that that operate at an
acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) under the 2010 Background without Project Condition would
continue to operate at acceptable LOS under the 2010 Background with Project Condition. The
addition of traffic generated by the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts
to study intersections during either of the peak hours analyzed.
5.4.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 18 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix A includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. All roadway segments
would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS The project would not result in a significant
impact to the study roadway segments.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
39
June 1, 2009
I\,t:ler
Ave
1
EO
a
~
San
/1ye
(49) 14J
(90) 24-
(36)9.
5
~~ >.D (,0
N_M
San
Ave'llliest
9
~
~
San
A,,, Ea(~8) 13 J '"l
~
'"
iD
11
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
eo:
m
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate,""'ay3\'d
iD
;:;
l
l
r 54 (l~us, 101 Grand
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e
'"l I
,A:"'e
Ave
M
a
::0
Ajrpoi 3:vd
__ 74 (17)
S oi
'"l
~
m
iD
~
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,1ateo,Aye
'- 90 (32)
l l,
San3runo San
,AYe, East Ave East
(48) 13-
(78) 23.
0;
N
~
101
101
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
D
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Grand
E, Grand
(2)6.
NN
~~
w~
~N
:!.-
2
"01
4
3
S,AJroort31'"'d
Sarl\,1ateoAve,
6"
~
'"
N
__ 10 (32)
~
0) 47 (174)
t1 -- 10 (32)
l,
61.:
Do::ar,Aye
8
'A'aterco:c SUnder
SUnder
,Aye
,Aye
(11)30-
(11)30-
7
10
a
M
-- 60 (22)
101
Pr:vateRd
SarBruro
Ave East
12
IJS
FIGURE 3
Project Increment Volumes
15% TOM Reduction
m
I\,t:lel"
.n
Ave
(124) 131,
1
San
.~Ye (153) 59 J
(264) 170-
(237) 118,
5
Mmo
mMO
San
Ave 'lilies!
(428)413-
(2)4,
9
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
'- 1 (5)
- 142 (244)
r 568 f'mL 101
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate'""'ay3\'d
o
M ""
c_ 0
'- 82(167)
-118(278)
r 205 (636)
Grand
- 356 (1,348)
r 7(16)
00
NO
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (70) 143 J
(326) 1,579-
(58) 45 ,
o M~
o M~
,"",..,-(0
m
eo.
'- 63 (131)
-- 249 (1,056)
r 129 (420)
Grand
,J ll,
",,0
0""
.~-
0._"",
M""
_ m
'--~
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(166) 237 J
(70) 131-
(89) 75,
(274) 1,027-
(14)29,
"'l I
3:vd
l l,
'- 139 (259)
__ 258 (222)
r 258 (9PA;_ oi
Blid
"'llr
00
""N
N
S
~
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,iateo,Aye
l l,
'-197(91)
__ 203 (450)
r 78 (184)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Bas1
_ O~
~ 0""
G)'''-''''''
~
101
?! ill
:! '- 78 (185)
m ~
N N -- 162 (289)
San l,
Ave Easl
(308) 269 J
(233)410-
11
"'l1
~m
00.,"",
01;:;.
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'\ r
m 0
0 m
N 0
N <0'
'" 0
N
1J1
4
'\11"
m ON
_ ""m
,,,,,"''''-
M
'"
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'j
Sanl\,1ateop.,/E'
00_
O~N
_Mm
GO CO
m
"" eo. '- 47 (174)
0
0 U; __ 125 (156)
0
S Linden.) l,
'- 11 (29)
__ 6 (41)
r 14 (76,)a'ecoo'
SUnden
__ 172 (267)
r 27(51)
\:BU,S
l l,
"T/'''ffPa:r'
v (375) 9'88 J
(24) 89-
(112)371,
/1,V:;
""l r
0 m
c_ "
~:: ce'
'" (0
''',\1'''(137) 132.J
(149) 144-
""llr
0)"'<:j"1'-
OM"
~ N
EO
c_
~
(226) 243 -
(105) 43,
6
7
Do::ar,/1ye
8
San
EO
:!.
o
c_
o
o
N
l. - 366 (581)
r 106 (340)
Ave East
(423) 496-
(388) 361 ,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
m
- 218 (646)
San
Ave East
r
(318) 484-
~
'"
N
6'
~
(".
12
IJS
FIGURE 4
2010 Background With Project Volumes
15% TOM Project Trip Reduction
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 14 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 150/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No I ntersection Location Control LOSb
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport Soulevard Signalized 33.3 C No 17.S S No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport Soulevard Signalized 37.6 D No 44.S D No
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 NS off-ramp Signalized 46.4 D No IS.7 S No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway Soulevard Signa lized 3S.S D No 30.0 C No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport Soulevard Signalized 31.S C No 42.1 D No
6 US 101 NS Ramps / South Airport Soulevard Signalized 26.4 C No 32.7 C No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 12.S S No 6.7 A No
S Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 14.6 S No 14.2 S No
9 San Sruno Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 20.S C No 24.6 C No
10 San Sruno Avenue / US 101 SS Ramps Signalized IS.7 S No 32.2 C No
11 San Sruno Avenue / US 101 NS Ramps Signa lized 26.4 C No 29.9 C No
12 San Sruno Avenue / US 101 NS Ramps - NS Rt Unsig. 3.2 2.9
NS Approach 12.3 S No 11.0 S No
SS Approach S.S A No 10.4 S No
Source: DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is based on average stopped delay.
For un signalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
42
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
III
..
I
III
'Iii
~
..
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
III
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
c
cu
E
CI
CU
III
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:e
"c:J
C
o
U
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
CI
...
V
..
III
o
..
o
N
c
o
:e
"c:J
C
o ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
CI
~ ~
.. c(
III
o
..
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
III
o
...
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
<( <( <( <( co <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~~~~~LI)f'.:~~f'.:
NMNMO"lMI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI.OI"'--.MN
MMMMNMNNNNNNMM
III
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~LI)~~f'.:~~O'I~~
MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.I.ONM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
T""'l CO LI) CO
o T""'l 'tt" T""'l
I"'--. LI) CO N
COCO('Y1L1)LI)I"'--.O"lI.O
ONO"lT""'ll"'--.'tt"CON
S 1.0 M T""'l LI) M T""'l 'tt"
'" N
Lf"l '"
~ Lf"l
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlCO~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 U 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) C
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
i;l
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c I"'--. M NaCO 0 'tt" 'tt" O"l 'tt" I"'--. N co 0
=''tt"'tt"NM~CO'tt"NCO~~O''lCOO''l
_.cNLI)N'tt"T""'lN'tt"T""'lMI.OLI)T""'lN~
o CLJ T""'l T""'l N T'"'""1
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
III
..
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1% III
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-c
c
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
III
'Iii
~
..
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
0
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
0
:e
"c:J
C
0
U
...
V
CU
,-
0
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
~ ... "c:J
z C
Q '"
.... 0
.~ ...
~ Cl
...J ...
(j Q V
'" ..
~ III
z e
Q ..
l- e
<( N
....
IJ:
~ C co
... ..
'" cu
z
Q <( :is
IJ: ..
.... I-
UI
0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u u 0 u 0 0 0
...
c
0
:,j;l w 0 0 0"> 0"> 0"> 00 0 00 "- 00 '" ... 00 ... 0 '" ,.., ...
'6 0 '" '" N N N N '" N Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l ~ "< ~ ": "< ":
c ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
U ll.
... cu~
V
cu E.c 0 '" ... '" ,.., '" "- Lf"l "- ... OJ ... 0 (') ~ "- OJ 00
,- "'..... 0 (') (') 0 (f) co (f) 00 (f) co "-
0 _.c '" 00 "- '" ,.., 0 '" N 0 ~ OJ "- ... (') co (f) ~ ...
... ... '" "- "- 00 Lf"l 0">
ll. 0 cu ,.., co co ... ... "- "- (f) (f) "- (f)
.c >~
...
'~ UI
"c:J 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u 0 0 u 0 0 0
c ...
'"
0
... w 0 '" '" '" ~ '" 0"> '" 00 '" Lf"l N ,.., ... '" N 00 0">
Cl 0 ~ Lf"l ~ Lf"l "< ": ~ ": ": ":
... '" '" '" '" N '" N '"
V ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
..
III c(
e cu~
.. E.c ... ,.., "- 0 '" ,.., 00 00 '" ,..,
e "- "- '" N "- 00 ,.., '"
N "'..... ,.., "- ... N Lf"l 00 0 0"> Lf"l "- 0 00 ,.., "- 0"> ... N "-
_.c 0"> '" "- Lf"l 0"> ... 00 '" 00 0">
o cu ... N '" Lf"l 00 Lf"l "- ... Lf"l ... Lf"l ... 00 '" '" '" '" '"
>~
...... ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C
W
0 Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
...~ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
0...... Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl
cu III Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::;
... III > > > > > > > > co co co co co co co co co co
'" cu co co co co co co co co c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c<
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
III C l- I- l- I- l- I- l- I-
.. cu u u u u u u u u u u
cu > Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
~:,j;l C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\
co co co co co co co co
V ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
cu Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
W
III III Q) t::
0. 0. ~ 0
E E 0.
0 ...
Q) ~ co co c <C
... ...
~ co co " 0
... ""C Q)
Z Cfl co u
0 C III > ~
Q) 0 III Q) ,.., ,.., c 'w C1i
~ ~ Q) ~ 0. ~ 0 0 co C ""C
co C\ E ,.., Cfl co Q) ~ ~
:E c ~ ,.., ... ~ c c
:;::; co ..c Cfl Cfl 0 LL 0 ~ '0 co
c ... ~ ~ ...
c C ""C 0 co "- => => c 00 0. "
co " c Q) t:: co '" Q) 0 ""C Qj ...
0 Cfl Cfl 0 0 0 C
I N ~ ~ 0 Cfl , ~ 00 Q) 0
:,j;l co ~ ~ ~ 0 co ..c ~
0 0 0 :E ,.., III III III 0. 0 0 c '" ... u ~
.. ~ ... , ""C
V ~ ~ 0 0. 0. 0. <C ~ ~ " ~ " "" {; >
Q) Q) Q) c ,.., E E E ... Qj :E
0 ~ Q) Q) co 0 0 C1i
... ~ ~ co Cfl co 0 ~ ~ ..c ~ ~
Cfl co co u 0 0
=> ... ... ... u c ~ Q) Q) ~ ~ ~
c 0 co III co :E ~ ~ c
0 0 0 ~ 0 co co 'w 0 0 Cfl Q) Q) '0
~ Q) Q) ~ Cfl Cfl Z c c c ~ ~
C\ ~ ~ Q) ~ co " " 0 0 0.
C co co ~ ,.., ,.., ,.., ... ... ... ~ ~ Qj Qj ...
:E :E 0 0 0 LL co co ""C ""C Q)
:;::; ,.., ,.., ,.., 0 0 ..c ..c C C ~
C C C ""C ..c c C c 00 00 u u co co
" co co c ~ Cfl Cfl Cfl co co co '" '" "" "" ... ... >-
I Cfl Cfl N "- => => => Cfl Cfl Cfl , , :E :E " " 0
~ ~
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
.. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
>... 0
.. c c ,..,
:l: CU " Q) 0
...
"c:J E co ~ ,..,
.. Cl c Cfl
o CU co =>
1%U1 Cfl
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
5.4.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 19 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. The single unsignalized intersection would meet
the peak hour signal warrant during the both the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 16 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 15% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No No No No No No
Source: DKS Associates
5.5 30% TOM Reduction
Figure 5 illustrates the project trips at each of the study intersections while Figure 6 illustrates
the total 2010 Background with Project Condition traffic volumes at each of the study
intersections for the AM and PM peak hours.
5.5.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 17. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The study intersections that that operate at an
acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) under the 2010 Background without Project Condition would
continue to operate at acceptable LOS under the 2010 Background with Project Condition. The
addition of traffic generated by the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts
to study intersections during either of the peak hours analyzed.
5.5.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 18 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix A includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. All roadway segments
would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS The project would not result in a significant
impact to the study roadway segments.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
45
June 1, 2009
I\,t:ler
Ave
1
iD
M
m
San
/1ye
(42) 11 J
(79)21-
(32)8.
5
"Nm
N_N
San
Ave'llliest
9
~
N
San
A,,, E311,)"J '"l
m
M
'"
11
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
eo:
~
l
r 51 (l~us, 101 Grand
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e
N
e
Ajrpoi 3:vd
__ 71 (15)
S oi
'"l
m
ro
N
~
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,1ateo,Aye
'- 71 (25)
l l,
San3runo San
,AYe, East Ave East
;::
iD
~
101
101
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
D
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
61.:
10
San Bruno
Ave East
12
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate'""'zy3\'d
'"
ro
m
l
Grand
E, Grand
'"l I
,A:"'e
Ave
(2)5.
NO
~~
m~
~~
~
2
"01
4
3
S,AJroortBI'"'d
Sanl\,1ateoAve,
s
~:;.
N
__ 8 (25)
'"
'"
0) '- 40 (153)
N -- 8 (25)
l,
'A'aterco:c SUnden
SUnden
,Aye
J
,Aye
(8)24-
(8)24-
.
6
7
Do::ar,Aye
8
'C1
e
M
N
-- 47 (17)
(41)11-
(63) 18.
101
Pr:vateRd
A'I0.
0\.0."0'
IJS
FIGURE 5
Project Increment Volumes
30% TOM Project Trip Reduction
m
1\1 Ie! ,J ll,
Ave
(124) 131,
1
~NN
CMN
_w~
San
.~Ye (146) 56J
(253) 167-
(233) 117,
5
CMM
WMro
San
Ave ',ilies!
(428)413-
(2)4,
9
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
'- 1 (5)
- 142 (244)
r 565 f'mL 10\
") I (' Cff-R.aTp
~ro
~~
.~-
0._"",
MN
_ W
'--~
3:vd
l l,
'- 139 (259)
__ 255 (220)
r 258 (9PA:" oi
Blid
")1('
mc
MN
N
GO
"'-
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,iateo,Aye
l l,
'- 178 (84)
__ 203 (450)
r 78 (184)
San Bruno
") I (' .~Ye. Basi
- ~~
~ W~
G)''''-''''''
C"-
101
S ill
C"- :! '- 78 (185)
M ~
N N -- 162 (289)
San l,
Ave Easl
(301) 267 J
(233)410-
11
")1
~W
r.....,"",
01;:;.
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
ro
M ~
c_ ~
Grand ,J ll,
,A:"'e(166) 237 J
(70) 131-
(89) 74,
'- 82(167)
-118(278)
r 205 (636)
")1 ('
W roN
_ Mro
,,,,,"''''-
N
'"
2
S,AJroortBI'"'j
~-
C~N
_MW
'- 11 (29)
__ 6 (41)
r 14 (76,)a'ecoo-
\:BU,S
l l,
"T/'''ffPa:r'
v (373) 9'85 J
(24) 89-
(112)371,
")1('
0)"'<:j"1'-
~ M"
~ N
EO
c_
C"-
6
GO
:!.
N
c_
~
o
N
l. -- 353 (576)
r 106 (340)
San
Ave East
(416)494-
(373) 356,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
W
- 218 (646)
San
Ave East
(318) 484-
12
IJS
Gate'""'ay3\'d
Grand
- 356 (1,348)
r 7(16)
roo
Nro
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (70) 143 J
(326) 1,579-
(58) 45 ,
'- 63 (131)
-- 249 (1,056)
r 129 (420)
,A:"'e
"11('
"I ('
ro ro
0 ro
N ro
N <0'
~ ro
N
1J1
4
(274) 1,027-
(14)29,
C M~
~ M~
,""'...-'"
ro
eo.
3
Sanl\,1ateop.,/E'
SLinden
_ 170 (260)
r 27(51)
c_~
~~
~M
'- 135 (298)
_ 8(25)
r 276 (306)
S Lindec t l,
/1've
/1've
'1 ('
0 ~
c_ "
~:: ce'
'" (0
'"
N
~
(223) 237 -
(105) 43,
(8)24-
0::
7
Do::ar,/1've
8
A'I0.
0\0-"0'
('
~
~
N
6'
~
(".
FIGURE 6
2010 Background With Project Volumes
30% TOM Project Trip Reduction
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 17 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 300/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No I ntersection Location Control LOSb
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 33.3 C No 17.8 8 No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 37.S D No 44.4 D No
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 46.4 D No 18.7 8 No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signa lized 3S.8 D No 30.0 C No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 31.6 C No 41.8 D No
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 26.4 C No 32.9 C No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signa lized 12.8 8 No 6.8 A No
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 14.6 8 No 14.1 8 No
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 20.6 C No 24.4 C No
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 18.7 8 No 31.6 C No
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signa lized 26.1 C No 29.8 C No
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsig. 3.2 2.9
N8 Approach 12.3 8 No 11.0 8 No
S8 Approach 8.8 A No 10.4 8 No
Source: DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is basd on average stopped delay.
For un signalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
48
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
o
M
I
III
'Iii
~
..
C
c(
CU
v
'~
CU
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
CI
CU
UI
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:e
"c:J
C
o
U
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
CI
...
V
..
III
o
..
o
N
c
o
:e
"c:J
C
o ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
"c:J
C
'"
o
...
CI
~ ~
.. c(
III
o
..
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
UI
o
...
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
<( <( <( <( co <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~f'.:
NMNMO"lMI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI.OI"'--.MN
MMMMNMNNNNNNMM
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~LI)~~f'.:~~O'I~~
MMMMNNLI)I"'--.I.OI"'--.I"'--.I.ONM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
LI) 1.0 CO LI)
O"l T""'l M T""'l
1.0 LI) CO N
I"'--. CO O"l LI) 'tt" 0 1.0 1.0
o T""'l M T""'l LI) 'tt" I"'--. CO
S 1.0 O"l T""'l LI) M T""'l M
'" N
Lf"l '"
~ Lf"l
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c 1.0 I"'--. O"l M 'tt" 1.0 'tt" 'tt" T""'l N 'tt" co co 0
=''tt"MT'''''lN~~'tt"NCOMN~COO''l
_.cNLI)N'tt"T""'lN'tt"T""'lMI.OLI)T""'lN~
o CLJ T""'l T""'l N T'"'""1
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
co
..
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
III
'Iii
~
..
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
0
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
0
:e
"c:J
C
0
U
...
V
CU
,-
0
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
~ ... "c:J
z C
Q '"
.... 0
.~ ...
~ Cl
...J ...
(j Q V
'" ..
~ III
z e
Q ..
l- e
<( N
....
IJ:
~ C co
... ..
'" cu
z
Q <( :is
IJ: ..
.... I-
UI
0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u u 0 u 0 0 0
...
c
0
:,j;l w 0 0 0"> 0"> 0"> 00 0 00 "- 00 '" ... Lf"l ... 0 '" ,.., ...
'6 0 '" '" N N N N '" N Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l Lf"l ~ "< ~ ": "< ":
c ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
U ll.
... cu~
V
cu E.c 0 Lf"l N '" 0"> 0"> 0 0 ~ OJ 0 00 ~ "- (') ~ "- ~
,- "'..... (') ~ 0 co (') co (f) (f) (') "-
0 _.c '" "- Lf"l N 00 0"> '" N 0 ~ OJ "- ~ (') co (f) ~ ...
... ... '" "- "- "- 0"> Lf"l 0">
ll. 0 cu co co ... ... "- "- (f) (f) "- (f)
.c >~
...
'~ UI
"c:J 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u 0 0 u 0 0 0
c ...
'"
0
... w 0 '" '" '" ~ '" 0"> '" "- '" Lf"l N 0"> '" '" N "- 0">
Cl 0 ~ Lf"l ~ Lf"l ": ": ~ ": ": ":
... '" '" '" '" N '" N '"
V ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
..
III c(
e cu~
.. E.c "- '" N N "- '" '" N '" ,..,
e "- ... 0"> N 0 0"> 0"> '"
N "'..... ,.., "- '" 0 Lf"l '" 0"> 00 '" '" 0 "- 0 '" 0"> '" ,.., Lf"l
_.c 0"> '" "- Lf"l "- ... 00 '" 00 0">
o cu ... N '" Lf"l 00 Lf"l '" ... Lf"l ... Lf"l ... 00 '" '" '" '" '"
>~
...... ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C ""C
W
0 Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
...~ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
0...... Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl
cu III Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::; :;::;
... III > > > > > > > > co co co co co co co co co co
'" cu co co co co co co co co c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c< c<
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
III C l- I- l- I- l- I- l- I-
.. cu u u u u u u u u u u
cu > Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
~:,j;l C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\
co co co co co co co co
V ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
cu Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
W
III III Q) t::
0. 0. ~ 0
E E 0.
0 ...
Q) ~ co co c <C
... ...
~ co co " 0
... ""C Q)
Z Cfl co u
0 C III > ~
Q) 0 III Q) ,.., ,.., c 'w C1i
~ ~ Q) ~ 0. ~ 0 0 co C ""C
co C\ E ,.., Cfl co Q) ~ ~
:E c ~ ,.., ... ~ c c
:;::; co ..c Cfl Cfl 0 LL 0 ~ '0 co
c ... ~ ~ ...
c C ""C 0 co "- => => c 00 0. "
co " c Q) t:: co '" Q) 0 ""C Qj ...
0 Cfl Cfl 0 0 0 C
I N ~ ~ 0 Cfl , ~ 00 Q) 0
:,j;l co ~ ~ ~ 0 co ..c ~
0 0 0 :E ,.., III III III 0. 0 0 c '" ... u ~
.. ~ ... , ""C
V ~ ~ 0 0. 0. 0. <C ~ ~ " ~ " "" {; >
Q) Q) Q) c ,.., E E E ... Qj :E
0 ~ Q) Q) co 0 0 C1i
... ~ ~ co Cfl co 0 ~ ~ ..c ~ ~
Cfl co co u 0 0
=> ... ... ... u c ~ Q) Q) ~ ~ ~
c 0 co III co :E ~ ~ c
0 0 0 ~ 0 co co 'w 0 0 Cfl Q) Q) '0
~ Q) Q) ~ Cfl Cfl Z c c c ~ ~
C\ ~ ~ Q) ~ co " " 0 0 0.
C co co ~ ,.., ,.., ,.., ... ... ... ~ ~ Qj Qj ...
:E :E 0 0 0 LL co co ""C ""C Q)
:;::; ,.., ,.., ,.., 0 0 ..c ..c C C ~
C C C ""C ..c c C c 00 00 u u co co
" co co c ~ Cfl Cfl Cfl co co co '" '" "" "" ... ... >-
I Cfl Cfl N "- => => => Cfl Cfl Cfl , , :E :E " " 0
~ ~
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >-
III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
.. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
>... 0
.. c c ,..,
:l: CU " Q) 0
...
"c:J E co ~ ,..,
.. Cl c Cfl
o CU co =>
1%U1 Cfl
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
5.5.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 19 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. The single unsignalized intersection would meet
the peak hour signal warrant during the both the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 19 - 2010 Background with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No No No No No No
Source: DKS Associates
5.6 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations
5.6.1 Transit Operations
As part of the TDM, an estimated 20% percent transit mode share would result in
approximately 119 AM and 144 PM transit-related trips via BART and SamTrans. Load factors
and operations of current transit services in the area would not be adversely affected by these
net-new transit trips related to the proposed project. Therefore it is anticipated that the
proposed project would not create significant impacts to the existing transit services.
5.6.2 Pedestrian Facilities
Existing sidewalks in the area are between five and twelve feet in wide and are provided in
most areas near the project site. Crosswalk striping is not provided at most unsignalized
intersections however, crosswalk striping is provided at signalized intersection including the
equidistant signalized intersections of San Mateo Avenue at San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo
Avenue at Linden Avenue.
The sidewalks in the vicinity of the project site are generally in acceptable condition with some
exceptions near auto repair shops. Some sidewalk furniture is present the area which includes
light poles, fire hydrants, street sign poles, trees in some areas, and mailboxes. Additionally, the
sidewalks are generally adjacent to the street with no parkways providing a buffer between the
two.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
51
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
5.6.3 Bicycle Facilities
In the City of South San Francisco, there are three different bicycle facility classifications:
. Bike Paths (Class I facilities) - Paved facilities that are physically separated from
roadways used by motor vehicles by space of a physical barrier and are designated for
bicycle use.
. Bike Lanes (Class II facilities) - Lanes on the outside edge of roadways reserved for the
exclusive use of bicycles designated with special signing and pavement markings.
. Bike Routes (Class III facilities) - Roadways recommended for use by bicycles and often
connect roadways with bike lanes and bike paths. Bike routes are designated with signs.
San Mateo Avenue, which serves as the access road for the project site, is classified as a bike
route in the City's General Plan. North of the project site, Airport Boulevard is also classified as
a bike route. No existing bicycle facilities near the project site are identified in the City of San
Bruno General Plan.
5.7 Site Plan and Area Circulation Analysis
Site access would be via two curb cuts along San Mateo Avenue. The northerly curb-cut would
provide access for passenger vehicles and trucks while the southerly curb-cut would be
restricted to passenger vehicles only. The site plan would include truck docks on the western
edge of the building. Truck access to San Mateo Avenue from the loading docks follows paths
without tight turning radii and provides sufficient lateral clearance for truck turning movements.
Passenger vehicle access is also facilitated by turning radii geometries, lane widths, and the
afore mentioned two egress and ingress points to San Mateo Avenue.
Additionally, two areas of concern related to project-related traffic were first addressed by City
staff and require additional discussion. First, the curb radius at the northeast corner of San
Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue may not accommodate some types of vehicles traveling
eastbound along San Bruno Avenue to northbound San Mateo Avenue and the project site.
AutoTurn analysis has been performed on the current northeast curb geometry to determine
the vehicle path. Based on the AutoTurn results, the turning paths for larger vehicles such as
semi trucks would cross over into the opposite travel lane on San Mateo Avenue in order to
complete the turning movement. It is suggested, and has been reflected in the traffic analysis,
that trucks are restricted from traveling along San Bruno Avenue and from making a turn at this
intersection of concern. Between 50-55 feet of right-of-way would need to be acquired in order
to facilitate this truck turning movement.
This second area of concern is the railway crossing between the intersections of San Bruno
Avenue at San Mateo Avenue and San Bruno Avenue at Huntington Avenue. The distance
between the two intersections is approximately 185 feet with the Caltrain line running between
the two. Given the restrictive space between the two intersections, eastbound left turns from
Centrum Distribution Center 52 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
San Bruno Avenue to San Mateo Avenue are currently not permitted. The railroad crossing is
marked by street striping and noise and visual alerts. All of these markings and alerts were
replaced and updated in 2008. Once the project is built and fully operational, additional signal
coordination may be necessary for the two intersections to continue to operate safely and
efficiently.
5.8 Parking
Off-Street Parkino
As part of the proposed site plan, the two existing lots would be combined and their parking
supply joined as well. The resulting on-site parking plan would include parking for
approximately 670 autos and trucks. Access would occur from San Mateo Avenue through two
curb cuts. A curb cut near the southern edge of the project site would be for autos only while
another curb cut slightly farther north would provide access for both autos and trucks. Internal
circulation paths would join areas of parking regardless of which access point a vehicle utilized.
Based on information provided by South San Francisco city staff, the total minimum required
parking spaces would be 381 off-street parking spaces. However, with the implementation of a
TDM plan the minimum required office parking would be reduced by 15% resulting in 348
required parking spaces. As a result, the parking excess would be 322 parking spaces.
On-Street Parkino
On-street parking conditions are expected to remain the same under the project condition.
While the off-airport parking lot curb cut would be removed under project conditions, a new
curb cut is proposed near the southern edge of the project site. In effect, the existing curb cut
would be moved south but should have no affect on on-street parking conditions.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
53
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
6 2020 CUMULATIVE WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITION
This section discusses the traffic operating conditions of the study intersections and roadway
segments under the 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition. The 2020 Cumulative without
Project Condition includes the existing traffic volumes plus the addition of background growth
traffic derived from the CjCAG travel forecast model. Figure 7 illustrates the 2020 Cumulative
without Project Condition traffic volumes at each of the study intersections.
6.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Table 20 summarizes the results of the intersection level of service calculations for the 2020
Cumulative without Project Condition. Detailed Level of Service calculation sheets are included
in Appendix A. Under 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition, four of the twelve study
intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or F in at least one of the peak hours.
During the AM peak period, the intersections of East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard, US
101 northbound off-ramps, and Gateway Boulevard, would operate at LOS F. East Grand
Avenue and Airport Boulevard and San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard would respectively
operate at LOS E and LOS F conditions during the PM peak hour.
6.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 21 summarizes the roadway segment operating level of service under the 2020
Cumulative without Project Condition. The detailed level of service calculations are included in
Appendix A. The addition of cumulative growth traffic would result in none of the roadway
segments operating under unacceptable conditions.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
54
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 20 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control
Delay' LOS b Delay LOS
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 30.2 C 17.3 8
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized llS.4 F 63.1 E
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 2S0.6 F 20.0 8
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signalized 197.8 F S2.8 D
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signa lized 32.7 C lS1.0 F
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 27.3 C 34.0 C
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 12.1 8 6.0 A
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 18.S 8 14.8 8
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signa lized 20.7 C 24.8 C
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 18.4 8 47.4 D
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signa lized 28.8 C 30.1 C
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsignalized S.4 3.0
N8 Approach 29.6 D 13.1 8
S8 ADDroach 8.6 A 11.3 8
Source: DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is basd on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
55
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
'Iii
>-
;;;
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
cu
E
CI
cu
UI
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
...
V
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U ::E
t ll.
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'" ::E
E c(
'"
U
o
N
o
N
UI
o
...
0,
~
"J
,,<'
CJ.J
~
"'i
<( <( <( <( 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
w
o
::E
~~~~f'..~f'.:~~~~~~~
NMNM'>iMI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI"'--.I"'--.MT""'l
MMMMT""'lMNNNNNNMM
cu~
S.c 1.0 0 M M 0 O"l LI) CO I"'--. CO O"l I"'--. N LI)
='NOCONMOLl)LI)NNM~NT""'l
_.c M 1.0 N LI) I"'--. M LI) T""'l 'tt" LI) M T""'l 'tt" MN
o CLJ T""'l T""'l M
>~
III
... III
o cu
CUC......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
.....::E
CLJ~""""
::Ell:
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
w
o
::E
~~~~C'Y1~~~~~~O~~
MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI"'--.I"'--.NM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
N T""'l M CO
'tt" 0 CO 1.0
I"'--. 1.0 CO N
T""'l0"l1"'--. I"'--. CO CO O"lN
LI) 1.0 I"'--. N I"'--. CO I"'--. M
~ LI) 'tt" M 'tt" M T""'l M
,.., ,..,
00
~ "
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
::g
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: "t:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
..
N
cu
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: cu
"c:JE
..CI
o cu
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
'Iii
>
;;;
c
c(
cu
v
.~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
...
v
CU
.-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
.~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:e
"c:J
c
8 ~
... ll.
v
cu
.-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
.~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'" ~
~ c(
u
o
N
o
N
III
... III
o cu
~~iU'
"'>0
IIl'- ~
..t......
cu cu
~=
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
v
o
...
III
III
..
U
..
N
cu
:is
..
I-
>...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u u u U LJ.J U 0 0 0
w
o
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LI) ~ f'.: M N co I"'--. co 0 N M 'tt" T""'l
MNNNNNMN~~LI)LI)~~~~~~
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOoooo
0,
~
"J
,,<'
CJ.J
~
"'i
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
N 'tt" N co co T""'l I"'--. LI) I'-- <D ('\J L() .- m <D L() ('\J L()
Ll)I"'--.N'tt"O"l""'T""'l'tt"o('\J('\Jrnl'--('\J('\J-r-l'--o:;:j"
1.0 f'.. 00 0'1 f'.. ~ LI) s ~ ~ ;n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u U U 0 0 U U 0 0
w
o
~
~~f'.:~~~~~O"lNI"'--.OOMLI)O"lMM
N M N M N M N M 1.0 LI) 1.0 LI) co I"'--. 1.0 ~ co f'.:
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1oooooooooo
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
,.., '"
,.., Lf"l
00 '"
1.0 N T""'l I"'--. T""'l 0'1
T""'lo 0'1 LI) O"l T""'l
~ LI) ~ ""' 0'1 ""'
"'C "'C "'C "'C "'C "'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U) U) U) U) U) U)
~~~~~~
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
01 01 01 01 01 01
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0 III
it; ~ Q) Q) E
:E :a ~ ~ ~
c C "'C 0
ctl ::::; C Q) co
(/') I N iO (/')
.8.s.s:E~
,..,
Q) Q)
~ ~
c 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' co
:;::; ::E
c c
" co
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) C
.a: ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
co C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
O"l 1.0 1.0 M CO I"'--. LI) O"l LI) O"l
I.OM CON COQCO 1"'--.1"'--. O"l
OLl)CO'tt"I"'--.'tt"T""'lONM
1.0 'tt" LI) 'tt" CO 1.0 I"'--. 1.0 I"'--. 1.0
""C ""C
Q) Q)
Q) Q)
Co Co
Cfl Cfl
~ ~ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
(IJ(IJ~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~
Q) Q)
C\ C\
co co
... ...
Q) Q)
~ ~
co CO
Z Cfl
~ S S
.<:: Cfl Cfl
~=>=>
000
~ ~ ~
~~~
E E E
~ ~ ~
u u u u u u u u u u
>>>>>>>>>>
~
Q) Q)
~ ~
>->-
~ ~
Q) Q)
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..Q)Q)
~~~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
co
Cfl
>->->-
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
>->->-
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
,A:rpoi 3:vd
,A:rpoi 3:vd
Gate'""'ay3\'d
a~ '- 1 (48) N" '- 107 (269)
Ma - 107 (298) 00 - 184 (461)
~m ~"
1\,1::ler ,J l r 356 f~'ln 101 Grand ,J l l, r 265 (654)
Ave
(146) 148,
1
San
/1've
(113)48J
(205) 218-
(210) 122,
5
ma"
aMO
San
Ave'llliest
(642) 803 -
(10)8,
9
San Bruno
i've. =?~t
~ (223) 150J
(285) 611-
11
Grand
- 551 (2,073)
r 7(16)
a
o 0
" N
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (94) 308 J
(535) 2,769-
(58) 45 ,
'- 89(271)
- 468 (1,883)
r 268 (1,030)
ON
~M
.~M
00.,"",
~a
'-'~
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(264) 334 J
(125)418-
(112)73,
a MN
m "a
,"","<j"(O
o
eo.
"'l I
,A:rpoi 3:vd
l l,
'- 196 (385)
- 249 (253)
r 568 (2,466)
S,A:r oi
"'llr
-"
ON
6i"
~
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,1ateo/1've
l l,
'- 147 (57)
_ 270 (589)
r 85 (302)
SarBruno
"'ll r .~.ve.Eas1
_ ma
NON
,"",..-01
"
'"
101
6'ffi
~ ~
~o
aM
'- 123 (220)
- 107 (310)
J l,
"'l I
MN
OM
01.,"",
'"
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
DKS Associates
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
(408) 1,772-
(14)29,
"'l r
00
m a
~ ro
'"III"
o '"~
_ mro
,"","'01
a
'"
6i'
~
U
4
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'d
Sanl\,1ateo/1've
" a
a a
'- 11 (73)
- 6(72)
r 11 (99)
'A'aterco:c
68"5
~M
~ .~
~a
00
roM
_ 184 (252)
r 16(47)
\:BU,S
l l,
,J l,
_ 327 (158)
SUnder
S, Unden
EI.s
"T/'''ffPamn
v (~;1') 980 J
(24) 110-
(87) 313,
/1've
"'l r
.Ave, (170) 160 J
(156) 87-
"'llr
(216) 305-
(92) 43,
om"
~~ r- (0
~ N
N
o
U
~ a
ON
~6
ec
6
7
Do::ar/1've
8
'01
Ave East
01 .'""'
~ E
'-' "--
a 0
" 0
N
,J l,
SarBruno
- 308 (689)
r 111 (356)
(386) 791 -
(412)600,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
'"
M
a
N
San Bruno J
Ave East
(498) 1,164-
- 148 (816)
r
o
a
N
w
['.
12
IJS
FIGURE 7
2020 Cumulative Without Project Volumes
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
6.2.1 Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 22 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis performed at the single unsignalized
intersection. Detailed traffic signal warrant analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. Based
on the analysis results, the intersection would satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during the
PM peak hour.
Table 22 - 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No No No No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
6.3 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations
There are no anticipated changes to transit and pedestrian operations for the 2020 Background
without Project Condition. Both of these operations would continue to function as described in
the Existing Conditions Section.
In the City of South San Francisco General Plan, a future bike path is planned for a railroad
right-of-way approximately 0.25 miles west of the project site. Additionally, bike paths are
planned for Herman Street (approximately 0.10 miles west of the project site) and Linden Street
(approximately 0.35 miles northwest of the project site). In the City of San Bruno General Plan,
potential future bikeways are proposed along Huntington Avenue and San Bruno Avenue in the
vicinity of the project.
6.4 Parking
Off-street and on-street parking conditions would remain the same as under the 2010
Cumulative without Project Condition. No changes in parking would be expected.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
59
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
7 2020 CUMULATIVE WITH PROJECT CONDITION
7.1 15% TOM Reduction
This section evaluates the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition. The trip generation factors
and distribution patterns follows those described under the 2010 Cumulative with Project
Condition. Figure 8 shows the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition traffic volumes.
7.1.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 26. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. All study intersections would continue to operate
at LOS D under the 2020 Cumulative with Project Conditions with the exception of three
intersections during the PM peak hour.
At East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard, the intersection delay would increase from 63.1
seconds and LOS E in the without project condition to 65.7 seconds and LOS F during the with
project condition. The intersection of San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard would still
remain at LOS F but would the delay would increase from 151.0 seconds in the without project
condition to 159.5 seconds in the with project condition. Meanwhile, the LOS and delay at the
intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 101 SB Ramps would increase from LOS D and 47.4
seconds of delay under the without project condition to LOS E and 59.4 seconds of delay under
the with project condition.
7.1.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 27 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix B includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. All roadway segments
would operate without impacts for the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
60
June 1, 2009
00
M~
~O
I\,t:lel"
.n
Ave
(146) 148,
1
00_,"
MOO
_a~
San
.~Ye (162) 62 J
(295) 242 -
(246) 131 ,
5
NO
A'"
San
Ave 'lilies!
(642) 803 -
(10)8,
9
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
'- 1 (48)
- 107 (298)
r 410 f~m 101
3"d
Gate'""'ay3\'d
Grand
'- 107 (269)
- 184 (461)
,J l l, r 265 (654)
Grand
'- 89(271)
-- 468 (1,883)
r 268 (1,030)
-- 551 (2,073)
7 (16)
00
o 00
'" N
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (94) 308 J
(535) 2,769-
(58) 45 ,
o MN
0,"0
,"","<j"<:D
a
eo.
00
~M
.~M
00.,"",
~o
~N
'"
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(264) 334 J
(125)418-
(114)79,
(408) 1,772-
(14)29,
"'l I
3:vd
l l,
'- 196 (385)
__ 323 (270)
r 568 (2,~~ oi
"'llr
00,"
aN
N
s
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,iateo,Aye
l l,
'- 237 (89)
__ 270 (589)
r 85 (302)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Eas1
_ 00
N ~~ N
,"",0101
'"
'"
101
6" ro
~ '" '- 123 (220)
N 00
M -- 107 (310)
San l,
Ave Easl
(271) 163J
(285) 611-
11
"'l1
OON
MM
M~
~
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'\ r
0 co
0 a
~
N
'" 0;'
N ~
1J1 U
4
'\11"
00 oo~
_ a~
,,,,,"'01
a
'"
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'j
Sanl\,1ateop.,/E'
00
6" 6"
a
:! '- 47 (174)
~ a
0 N __ 337 (190)
00 00
S Linden.) l,
'- 11 (73)
__ 6 (72)
r 11 (9~l'a'ec'"
o
a
;:
__ 194 (284)
r 16(47)
l l,
SUnden
EI.s
"T/'''ffPa:r'
(438) 1,054-'
(24) 110-
(87) 313,
/1,V:;
""l r
~ a
00 N
'i' 6"
'" (0
/1,\12
(170) 160
(167) 117-
""llr
o a"
~~ r- <;0
~ N
N
a
~
(227) 335 -
(92) 43,
6
7
Do::ar,/1ye
8
San
6i"
a
'"
a
c_
o
o
N
l. - 368 (711)
r 111 (356)
Ave East
(434) 804-
(490) 623,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
6i"
M
o
N
-148(816)
San
Ave East
r
(498) 1,164-
o
a
N
12
IJS
W
(".
FIGURE 8
2020 Cumulative With Project Volumes
15% TOM Project Trip Reduction
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 23 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 150/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control LOS b
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 31.S C No 17.4 8 No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 114.9 F No 6S.7 E Yes
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 2S0.6 F No 20.0 8 No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signa lized 197.8 F No S2.8 D No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 34.4 C No lS9.S F Yes
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 27.7 C No 34.1 C No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 11.9 8 No S.7 A No
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 21.7 C No lS.S 8 No
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 21.S C No 29.4 C No
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 19.0 8 No S9.4 D Yes
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signa lized 30.3 C No 30.9 C No
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsig. S.4 3.0
N8 Approach 29.6 D No 13.1 8 No
S8 Approach 8.6 A No 11.3 8 No
~DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is based on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
62
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
III
..
I
III
'Iii
~
..
c
c(
cu
v
'~
cu
III
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
c
cu
E
CI
CU
III
>-
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
~ ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E ~
'" c(
u
o
N
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
III
o
...
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
<( <( <( <( 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~""'~f'.:~~C'Y1~~~~
NMNM'>iMI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI.OI"'--.MT""'l
MMMMT""'lMNNNNNNMM
III
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~C'Y1":~~":~~f'..~~
MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI"'--.I.ONM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
N LI) M N
O"l T""'l M CO
1"'--.1.0 O"l N
o 'tt" I"'--. I"'--. 'tt" LI) I"'--. I"'--.
1.0 1.0 I"'--. N I"'--. M LI) LI)
~ 1.0 'tt" M 1.0 'tt" N LI)
,.., ,..,
00
~ "
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
i:2
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c 0 co co N 1.0 LI) LI) co 0 M O"l O"l N LI)
='~~O"l~I.OMLI)LI)COO~~N~
_.c M 1.0 N LI) I"'--. M LI) T""'l 'tt" I"'--. 1.0 N 'tt" MN
o CLJ T""'l T""'l M
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
....
N
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1% III
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(UUUUULJ.JUOOO
...
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
>
cu
...
...
C
cu
E
Cl
cu
UI
>
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:p
'6
c
o
u
t
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:p
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:p
'6
C ::E
o ll.
U
t
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:p
..!!!
'"
~ ::E
u <(
o
N
o
N
III
... III
o cu
CUC......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
..t::E
cucu......
::E=
w
C
o
:p
..
V
o
...
III
III
..
U
"
N
cu
:is
..
I-
>...
.. C
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
w
o
::E
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~~~~~~~f'.:MMO"lCOO"lT""'lM'tt"I.ON
M N N N N N M N 1.0 1.0 LI) LI) 1.0 O"l 1.0 co co co
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y10000000000
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
NaCO CO 'tt" T""'l LI) T""'l CO ("') L() o:;:j ("') CO o:;:j ('\J ("') D
COl.Ol"'--.o:;:j"!'--CO!'--('\JO<DLOo:;:;tO)
t8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Lf) S t8 t8 u:; ~ ~ 26 ~ f2 ~ ~
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( 0 U U U 0 0 U 0 0 0
w
o
::E
O"lOI.OOT""'lO~OT""'lNCOT""'lT""'l'tt"I.OT""'lMLI)
N M N M N M N M f'.: LI) 1.0 LI) co f'.: 1.0 I"'--. co I"'--.
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y10000000000
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
T""'l('Y1NI.OI"'--.O'tt"MO"l'tt"O"l'tt"LI)CONI.OT""'l1.O
T""'l CO LI) M N O"l 0 0 T""'l I"'--. LI) CO CO 1.0 NON LI)
00 M ~ 1.0 ~ LI) S LI) ~ ~ ~ ~ gg (b ~ ~ ~ t8
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0
~ ~
CO C\
:E C
.,
C C
CO "
Cfl I
o 0
~ ~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' CO
:;:; ::E
C C
" CO
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~ ~
""C 0
C Q)
N iO
.8 :E
Q) C
~ ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
CO C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co CO
Z Cfl
V) Q) T""'l T""'l
E.a: s s
~.p(/')(/')
CO I"'--. => =>
(/') 0 0 0
T""'l +-' +-' +-'
o V) V) V)
T""'l c.. c.. c..
E E E
~ ~ ~
u u u u u u u u u u
>>>>>>>>>>
~
Q) Q)
~ ~
>->-
CO CO
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 ctl ctl
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
CO
Cfl
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
7.1.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 28 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. The single unsignalized intersection would satisfy
a peak hour signal warrant during both the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 25 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 15% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
7.2 30% TOM Reduction
This section evaluates the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition. The trip generation factors
and distribution patterns follows those described under the 2010 Cumulative with Project
Condition. Figure 9 shows the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition traffic volumes.
7.2.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 26. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. All study intersections would continue to operate
at LOS D under the 2020 Cumulative with Project Conditions with the exception of three
intersections during the PM peak hour.
At East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard, the intersection delay would increase from 63.1
seconds and LOS E in the without project condition to 65.4 seconds and LOS F during the with
project condition. The intersection of San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard would still
remain at LOS F but would the delay would increase from 151.0 seconds in the without project
condition to 158.4 seconds in the with project condition. Meanwhile, the LOS and delay at the
intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 101 SB Ramps would increase from LOS D and 47.4
seconds of delay under the without project condition to LOS E and 56.8 seconds of delay under
the with project condition.
7.2.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 27 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix B includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. All roadway segments
would operate without impacts for the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
65
June 1, 2009
moo
MOO
~oo
I\,t:lel"
.n
Ave
(146) 148,
1
~-"
MOOOO
_oo~
San
.~Ye (155) 59 J
(284) 239-
(242) 130,
5
mN
00"
San
Ave 'lilies!
(642) 803 -
(10)8,
9
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
'- 1 (48)
- 107 (298)
r 407 f~m 101
3"d
Gate'""'ay3\'d
Grand
'- 107 (269)
- 184 (461)
,J l l, r 265 (654)
Grand
'- 89(271)
-- 468 (1,883)
r 268 (1,030)
-- 551 (2,073)
r 7(16)
00
o 00
" N
E. Grand,J t l,
A,,, (94) 308 J
(535) 2,769-
(58) 45 ,
o MN
00 "m
,"","<j"<:D
ro
eo.
m"
~M
.~M
00.,"",
~ ,-
~N
'"
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(264) 334 J
(125)418-
(114)78,
(408) 1,772-
(14)29,
"'l I
3:vd
l l,
'- 196 (385)
__ 320 (268)
r 568 (2,~~ oi
"'llr
00"
"N
N
GO
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,iateo,Aye
l l,
'- 218 (82)
__ 270 (589)
r 85 (302)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Eas1
_ rom
NOON
,"",0101
"
'"
101
s ro
'" '- 123 (220)
00 00
M -- 107 (310)
San l,
Ave Easl
(264) 161 J
(285) 611-
11
"'l1
OON
NM
M~
!CC
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'\ r
0 co
00 ro
~
N
" 0;'
N ~
1J1 U
4
'\11"
00 ,,~
_ ro~
,,,,,"'01
00
'"
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'j
Sanl\,1ateop.,/E'
00
'- 11 (73)
__ 6 (72)
r 11 (9~l'a'ec'"
~
00
'- 120 (263)
__ 8 (25)
r 390 (399)
o
m
__ 192 (277)
r 16(47)
;:
l l,
SUnden
/1,\12
t l,
SUnden
EI.s
"T/'''ffPa:r'
(436) 1 ,051 J
(24) 110-
(87) 313,
/1,V:;
"'llr
""l r
~ m
00 N
'i' 6"
'" (0
000"
~~ r- <;0
~ N
N
ro
!CC
(8)24-
,-
N
M
ro
00
(224) 329-
(92) 43,
6
7
Do::ar,Aye
8
San
6"
ro
'"
N
,-
o
o
N
l. - 355 (706)
r 111 (356)
Ave East
(427) 802-
(475) 618,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
'"
M
o
N
A'I0.
0\0-"0'
-148(816)
San
Ave East
r
(498) 1,164-
o
m
N
12
IJS
W
(".
FIGURE 9
2020 Cumulative With Project Volumes
30% TOM Project Trip Reduction
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 26 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 300/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control LOS b
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 31.4 C No 17.4 8 No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 114.9 F No 6S.4 E Yes
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 2S0.6 F No 20.0 8 No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signa lized 197.8 F No S2.8 D No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 34.2 C No lS8.4 F Yes
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 27.7 C No 34.1 C No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 11.9 8 No S.8 A No
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 24.8 C No lS.6 8 No
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 21.2 C No 27.9 C No
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 18.8 8 No S6.8 E Yes
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signa lized 29.9 C No 30.8 C No
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsig. S.4 3.0
N8 Approach 29.6 D No 13.1 8 No
S8 Approach 8.6 A No 11.3 8 No
~DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is based on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
67
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
o
M
I
III
'Iii
~
..
C
c(
CU
v
'~
CU
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
CI
CU
UI
>-
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
~ ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E ~
'" c(
u
o
N
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
UI
o
...
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
<( <( <( <( 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~LI)~f'.:~~":f'.:~~~
NMNM'>iMI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI.OI"'--.MT""'l
MMMMT""'lMNNNNNNMM
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~C'Y1":~~LI)~~CO~~
MMMMNNI.OI"'--.I.OI.OI"'--.I.ONM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
1.0 M 1.0 O"l
CO T""'l N I"'--.
1"'--.1.0 O"l N
O"l 'tt" I"'--. I"'--. M CO 'tt" I"'--.
LI) LI) I"'--. N LI) N 'tt" T""'l
~ 1.0 'tt" M 1.0 'tt" N LI)
,.., ,..,
00
~ "
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0101010101010101010101010101
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
::g
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c O"l N LI) LI) N T""'l LI) co N T""'l 1.0 LI) N LI)
='M~O"lI.OI.OMLI)LI)~CO~ONT""'l
_.c M 1.0 N LI) I"'--. M LI) T""'l 'tt" 1.0 LI) N 'tt" MN
o CLJ T""'l T""'l M
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"
N
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(UUUUULJ.JUOOO
...
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
>
cu
...
...
C
cu
E
Cl
cu
UI
>
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:p
'6
c
o
u
t
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:p
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
N
o
N
c
o
:p
'6
C ::E
o ll.
U
t
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:p
..!!!
'"
~ ::E
u <(
o
N
o
N
III
... III
o cu
CUC......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
..t::E
cucu......
::E=
w
C
o
:p
..
V
o
...
III
III
..
U
"
N
cu
:is
..
I-
>...
.. C
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
w
o
::E
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~~~~~LI)~f'.:MMO"lCOO"lT""'lMMLI)N
M N N N N N M N 1.0 1.0 LI) LI) 1.0 O"l 1.0 co co co
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y10000000000
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
N O"l 1.0 T""'l N 'tt" CO 1.0 ('\J CO <D CO o:;:j ('\J <D <D .- ("')
I"'--.LI)l.Oo:;:jL()I'--<DDDo:;:jo:;:j('\JCQ
t8 :;g ~ ~ ~ ~ Lf) S t8 t8 u:; ~ ~ 26 ~ f2 ~ ~
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( U U U U 0 0 U U 0 0
w
o
::E
O"lOI.OONO~OONCOT""'lT""'lMI.OOM'tt"
N M N M N M N M f'.: LI) 1.0 LI) co f'.: 1.0 I"'--. co I"'--.
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y10000000000
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
T""'lOLl)I,QOT""'lNONO"l'tt"I.OI.OOI"'--.O'tt"1.O
'tt" N 0 0'101.0 LI) I"'--. I"'--. 1.0 T""'l O"l T""'l M
;;:j~~~~[;;S'tt"~~~~~~~~~t8
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0
~ ~
CO C\
:E C
.,
C C
CO "
Cfl I
o 0
~ ~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' CO
:;:; ::E
C C
" CO
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~ ~
""C 0
C Q)
N iO
.8 :E
Q) C
~ ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
CO C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co CO
Z Cfl
V) Q) T""'l T""'l
E.a: s s
~.p(/')(/')
CO I"'--. => =>
(/') 0 0 0
T""'l +-' +-' +-'
o V) V) V)
T""'l c.. c.. c..
E E E
~ ~ ~
u u u u u u u u u u
>>>>>>>>>>
~
Q) Q)
~ ~
>->-
CO CO
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 ctl ctl
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
CO
Cfl
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
7.2.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 28 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. The single unsignalized intersection would satisfy
a peak hour signal warrant during both the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 28 - 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
7.3 Parking
The 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition on-street and off-street parking conditions are
expected to remain the same when compared to the 2010 Background with Project Condition.
Off-Street Parkina
Under the project conditions, there are estimated to be 670 parking spaces for autos and
trucks. Access would occur from San Mateo Avenue through two curb cuts. A curb cut near the
southern edge of the project site would be for autos only while another curb cut slightly farther
north would provide access for both autos and trucks. Internal circulation paths would join
areas of parking regardless of which access point a vehicle utilized.
On-Street Parkina
On-street parking conditions are expected to remain the same under the project condition.
While the off-airport parking lot curb cut would be removed under project conditions, a new
curb cut is proposed near the southern edge of the project site. In effect, the existing curb cut
would be moved south, but this should have no affect on on-street parking conditions.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
70
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
8 2030 CUMULATIVE WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITION
This section discusses the traffic operating conditions of the study intersections and roadway
segments under the 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition. The 2030 Cumulative withough
Project Condition includes the existing traffic volumes plus the addition of background growth
traffic derived from the CjCAG travel forecast model. Figure 10 illustrates the 2030 Cumulative
without Project Condition traffic volumes at each of the study intersections.
8.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Table 29 summarizes the results of the intersection level of service calculations for the 2030
Cumulative without Project Condition. Detailed Level of Service calculation sheets are included
in Appendix A. Under 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition, six of the twelve study
intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both of the
peak hours.
For the AM peak hour, four intersections would operate at LOS F. These intersections include
East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard, US 101 northbound off-ramp, and Gateway Boulevard,
Shaw Road at San Mateo Avenue, and San Bruno Avenue at US 101 northbound right off-ramp.
During the PM peak hour, four intersections would operate at LOS F. These would include East
Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard, San Mateo Avenue at Airport
Boulevard, and San Bruno Avenue at US 101 southbound ramps.
8.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 30 summarizes the roadway segment operating level of service under the 2030
Cumulative without Project Condition. The detailed level of service calculations are included in
Appendix A. The addition of cumulative growth traffic would cause one segment during the
AM peak period and five segments during the PM peak period to operate at LOS E or F. During
the PM peak period, the southbound segment of Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to
Terminal Court would operate at LOS F.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
71
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 29 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control
Delav' LOS b Delav LOS
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 27.8 C 16.6 8
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signa lized 192.8 F 98.4 F
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signa lized 367.3 F 23.9 C
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signa lized 298.1 F 103.8 F
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 36.0 D 238.9 F
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 29.2 C 3S.3 D
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized I1.S 8 S.O A
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signa lized 26.4 C 16.S 8
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signa lized 23.3 C 32.7 C
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 28.3 C 89.S F
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signalized S1.0 D 47.8 D
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsignalized 34.8 3.S
N8 Approach 234.3 F 17.0 C
S8 ADDroach 8.S A 12.4 8
Source: DKS Associates
Notes: a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is basd on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
72
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(LL<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
...
III
'Iii
>-
;;;
C
<(
cu
v
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
cu
E
CI
cu
UI
>-
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
...
V
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
M
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U ::E
t ll.
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'" ::E
E <(
'"
U
o
M
o
N
w
o
::E
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
f'.:~~~N~LI)~~~~~~f'.:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~g
cu~
S.c T""'l 0 0 CO 1.0 T""'l LI) N M 'tt" 0 'tt" I"'--. CO
='~N'tt"N~~I.O~T""'lM~~O~
_.c LI) I"'--. LI) 1.0 'tt" M 1.0 T""'l LI) 1.0 M T""'l LI) I"'--.N
o CLJ T""'l T""'l 'tt"
>~
III
... III
o cu
CUC......
...cuw
iil,i!:O
.....::E
CLJ~""""
::Ell:
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
w
o
::E
~~~~~C'Y1f'.:~f'.:~~0'I.-I~
MM NM.-INI.O 1.01.01.0 1"'--.1.0 NM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
,.., ,..,
0"> N
00 "
ON""
'" N N
S M ~
M.-I 0'1 'tt" 1.0 I"'--. M
CO 1.0 M I"'--. 1.0 'tt" 1.0
1.0 LI) LI) LI) 'tt" N 'tt"
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlCO~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 U 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) C
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o .C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
,.., ,..,
'" ...
;::j 00
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o
M
cu
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: cu
"c:JE
..CI
o cu
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
'Iii
>
;;;
c
c(
cu
.,
'~
cu
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
..
:l:
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
U
...
.,
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
M
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
8 ~
... ll.
.,
cu
,-
o
...
ll.
...
'"
o
.c
...
'~
cu
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'" ~
~ c(
u
o
M
o
N
UI
9
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( u u U U 0 LJ.J U LJ.J 0 LJ.J
w
o
~
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
~ co co 1.0 O"l O"l ~ 1.0 co I"'--. T""'l 0 N I"'--. 1.0 T""'l co O"l
N N N N N T""'l M N 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 I"'--. O"l 1.0 O"l co co
('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1oooooooooo
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
'" co Lf"l
" '" '"
co '" '"
'tt"ol"'--.\.OT""'lmLOCOLOo:;:jo:;:jCOD<D1'--
o T""'lT""'lO'l.-<DmOo:;:jI'--DOL()L()
~~~Lf)~55fgfrifri~::2~26~~
UI
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(ouuuoouuou
...
W 1.00 1.00 T""'lo'tt" ONO OO"l T""'lMCO I"'--. CO CO
5! NMT""'lMOMNMf'.:LI)f'.:~~f'.:I.C1:I.C1:~1.C1:
lIl:. ('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1('Y1oooooooooo
cu~
E.c 'tt" T""'l T""'l 1.0 T""'l 0 LI) 1.0 'tt" O"l I"'--. I"'--. 1.0 'tt" O"l I"'--. 'tt" 'tt"
='OI.ONT""'lI.OI.OO"lNMMMNLI)OOM~CO
_.cN_I.O,~O"l_N_M'tt"T""'lMO"l'tt"LI)O"l~O"l
O~T""'l~T""'l~T""'l~T""'l~I.O'tt"I.O'tt"COI.O~LI)~LI)
>~
III
... III
o cu
~~iU'
"'>0
IIl:,j;l~
...,......
cu cu
~=
w
c
o
:,j;l
..
.,
o
...
III
III
..
U
o
M
cu
:is
..
I-
>...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
Qj Qj Q3> OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
~ ~ ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u u u u u u u u u u
Q,lQJQJQJQJQJQJQ)>>>>>>>>>>
0101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
<(~Q)Q)<(~Q)Q)Q)Q)
~~ ~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0
~ ~
co C\
:E C
.,
C C
co "
Cfl I
o 0
~ ~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' co
:;:; ::E
C C
" co
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~ ~
""C 0
C Q)
N iO
.8 :E
Q) C
~ ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
co C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
co CO
Z Cfl
V) Q) T""'l T""'l
E.a: s s
~.p(/')(/')
CO I"'--. => =>
(/') 0 0 0
T""'l +-' +-' +-'
o V) V) V)
T""'l c.. c.. c..
E E E
~ ~ ~
~
Q) Q)
~ ~
>->-
co co
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 ctl ctl
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
co
Cfl
>->->-
co co co
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
>->->-
co co co
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
oro
_00
N~
I\,t:lel"
.n
Ave
(168) 165,
1
N
o
San
.~Ye (136) 58 J
(246) 262 -
(252) 146,
5
row
OOM
San
Ave 'lilies!
(856) 1,193-
(17)11,
9
San Bruno
i've. =?~t
~ (186) 43 J
(337) 811-
11
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
\.. 1 (91)
_ 73 (351)
r 198 (190)
SBUS,101
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
Gate'""'ay3\'d
Grand
Nro
NO
~'"
,JP.
\.. 128 (323)
- 221 (553)
r 318 (785)
Grand
- 661 (2,488)
r 8(19)
M
o '"
'" M
E. Grand,J t l,
A'''(113) 370 J
(642) 3,323-
(70) 54 ,
a NO
ro M~
,"",<.Om
M
'"
\.. 107 (325)
- 562 (2,260)
r 322 (1,236)
")1 I"'
,A:"'e
(490) 2,126-
(17)35,
'1 I"'
'"III"'
,"00
o ~
~ ro
8&
N ro
--'':!?
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(317) 401 J
(150) 502-
(134) 88,
") I
Ajrpoi 3:vd
l l,
\.. 235 (462)
- 299 (304)
r 682 (2,959)
S,Ajr 01
'111"'
~O
ON
N
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,1ateo,Aye
l l,
\.. 188 (56)
_ 336 (728)
r 92 (420)
San Bruno
") I I"' .~Ye. East
o roro
'" ~~ ...-
,"",01(0
M
'"
101
;:,12
~ ~
~oo
N,"
\.. 168 (256)
- 52 (331)
J l,
")1
~ 0
,"ro
M~
(0~
'"
'"
101
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
DKS Associates
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
00
o ~
ro
8""':
00 ii>
!CC~
"01 e
00 ro~
..,... 011'-
,,,,,"<tN
N
C
2
3
4
S,AJroortBI'"'j
Sanr;,!ateoAve,
roNO
o ~~..,...
_N~
\.. 11 (116)
- 5(102)
r 9(119)
Ij\'aterco,c
___,0:1
ro,"
r-- "--
~M
roo
roro
_ 206 (268)
r 6(43)
\:BU,S
l l,
,J l,
_ 539 (192)
SUnden
SLinden
EI.:
"T/."ffPa:r'
(4~~; 1,047J
(23) 130-
(62) 255,
/1've
'1 ,.
.A.'2 (203) 188 J
(174) 58-
'111"'
(216) 396-
(79) 43,
o ro~
0_00
~ M
GO
'"
!CC
ro M
a
G)
N~
:::t
6
7
Do::ar,/1've
8
San
EO
00
;<'.
ro
o
l,
- 311 (819)
r 115 (372)
Ave East
(397) 1,099-
(513) 862,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
(D'
co
~
N
San Bruno J
Ave East
(678) 1,844-
- 78 (986)
,.
ro
M
M
f;:'
N
e
12
IJS
FIGURE 10
2030 Cumulative Without Project Volumes
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
8.3 Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 31 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis performed at the single unsignalized
intersection. Detailed traffic signal warrant analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. Based
on the analysis results, the intersection would satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during both
the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 31 - 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
8.4 Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Operations
Similar to the 2020 without Project Condition, there are no anticipated changes to transit and
pedestrian operations for the 2020 Background without Project Condition. Both of these
operations would continue to function as described in the Existing Conditions Section.
As mentioned in the 2020 without Project Condition, in the City of South San Francisco General
Plan, a future bike path is planned for a railroad right-of-way approximately 0.25 miles west of
the project site. Additionally, bike paths are planned for Herman Street (approximately 0.10
miles west of the project site) and Linden Street (approximately 0.35 miles northwest of the
project site). In the City of San Bruno General Plan, potential future bikeways are proposed
along Huntington Avenue and San Bruno Avenue in the vicinity of the project.
8.5 Parking
Off-street and on-street parking conditions would remain the same as under the 2010 and 2020
Cumulative without Project Condition. No changes in parking would be expected.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
76
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
9 2030 CUMULATIVE WITH PROJECT CONDITION
This section evaluates the 2030 Cumulative with Project condition. The trip generation factors
and distribution patterns follow those described under the 2010 Cumulative with Project
Condition.
9.1 15% TOM Reduction
Figure 11 shows the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition traffic volumes.
9.1.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 35. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Under the 2030 Cumulative with Project
Condition, impacts would occur at two intersections during the AM peak hour and three
intersections during the PM peak hour.
For the AM peak hour, the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would
operate at LOS F and 192.8 seconds of delay under the 2030 without project conditions and
LOS F and 195.7 seconds of delay under the 2030 with project condition.
During the PM peak hour, the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would
operate with 98.4 seconds of delay and LOS F under the 2030 without project condition and
would operate with 103.3 seconds of delay and LOS F in the 2030 with project condition. At San
Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard, the intersection would operate at LOS F and 238.9
seconds of delay under the 2030 without project condition and LOS F and 246.4 seconds of
delay in the 2030 with project condition. The intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 101
southbound ramps would operate with 89.5 seconds of delay and LOS F under the 2030 without
project condition and 106.0 seconds of delay and LOS F in the 2030 with project condition.
9.1.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 36 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix B includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. Under this scenario, no
segments would be impacted during either peak period.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
77
June 1, 2009
,Ajrp013:vd
3"d
a" '- 1 (91) '- 128 (323)
_0 - 73 (351) - 221 (553) - 661 (2,488)
Na
I\,t:ler ,J l l, r 252 f~m 10' Grand r 318 (785) Grand r 8(19)
Ave ") I (' Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(317) 401 J ") I (' ,A:"'e '\ ('
"N (150) 502- ~ ~~ (490) 2,126- a a
ON N (")1"- a ~
(168) 165, ~ 0 (136) 94, '""""<tN (17)35, 0
a
8& C 6"
N 00 00 (D'
--'':!? N ~
1 2 3 1J1 e
NMO
00000
-~~
San
.~Ye (185) 72J
(336) 286 -
(288) 155,
5
N
N"
_0
San
Ave'llliest
(856) 1,193-
(17)11,
9
3:vd
S,AJroort31'"'d
l l,
'- 235 (462)
__ 373 (321)
r 682 (2,~~ 01
mNa
N ~~..,...
_N~
__ 216 (300)
r 6(43)
'- 11 (116)
__ 5 (102)
r 9("~)!a'eco'0"
l l,
SUnden
")1('
BI.o
'1 ('
0 ~
;> <'i'
N t!.
:::t
"T/'''ffPamn
(50'2) 1,121 J
(23) 130-
(62) 255,
/1've
'11('
am
aN
N
EO
M
'"
o a~
a _a
~ M
GO
"
t!.
(227) 426 -
(79) 43,
Produ::eA'Je
6
7
Do::ar/1've
Sanl\,1ateo/1've
l l,
'- 278 (88)
__ 336 (728)
r 92 (420)
San3runo
S
a
C
00
c_
a
00
San
l. -- 371 (841)
r 115 (372)
") I (' .~Ye. Bas'
A'JeEast
00000
M a~
,"""(")(")
M
'"
(445) 1,112-
(591) 885,
10
101
101
Pr:vateRd
GO
o
iD 6'
C '- 168 (256)
c- oo
" -- 52 (331)
San l, r
Ave Easl
(234) 56 J
(337) 811-
11
M
N
- 78 (986)
San
")1
Ave East
('
Na
moo
M~
!CC
(678) 1,844-
a
~
~
ce'
N
;?
12
IJS
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
Gate'""'zy3\'d
M
a "
" M
E. Grand,J t l,
A'''(113) 370 J
(642) 3,323-
(70) 54 ,
'- 107 (325)
- 562 (2,260)
r 322 (1,236)
'\1('
a NO
00 M~
,"",,<.Om
M
'"
4
Sanl\,1ateoA'/e
N
& ~
C N
o "
00 ~
S Unden.) l.
,A'v"'(203) 188 J
(185) 88-
'- 47 (174)
__ 549 (224)
8
A'I0.
0\.0."0'
FIGURE 11
2030 Cumulative With Project Volumes
15% TOM Project Trip Reduction
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 32 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 150/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control LOS b
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 30.4 C No 16.6 8 No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 195.7 F Yes 103.3 F Yes
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 367.3 F No 23.9 C No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signalized 298.1 F No 103.8 F No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 38.1 D No 246.4 F Yes
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 30.3 C No 35.6 D No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 11.5 8 No 4.8 A No
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 48.0 D No 17.8 8 No
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 24.6 C No 51.5 D No
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 32.2 C No 106.0 F Yes
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signalized 54.5 D No 48.5 D No
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsig. 34.8 3.5
N8 Approach 234.3 F No 17.0 C No
S8 Approach 8.5 A No 12.4 8 No
Source: OKS Associates
~a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is basd on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
79
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
III
o <(<(<(<(LL<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
...
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
III
..
I
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
CU
v
'~
CU
III
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
CI
CU
III
>-
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
M
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
~ ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E ~
'" <(
u
o
M
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
W
o
~
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
f'.:~~~o~LI)~f'.:~LI)~~f'.:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~g
III
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~~f'.:~.-I~~,,",.-I~
MM NM.-I.-II.O 1.01.01.0 1"'--.1.0 NM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
,.., Lf"l
... '"
0"> "
0",0
,.., '" '"
~ M ~
COT""'lO"lOMLI)CO
I"'--. 1.0 M I"'--. .-I N CO
I"'--. LI) LI) I"'--. LI) M 1.0
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o 'C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
,.., ,..,
'" ...
;::j 00
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
ii5
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c LI) co LI) I"'--. N I"'--. LI) N 1.0 O"l 0 1.0 I"'--. co
='oI.OLI)~~O"lI.OO"lI.OO~~O~
_.c 1.0 I"'--. LI) 1.0 LI) M 1.0 T""'l LI) co 1.0 T""'l LI) I"'--.N
o CLJ T""'l T""'l 'tt"
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M
M
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1% III
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-C
C
::J
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(UUUUOLJ.JULJ.JLJ.JLJ.J
...
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
CU
..
'~
CU
UI
...
o
Qj
>
CU
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
'"
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
'"
..!!!
::I
E
::I
U
o
M
o
N
c
o
'"
'6
C ::E
o ll.
U
...
..
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
'"
..!!!
::I
~ ::E
u <(
o
M
o
N
w
o
::E
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
O"l f'.: f'.: LI) ~ ~ 0 LI) O"l CO N T""'l 'tt" CO I"'--. T""'l 0 0
NNNNN.-IMN~~~~f'.:~~~~~
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOO
cu~
S.c M 'tt" .-I 'tt" 1.0 I"'--. 'tt" I"'--. D ('\J .- o:;:j <D ("') <D I'-- I'-- ('\J
='~~N'tt"MLI)I.O.-I<D.-<Drom~o:;:j("')('\JD
_.cCOO.-lNOLl)LI)NDDo:;:j(",)D<D("')Omm
OCLJ .-IT""'lT""'lT""'lT""'l T""'l<D<DL()L()CQCOI'--COI'--I'--
>~
UI
9
<( <( <( <( CO <( <( <( 0 U 0 U 0 0 U U LJ.J U
w
o
::E
~~LI)~~~...:r:~'tt"T""'lT""'lONMO"lO"lO"lO
NMT""'lNO"lMNMf'.:LI)f'.:LI)~f'.:~~~f'.:
MMMMNMMMOOOOOOOOOO
cu~
S.c'tt" co I"'--. 0 I"'--. M CO 0 'tt" I"'--. 0 CO M LI) 1.0 'tt" 0 T""'l
='OCOLl)LI)O"lO"lOT""'lCO~T""'lCOLl)I.O'tt"I.ON'tt"
_.cN_I.O~O"lLl)MLI)'tt"'tt"NMO'tt"LI)OCOT""'l
OCLJT""'l~T""'l'~T""'l T""'l 1.O'tt"1.O'tt"0"l1.O~1.O~1.O
>~
III
... III
o CU
~~iU'
::1>0
IIl'"::E
..........
CU CU
::E=
w
C
o
'"
..
..
o
...
III
III
..
U
\0
M
CU
:is
..
I-
>...
.. C
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0
~ ~
CO C\
:E C
.,
C C
CO "
Cfl I
o 0
~ ~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' CO
:;:; ::E
C C
" CO
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~ ~
""C 0
C Q)
N iO
.8 :E
Q) C
~ ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
CO C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
CO CO
Z Cfl
V) Q) T""'l T""'l
E.a: s s
~.p(/')(/')
CO I"'--. => =>
(/') 0 0 0
T""'l +-' +-' +-'
o V) V) V)
T""'l c.. c.. c..
E E E
~ ~ ~
u u u u u u u u u u
>>>>>>>>>>
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 ctl ctl
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
CO
Cfl
>->-
CO CO
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
~
Q) Q)
~ ~
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
9.1.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 37 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. Similar to the 2030 Cumulative without Project
condition, the single unsignalized intersection would satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during
the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 34 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 15% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
9.2 30% TOM Reduction
Figure 12 shows the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition traffic volumes.
9.2.1 Intersection Operating Conditions
Intersection operational levels of service along with their associated delays are summarized in
Table 35. Appendix A includes the detailed calculation level of service analysis sheets,
including the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Under the 2030 Cumulative with Project
Condition, impacts would occur at two intersections during the AM peak hour and three
intersections during the PM peak hour.
For the AM peak hour, the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would
operate at LOS F and 192.8 seconds of delay under the 2030 without project conditions and
LOS F and 195.2 seconds of delay under the 2030 with project condition.
During the PM peak hour, the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard would
operate with 98.4 seconds of delay and LOS F under the 2030 without project condition and
would operate with 102.7 seconds of delay and LOS F in the 2030 with project condition. At San
Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard, the intersection would operate at LOS F and 238.9
seconds of delay under the 2030 without project condition and LOS F and 245.4 seconds of
delay in the 2030 with project condition. The intersection of San Bruno Avenue and US 101
southbound ramps would operate with 89.5 seconds of delay and LOS F under the 2030 without
project condition and 102.7 seconds of delay and LOS F in the 2030 with project condition.
9.2.2 Roadway Segment Operating Conditions
Table 36 provides a summary of the roadway segments operation conditions, including MOEs
and LOS. Appendix B includes the detailed LOS calculation sheets. Under this scenario, one
segment, Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court would be impacted
Centrum Distribution Center 82 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
during the PM peak period. All other roadway segments would operate at acceptable levels of
service for both peak periods.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
83
June 1, 2009
OON
_a
NOO
I\,t:lel"
,JP.
Ave
(168) 165,
1
OMO
"moo
-~~
San
.~Ye (178) 69 J
(325) 283 -
(284) 154,
5
"'~
_0
San
Ave 'lilies!
(856) 1,193-
(17)11,
9
,Ajrpoi 3:vd
'- 1 (91)
- 73 (351)
r 249 f~m 101
Grand
Grand
- 661 (2,488)
r 8(19)
M
00 "
" M
E. Grand,J t l,
A'''(113) 370 J
(642) 3,323-
(70) 54 ,
a NO
a M~
,"",<.Om
M
'"
3'd
Gate'""'ay3\'d
'- 128 (323)
- 221 (553)
r 318 (785)
'- 107 (325)
-- 562 (2,260)
r 322 (1,236)
,,-
aN
~ 0
6'(0'
N m
--'':!?
Cff-R,amp ,A:"'e(317) 401 J
(150) 502-
(136) 93,
(490) 2,126-
(17)35,
"'l I
3:vd
l l,
'- 235 (462)
__ 370 (319)
r 682 (2,~~ oi
"'llr
am
r_ N
N
'"
M
'"
ProdLCeAve
Sanl\,iateo,Aye
l l,
'- 259 (81)
__ 336 (728)
r 92 (420)
San Bruno
"'ll r .~Ye.Eas1
a 000
M ,,~
'""'''''''
M
'"
101
GO 6'
t::. 168 (256)
:" m
" -- 52 (331)
San l,
Ave Easl
(227) 54 J
(337) 811-
11
"'l1
Na
000
M~
!CC
LEGEND
. Signalized Intersection
o Unsignalized Intersection
AM (PM) Peak HourVolumes
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
"'ll r
,A:"'e
'\ r
a a
a ~
a
6"
m Gi'
N ~
1J1 e
4
'\11"
~ O~
N (")1'-
,,,,,"<tN
r_
t::.
2
3
S,AJroortBI'"'j
Sanl\,1ateop.,/E'
aNOO
N ~~..,...
_N~
'- 11 (116)
__ 5 (102)
r 9("~)!a1eco'0"
a
o
'- 105 (228)
__ 8 (25)
r 503 (491)
__ 214 (293)
r 6(43)
l l,
SUnden
/1,\12
t l,
SUnden
EI.s
"T/'''ffPa:r'
'"'(500) '1, {is J
(23) 130-
(62) 255,
/1,V:;
"'llr
""l r
0 ~
;> <'i'
N t!.
:::t
a a~
00 _a
~ M
GO
"
!CC
(8)24-
00
M
o
N
m
(224) 420-
(79) 43,
6
7
Do::ar,/1ye
8
San
iD
a
t::.
N
r_
a
m
l. - 358 (836)
r 115 (372)
Ave East
(438) 1,110-
(576) 880,
10
101
Pr:vateRd
CD
o
M
N
A'I0.
0\0-"0'
- 78 (986)
San
Ave East
r
(678) 1,844-
a
~
~
ce'
N
;?
12
IJS
FIGURE 12
2030 Cumulative With Project Volumes
30% TOM Project Trip Reduction
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
Table 35 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Intersection Level of Service - 300/0 TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Intersection Location Control LOS b
Delay' Impact Delay LOS Impact
1 Miller Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 30.2 C No 16.6 8 No
2 East Grand Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 195.2 F Yes 102.7 F Yes
3 East Grand Avenue / US 101 N8 off-ramp Signalized 367.3 F No 23.9 C No
4 East Grand Avenue / Gateway 80ulevard Signalized 298.1 F No 103.8 F No
S San Mateo Avenue / Airport 80ulevard Signalized 37.8 D No 245.4 F Yes
6 US 101 N8 Ramps / South Airport 80ulevard Signalized 30.2 C No 35.5 D No
7 South Linden Avenue / Dollar Avenue Signalized 11.5 8 No 4.8 A No
8 Shaw Road / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 44.9 D No 17.5 8 No
9 San 8runo Avenue / San Mateo Avenue Signalized 24.3 C No 46.9 D No
10 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 S8 Ramps Signalized 31.1 C No 102.7 F Yes
11 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps Signalized 53.7 D No 48.3 D No
12 San 8runo Avenue / US 101 N8 Ramps - N8 Rt Unsig. 34.8 3.5
N8 Approach 234.3 F No 17.0 C No
S8 Approach 8.5 A No 12.4 8 No
Source: OKS Associates
~a. Delay is in seconds per vehicle. For signalized intersections, delay is basd on average stopped delay.
For unsignalized intersections, delay is based at the worst approach fro two-way stop controlled intersection.
b. LOS = Level of Service
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
85
June 1, 2009
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(LL<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(
...
c
o
:,j;l
V
'"
"c:J
~
~
Q
I-
~
o
o
M
I
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
CU
v
'~
CU
UI
...
o
Qj
~
...
...
C
CU
E
CI
CU
UI
>-
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
:,j;l
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
M
o
N
c
o
:,j;l
'6
~ ~
U ll.
...
V
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
:,j;l
..!!!
'"
E ~
'" <(
u
o
M
o
N
III
... III
o CU
CUC......
...CUW
iil,i!:O
.....~
cu~........
~:t:
W
c
o
:,j;l
..
V
oS
W
o
~
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
f'.:~~~.-I~LI)~f'.:~~~~f'.:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~g
UI
o
...
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
W
o
~
~~~~~~f'.:~t"'\j~~LI).-I~
MM NM.-I.-II.O 1.01.01.0 1"'--.1.0 NM
MMMMMMNNNNNNMM
CU~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o CU
>~
Lf"l '"
'" '"
0"> "
'" '" 0">
0", N
~ M ~
COT""'lO"lO"lI.ONCO
1.0 1.0 M 'tt" 0 .-I 'tt"
I"'--. LI) LI) I"'--. LI) M 1.0
Q) Q)
u (J) .a: .a:
Q) Q) ~ C 0
> c CO
<ctlco~2
<(~<(~ o....J.E2..E ctl
Q) "'C i.... ctl c :E
c"'CiO~~:E~c
i ~ ~ B B ~ B ~
....... ctl Q) Q) 0 Q)
.8.s~~.a:+-'.a:<(~
+-' 0 0 u 0
Q) Q) Q) -;;:;; Q) c
C +-' +-' '''' +-' ctl
ctl ctl ctl C ctl i....
...J:E:E'E:E.E
"'C c C i.... C C
cE5~~~~~
E E E E E E
o 0 000 0
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i-
LL LL LL LL LL LL
Q) -C
~ ~
.~ 1:
;;: 0
o e-
....J <
.8 0
~
~ Q)
CO ~
t:: Q)
o 'C
e- ;;:
:.;;: .5
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
,.., ,..,
'" ...
;::j 00
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U)
QjQjQ3Q3QjQjQ3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3Q3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~
-C C
C Q)
CO -C
15 ~
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
::g
c. -C
~ ~
Q) +-' c:t::: 1:
~ ~ It: 0
o ::l 0 e-
c...!::T""'l<
2 ~ S 0
co > ~
c .8
ci'l Q)
o ~
~
U) g
~ "
" ...
.!: co
CO c
~ ci'l
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
o
Q)
~
CO Q)
:E~
c
CO
Cfl
co c.
Z E
o CO
~ c<
~~
t:: ,..,
o ~
c.
... co
:.;;: Z
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
CU~
S.c'tt" N NaCO M LI) N co I"'--. I"'--. N I"'--. co
='O~LI)~O~~~LI)CONMO~
_.c 1.0 I"'--. LI) 1.0 LI) M 1.0 T""'l LI) I"'--. 1.0 N LI) I"'--.N
o CLJ T""'l T""'l 'tt"
>~
(I) 1--1 1--1 ~ ~ 1--11--11--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 1--1 ~ ~
(I) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
fa c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..
U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\0
M
CU
:is
..
I-
>-...
.. c
:l: CU
"c:JE
..CI
o CU
1%U1
t::
O-C
c.-'!:
.:: co
<(
Q)
~
c
Q)
-c
c
::J
-CQ)
C "
CO C
... Q)
,,~
~~
.~ ~
(j~
~~
IJ:
~~
Q~
UI
o <(<(<(<(<(<(<(<(UUUUOLJ.JULJ.JLJ.JLJ.J
...
III
'Iii
~
..
C
<(
CU
..
'~
CU
UI
...
o
Qj
>
CU
...
...
C
CU
E
Cl
CU
UI
>
~
"c:J
..
/i
c
o
'"
'6
c
o
u
tl
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
'"
..!!!
'"
E
'"
u
o
M
o
N
c
o
'"
'6
C ::E
o ll.
U
...
..
CU
,-
o
...
ll.
.c
...
'~
CU
>
'"
..!!!
'"
~ ::E
u <(
o
M
o
N
w
o
::E
~
~
,,<'
CJ.J
IS
'"'i
O"l f'.: f'.: LI) ~ ~ 0 ~ O"l CO N T""'l M CO I"'--. T""'l 0 0
NNNNN.-IMN~~~~f'.:~~~~~
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOO
cu~
E.c
"'.....
_.c
o cu
>~
'" '"
" '"
00 ~
O"ll"'--. 'tt"O("'-.. No:;:j"!'--('\JCOI'--I'--CO..-L()L()
O"l M .-I LI) LI) .-I L() m L() I'-- I'-- o:;:j ('\J ("') D m
S~S~LI1~8~~fri~gs~~~~
UI
9
<( <( <( <( CO <( <( <( 0 U 0 U 0 0 U U 0 U
w
o
::E
~~LI)~~~...:r:~M.-I.-IONMO"lO"lO"lO
NM.-INOMNMf'.:LI)f'.:LI)~f'.:~~~f'.:
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOO
Q) Q)
~ ~
o c
Q) 0
~ ~
CO C\
:E C
.,
C C
CO "
Cfl I
o 0
~ ~
Q) Q)
~ ~
C 0
o Q)
~ ~
g' CO
:;:; ::E
C C
" CO
I Cfl
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
~ ~
""C 0
C Q)
N iO
.8 :E
Q) C
~ ~
o 0
Q) ~
~ Q)
~ ~
C ""C
CO C
Cfl N
E E
o 0
... ...
LL LL
CO CO
Z Cfl
V) Q) .-I .-I
E.a: s s
~.p(/')(/')
CO I"'--. => =>
(/') 0 0 0
.-I +-' +-' +-'
o V) V) V)
.-I c.. c.. c..
E E E
~ ~ ~
cu~
S.c'tt" LI) 0 0 0 'tt" 1.0 I"'--. I"'--. N LI) 0 'tt" 1"'--..-1 CO M .-I
='OCOLl1MO"l~OO"lI.O~OCO'tt"LI1'tt"'tt".-IN
_.cN_I.O~O"lLl1M_'tt"'tt"NMO'tt"LI10CO.-l
O~.-I~.-I'~.-I .-I~I.O'tt"I.O'tt"O"lI.O~I.O~1.O
>~
C
o
'"
..
..
o
...
III
III
..
U
\0
M
CU
:is
..
I-
>...
.. C
:l: CU
"c:J E
.. Cl
o CU
1%U1
III
... III
o CU
~~iU'
"'>0
IIl'"::E
..........
CU CU
::E=
w
"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C"'C
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
(/') (/') (/') (/') (/') (/') (/') (/')
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
0101010101010101
ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl ctl
i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i.... i....
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~~~~~~~~
u u u u u u u u u u
>>>>>>>>>>
Q) Q)
~ ~
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 >- >-
1--1 1--1 1--1 1--1 1--11--11--1 1--1 ctl ctl
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
~~~~~~~~
o
C
;: Q)
CO~
C
CO
Cfl
>->-
CO CO
~ ~
Q) Q)
... ...
LL LL
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
,..,
o
,..,
Cfl
=>
~
>->->-
CO CO CO
~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
... ... ...
LL LL LL
h
~
ftJ
~ Oc:
~ t;:
~ I""
<: "'~
:a~bLJ
~1i)~
tit
,~ rtl ~
Cl ~r::
E:~~
;:~ ~
~!tl~
a~~
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
9.2.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Table 37 summarizes the traffic signal warrant analysis results. Detailed traffic signal warrant
analysis sheets are included in Appendix B. Similar to the 2030 Cumulative without Project
condition, the single unsignalized intersection would satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during
the AM and PM peak hours.
Table 37 - 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition Signal Warrant Analysis - 30% TOM
Reduction
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Criteria Criteria Warrant Criteria Criteria Warrant
1 2 Met? 1 2 Met?
San 8runo Ave / N8 US-101 Off-Ramp N8-Right No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Source: DKS Associates
9.3 Parking
The 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition on-street and off-street parking conditions are
expected to remain the same when compared to the 2010 Background with Project Condition.
Off-Street Parkina
Under the project conditions, there are estimated to be 670 parking spaces and would meet the
total minimum 322 required parking spaces. The minimum require parking spaces has been
provided by City of South San Francisco staff and would include an implementation of a TDM
plan. Access would occur from San Mateo Avenue through two curb cuts. A curb cut near the
southern edge of the project site would be for autos only while another curb cut slightly farther
north would provide access for both autos and trucks. Internal circulation paths would join
areas of parking regardless of which access point a vehicle utilized.
On-Street Parkina
On-street parking conditions are expected to remain the same under the project condition.
While the off-airport parking lot curb cut would be removed under project conditions, a new
curb cut is proposed near the southern edge of the project site. In effect, the existing curb cut
would be moved south, which should have no affect on on-street parking conditions.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
88
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
10MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures are recommended for the project impacts and project transportation
deficiencies.
10.1 Intersection Mitigation Measures
10.1.1 Intersection Mitigation Measure 1 - East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard
Under the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersection delay would
increase to 65.6 seconds for the 15% TDM reduction and 65.3 seconds for the 30% TDM
reduction from 63.1 seconds of delay under the without project condition. In the with project
condition, traffic would increase in the northbound through and right directions and in the
southbound through direction. In order to avoid triggering an impact restriping the westbound
approach from a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared
through-right lane would reduce the "with project" delay to below "without project" conditions.
With this strategy, the delay at the intersection would become 54.9 and 54.7 seconds for the
respective 15% and 30% TDM reduction conditions, fully mitigating the impact at this
intersection to a less than significant level.
For the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition AM peak hour, the intersection delay at this
intersection would reach 195.7 seconds for the 15% TDM reduction and 195.2 seconds for the
30% TDM reduction, compared to 192.8 seconds during the "without project" conditions. In the
with project condition, traffic would increase in the northbound through and right directions and
in the southbound through direction. In order to mitigate this impact, restriping the westbound
approach from a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared
through-right lane would need to occur. The resulting delay at this intersection would be below
"without project" conditions and would respectively be 118.8 and 118.4 seconds of delay for the
15% and 30% TDM reductions, fully mitigating the impact at this intersection to a less than
significant level.
During the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersection would
operate with 103.3 seconds of delay for the 15% TDM reduction and 102.7 seconds of delay for
the 30% TDM reduction compared to 98.4 seconds of delay in the without project condition. In
order to avoid triggering an impact at this intersection, restriping the westbound approach from
a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared through-right
lane would need to occur. The resulting delay at this intersection would be below "without
project" conditions and would respectively be 81.0 and 80.6 seconds of delay for the 15% and
30% TDM reductions, fully mitigating the impact at this intersection to a less than significant
level..
10.1.2Intersection Mitigation Measure 2 - San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard
For the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersection delay would
increase to 159.5 and 158.4 seconds for the respective 15% and 30% TDM reductions
compared to 151.0 seconds for the "without project" condition. Project-related trips would
Centrum Distribution Center 89 June 1, 2009
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
increase traffic at all approaches but most notably in the northbound direction. For the
eastbound direction, it is suggested to restripe one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a
through-right lane. This measure would reduce the delay at this intersection to 150.7 and 148.7
for the respective 15% and 30% TDM reductions seconds (LOS F), which is below the "without
project" condition, fully mitigating the impact at this intersection to a less than significant level.
It should be noted that these PM peak hour mitigation measures would not cause a significant
impact in the AM peak hour. It should be noted that this mitigation measure would include the
removal of a triangular island to accommodate the additional capacity for right-turn
movements.
For the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersection delay would
respectively increase for the 15% and 30% TDM reductions to 246.4 and 245.4 seconds
compared to 238.9 seconds for the "without project" condition. Project-related trips would
increase traffic at all approaches but most notably in the northbound direction. For the
eastbound direction, it is suggested to restripe one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a
through-right lane. This measure would reduce the delay at this intersection to 238.3 and 236.5
seconds (LOS F) for the respective 15% and 30% TDM reductions, which is below the "without
project" condition, fully mitigating the impact at this intersection to a less than significant level.
It should be noted that these PM peak hour mitigation measures would not cause a significant
impact in the AM peak hour. It should be noted that this mitigation measure would include the
removal of a triangular island to accommodate the additional capacity for right-turn
movements.
10.1.3Intersection Mitigation Measure 3 - San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound
Ramps
The intersection of San Bruno Avenue at US 101 southbound ramps would experience a
significant impact under the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour. The delay at
this intersection would increase from 47.4 seconds for the "without" project condition to 59.4
seconds and 56.8 seconds in the respective 15% and 30% TDM reduction "with" project
conditions. This increase in delay is attributed to project-related traffic using the US 101
northbound and southbound interchange ramps. To mitigate the impact at this intersection, it is
suggested to restripe the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a southbound
through-right lane. This restriping plan would reduce the delay at this intersection to 28.7 and
28.3 seconds for the respective 15% and 30% TDM reduction conditions, fully mitigating the
impact at this intersection to a less than significant level. It should be noted that this PM
mitigation measure would not cause a significant impact in the AM peak hour.
The intersection would experience a significant impact during the 2030 Cumulative with Project
PM peak hour as well. At this intersection, the delay would increase from 89.5 seconds for the
"without" project condition to 106.0 seconds and 102.7 seconds for the respective 15% and
30% TDM reductions under the "with" project condition. Similar to the 2020 mitigation strategy,
restriping the existing southbound through lane to accommodate a southbound through-lane
would reduce the intersection delay to 41.8 and 40.0 seconds for the respective 15% and 30%
TDM reduction scenarios and would fully mitigate the impact at this intersection to a less than
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
90
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
significant level. This PM mitigation measure would not cause a significant impact in the AM
peak hour.
All of the intersection mitigation measures are summarized in Table 38 and Table 39.
Table 38 - Summary of Mitigation Measures - 150/0 TOM Reduction
2010 2020 2030
Impacted Intersection Mitigation Measure Miti~ ated? Mitiqated? Miti( ated?
AM PM AM PM AM PM
East Grand Ave at Airport Blvd Additional Lane Capacity- - - - No No No
Westbound Throuqh
San Mateo Ave at Airport Blvd Additional Lane Capacity- - - - No - No
Eastbound Riqht Turn
San Bruno Ave at US 101 NB Ramps Restripe Southbound Through Lane - - - Yes - Yes
to Shared Throuqh-Riqht Lane
Table 39 - Summary of Mitigation Measures - 300/0 TOM Reduction
2010 2020 2030
Impacted Intersection Mitigation Measure Miti~ ated? Mitiaated? Miti( ated?
AM PM AM PM AM PM
East Grand Ave at Airport Blvd Additional Lane Capacity- - - - No No No
Westbound Throuqh
San Mateo Ave at Airport Blvd Additional Lane Capacity- - - - No - No
Eastbound Riqht Turn
San Bruno Ave at US 101 NB Ramps Restripe Southbound Through Lane - - - Yes - Yes
to Shared Throuah-Riaht Lane
10.2 Roadway Segment Mitigation Measures
One roadway segment, Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court, would be
significantly impacted by the proposed project for both the 15% and 30% TDM reduction in the
2030 PM peak hour scenario.
Although the decreases in average travel speed would be minimal in each case, the impacts
would be significant and unavoidable. Adding capacity to the roadway system is not a feasible
mitigation measure and the project would have to be reduced in size in order to lower the
number of trips being generated. However, virtually any increase in trips on this roadway would
trigger a significant impact under the significance criteria. Thus, the impacts to roadway
segments would remain significant and unavoidable.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
91
June 1, 2009
OKS Associates
TRANS~ORTATION SOLUTIONS
11CONCLUSION
This section summarizes the potential traffic impacts identified in the previous sections and
presents recommended mitigation measures.
The study determined the potential transportation impacts of the proposed Centrum Distribution
Center. Twelve study intersections and sixteen roadway segments were selected to evaluate
their operating conditions under Existing Condition, 2010 Background Condition, 2010
Background with Project Condition, 2020 Cumulative without Project Condition, 2020
Cumulative with Project Condition, 2030 Cumulative without Project Condition and 2030
Cumulative with Project Condition.
The project trips generated by Centrum Distribution Center were estimated based on the 8th
edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual with consideration given to Transportation Demand
Management and passenger car equivalents for truck trips.
Following the City/county Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/C4Clj 2007
Congestion Management Program (CMP) the study used several Measures of Effectiveness
(MOE) to evaluate the Level of Services (LOS) of the study intersections and roadway segments
under the various study conditions.
The development of the Centrum Distribution Center would result in three significant
transportation impacts during the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, one
during the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition AM peak hour, and four during the 2030
Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour.
For the 2020 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersections of East Grand
Avenue at Airport Boulevard, San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard, and San Bruno Avenue
and US 101 southbound ramps would all experience a significant impact. Mitigation measures to
alleviate these impacts to less than significant levels include restriping some approaches.
For the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition AM peak hour, the intersection of East Grand
Avenue and Airport Boulevard would experience a significant impact. Restriping one of the
approaches would mitigate these impacts to less than significant level.
For the 2030 Cumulative with Project Condition PM peak hour, the intersections of East Grand
Avenue and Airport Boulevard, San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard, and San Bruno
Avenue and US 101 southbound ramps would all experience significant impacts. Measures to
mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels include restriping some approaches.
The study concluded that the proposed development of the Centrum Distribution Center would
also result in significant and unavoidable cumulative project transportation impact to one
roadway segment along Airport Boulevard from San Mateo Avenue to Terminal Court under the
2030 Cumulative with Project PM peak hour scenario.
Centrum Distribution Center
Traffic Impact Study -
ADMINISTRA lIVE DRAFT REPORT
92
June 1, 2009
ApPENDIX E
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT (TOM) PLAN
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue
Transportation Demand Management Program
..
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. I ntrod uction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ ..................... 1
Background..................................................................................................................... ..................................... 1
Purpose....................................................................................................................... ........................................ 1
Project Description................................................................................................................... ............................ 3
Regulatory Setting....................................................................................................................... ........................ 3
2. Existing Transportation System ...................................................................................................................... 6
Transit Service....................................................................................................................... .............................. 6
Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................................................... .............................. 8
Pedestrian Facilities............................................................................................................................................ 9
3. Transportation Demand Management Program ...........................................................................................10
Mode Share Assumptions................................................................................................................................. 13
Required Measures........................................................................................................................................... 13
Additional City of South San Francisco Measures ............................................................................................ 17
Phasing....................................................................................................................... ....................................... 18
Enforcement and Financing............................................................................................................................... 18
4. Compliance with Guidelines and Effectiveness........................................................................................... 19
City of South San Francisco Guidelines............................................................................................................ 19
City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Guidelines..................................................... 19
APPENDICES
Appendix A: TOM Program Provision Assumptions
Appendix B:~Project Trip Generation and Employee Estimates
Appendix C: City of South San Francisco Travel Demand Management Requirements
Appendix 0: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Transportation Demand Management
Measures
Front Cover: Overlooking the San Bruno BART station into South San Francisco. Flickr photo by Michael Patrick, Creative Commons
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Context Map ..........................................................................................................................2
Figure 2 Project Site Plan .............................................................................................................................. ............5
Figure 3 Existing and Future Transportation Facilities .............................................................................................. 7
Figure 4 Proposed TOM Site Plan.......................................................................................................................... .12
LIST OF TABLES
Table 11070 & 1080 San mateo avenue Transportation Demand Program Measures .........................................10
Table 2 compliance with Guidelines and TOM Program Effectiveness ..................................................................20
Table A1 TOM Program Quantity Calculation Assumptions ...................................................................................23
Table 81 Project Trip Generation Forecasts........................................................................................................... 25
Table 82 Employee Population.................................................................................................................... ...........25
Table 01 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Transportation Demand Management
Measures...................................................................................................................... ....................................33
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - ---~- ~- ~ "-
1. INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents a Transportation Demand Management (TOM) program for the proposed project located at
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue in South San Francisco, California. The report identifies TOM measures that will
exceed the amount needed to achieve 30 percent alternative mode use for the site's employees, as required by
the City of South San Francisco (SSF). The TOM Program also satisfies the City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) requirement, by providing the capacity to mitigate all new peak-hour
trips based on the C/CAG trip credit guidelines.
BACKGROUND
The proposed project at 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue (herein referred to as "the project") will remodel an
existing 571,748 square foot warehouse and construct five new buildings totaling 52,300 square feet on a 25.02
acre site. Currently, the site is divided in two parcels with the following uses:
1. 5.23 acres: Offsite Airport Parking - a privately run parking lot of 670 spaces with shuttle service to the
San Francisco International Airport.
2. 19.79 acres: Various tenants of the U.S. government including the U.S. Postal Service which operates a
mail processing and handling facility and the General Services Administration and the Drug Enforcement
Administration which use parts of the site for storage.
The site is situated in the Lindenville planning sub-area of South San Francisco which is in the southern portion of
the city, west of US-1 01. Existing land uses in the area are primarily light industrial, warehouse, and auto repair
shops. The project site is accessible to the region via the following:
. Motor vehicle access through nearby interchanges of US-101 at South Airport Boulevard, north of the
site, and San Bruno Avenue, south of the site.
. Transit access through nearby rail transit stations: approximately 1/3 mile from the San Bruno BART
Station and approximately 1/3 mile of the future San Bruno Caltrain station which is currently under
construction.
. Bicycle Access through designated bike routes including: San Mateo Avenue, Airport Boulevard, and EI
Camino Real.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this TOM Program is to develop a set of strategies, measures, and incentives to encourage future
users of the project site to walk, bicycle, use public transportation, carpool, or use other alternatives to driving
alone. In general, TOM supports more mobility by using existing transportation systems, boosts economic
efficiency of the current transportation infrastructure, improves air quality, saves energy, and reduces traffic
congestion.
Convenience, time, and cost are the primary factors that affect a person's choice of transportation mode.
Measures that work well for some people or types of businesses do not work as well for others. Therefore, an
effective TOM Program needs to provide multiple options and incentives that are flexible enough to allow
customization to meet the varied needs of individual employees and employers. This program presents an array
of proven strategies and measures used in the Bay Area under a flexible implementation plan that can meet the
needs of the future tenants of the project site.
~ . I
~
1
LEGEND:
N
Not to Scale
= Caltrain Tracks
= Caltrain Station
(existing)
= Caltrain Station
(planned)
= BART Line
= BART Station
Walking Route to
Rail Transit
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Plan
SITE LOCATION
April 2009
SF09-0427\graphics\0427-1
FIGURE 1
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - ---~- ~- ~ "-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site, as shown on Figure 1, is located at 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue in South San Francisco,
California.
The project will consist of remodeling an existing 571,748 square foot warehouse and constructing four, single
story buildings to be used as industrial, warehousing, and other services allowed under the City's" M-1" Mixed
Industrial designation. A fifth building will be constructed along the frontage of San Mateo Avenue to serve
multiple tenants including restaurant, convenience store, and business and professional services totaling 9,100
square feet. The floor-area ratio (FAR) of the project is 0.57. This represents higher FAR than is currently
permitted for industrial buildings in the area. The project would provide 625 parking spaces for passenger vehicles
and trucks, not including loading zones and tractor trailer docking bays and 54 bicycle parking spaces. A site plan
for the proposed project is shown on Figure 2.
The proposed project is forecasted to generate 635 net new AM peak hour trips, 682 net new PM peak hour trips,
and 5510 daily trips '. Proposed land uses on the site could have approximately 750 employees.'
REGULATORY SETTING
The TOM Program is based on guidelines provided by SSF' and C/CAG4, the local Congestion Management
Agency for San Mateo County.
City of South San Francisco Guidelines
The SSF guidelines for TOM Programs require that all projects that generate greater than 100 daily trips and are
seeking an FAR bonus obtain a required alternative mode use goal of 30 percent, based on a list of required TOM
Program measures and other measures necessary to meet the goal. This alternative mode use goal is required
to be monitored and reported to SSF through annual surveys of employee travel habits. The measures required
and recommended for 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue will be discussed in greater detail in chapter 3 & 4. Below
is the summary of required measures for TOM programs in South San Francisco': The full list and description of
required and additional measures is in Appendix C.
Required Measures
All non-residential developments shall implement the following measures:
A Bicycle Parking, Long-Term. The applicant shall determine the appropriate number of bicycle spaces.
Bicycle parking shall be located within 75 feet of a main entrance to the building and all long-term spaces
must be covered. Long-term bicycle parking shall be achieved by providing one or more of the following
measures:
1. Parking in a locked, controlled access room or area enclosed by a fence with a locked gate.
2. Lockers.
1 See Appendix B for proposed project trip generation and employee forecasts.
'Based on rates from "Employment Density Summary Report", The Natelson Company Inc., 2002.
, City of South San Francisco, Municipal Code, Chapter 20.120, 2006.
4 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, Revised C/CAG Guidelines for the
Implementation of the Land Use Component of the Congestion Management Program, 2004.
~ . I
~
3
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - ---~- ~- ~ "-
3. Parking within view or within 100 feet of an attendant or security guard.
4. Parking in an area that is monitored by a security camera.
5. Providing fixed stationary objects that allow the bicycle frame and both wheels to be locked.
B. Bicycle Parking, Short Term. The applicant shall determine the appropriate number of bicycle spaces.
If more than 10 short-term spaces are required at least 50 percent must be covered.
C. Carpool and Vanpool Ridematching Services. The Designated Employer Contact shall be responsible
for matching potential carpoolers and vanpoolers using available ride matching services.
D. Designated Employer Contact. Each applicant shall designate or require tenants to designate an
employee as the official contact for the TOM Program. The Designated Employer Contact shall
administer aspects of the TOM program and promote alternative mode uses on the site.
E. Direct Route to Transit. A well-lighted path or sidewalk shall be provided utilizing the most direct route
to the nearest transit or shuttle stop from the building.
F. Carpool and Vanpool Free Parking. Preferential parking spaces shall be provided free of charge.
G. Guaranteed Ride Home. Carpool, van pool, and transit riders shall be provided with guaranteed rides
home in emergencies.
H. Information Boards/Kiosks. The Designated Employer Contact shall display in a permanent location
the following information: transit routes and schedules; carpooling and vanpooling information; bicycle
lanes, routes and paths and facility information; and alternative commute subsidy information.
I. Passenger Loading Zones. Passenger loading zones for carpool and van pool drop-off shall be located
near the main building entrance.
J. Pedestrian Connections. Safe, convenient pedestrian connections shall be provided from the project to
surrounding external streets.
K. Preferential Carpool and Vanpool Parking. Ten Percent of vehicle spaces shall be reserved for
carpools or van pools, with a minimum of one space required.
L. Promotional Programs. Promotional programs shall be promoted and organized by the Designated
Employer Contact such as: new tenant and employee orientation packets; flyers, posters; promotions of
Spare the Air (June - October); Rideshare Week (October); trip planning assistance-routes and maps.
M. Shower/Clothes Lockers. Shower and clothes locker facilities shall be provided free of charge.
N. Shuttle Program. Establish a Shuttle Program or participate in an existing program.
O. Transportation Management Association (TMA). The applicant shall participate or require tenant to
participate in a local TMA that provides ongoing support for alternative commute programs.
City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Guidelines
C/CAG guidelines require developments that generate 100 or more net new peak hour trips to implement TOM
measures that have the capacity to mitigate all new peak hour trips, based on C/CAG programmatic trip credits.
~ . I
~
4
~
'C Q)
1;0'"
= e
u 0
SOU)
~Oi
_ C
.......I =
- ~
m ~
~ ID
:gO
0~
'0'0
u ~
<0 1i5 8
~ 8 fJ)'C:
~.~ ~~
.;:: c (j)-
o Q) Q) ~
<0 E g.Q
OlO(l)W
E 8'c~
tl32:ge
CeO-
oE8cO
""":..c (f)
(0 vi ~ 'Ci::';
g is ~ ~.!:
j2 "'"".1Ji E ~
'S 0) W:.:J aJ
[lJ
C
......:......: .2
~,' vi vi:J
. (J)lOLl
(01'- ;;::
g (J).(J).1Ji
~ ffi ~ [5
'S (') N 00
OJ
z
~
:1
fu~~
g "'.
"-
.
o. 0
"
~~
'!
I H""'. f_"'"
I I J tl ++
~'-rIIETTln~nllH~IIIJU II 11-'.1111 UJ
w
~
<>:
o
(f)
a
f--
f--
a
z
c N
ro W
Ii: '"
:;; :::l
0 Cl
f-- ii:
~
~
c
~
,1(
0
.'!l
ro
:;;
c
ro
en
0
'"
0
~
""
0
....
0
~
"
,
.U)
~
9
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
2. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
This chapter describes the existing transportation system in the project vicinity, including the transit services and
facilities, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities.
TRANSIT SERVICE
The project site is located within walking distance to two regional rail services. It is approximately 0.35 mile
walking distance to the San Bruno BART station and 0.36 mile from the future San Bruno Caltrain station that is
located at the intersections of San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue. The public bus transit in San Mateo
County, Sam Trans, has stops at the rail station locations, but does not directly serve the project site. Pedestrian
accessibility to BART and Caltrain stations are adequate with sidewalks and crosswalks connecting to each. The
existing transit services are shown on Figure 3 and described in detail below.
Rail Service
Caltrain and BART provide rail transportation services to a variety of regional destinations such as San Francisco,
Oakland, and San Jose.
Caltrain
The current Caltrain station is currently just under a mile south of the site in San Bruno at
the intersection of Sylvan and Huntington Avenues. Caltrain frequencies vary between 20,
35, and 40 minutes in the northbound direction during the AM commute period (6:00 -
9:00 AM). During the PM commute period (4:00 - 7:00 PM), southbound frequencies
vary between 20 and 40 minutes. Less frequent service, about once every hour, is
provided during off-peak periods. Local and some limited (skip-stop) trains stop at this
station, approximately every twenty minutes to an hour. There are no plans to have express (Baby Bullet) service
stops at this station. In the near future, Caltrain and the City of San Bruno plan on moving the San Bruno Caltrain
station about Y, mile to the north near the intersection of San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue as part of a
grade separation project in the area. The Caltrain station will then be about 1/3 mile from the project site.
: ~. ~ ~ I. 1 .
~2"f~ ).,t<4. I, -_ ~
to -"l
~__V;" .:
The San Bruno BART station is currently about 1/3
mile from the project site on Huntington Avenue. The
station is located adjacent to the Tanforan shopping
mall and is a short walk from the project site along
Scott Street. BART service frequencies average
about once every 15 minutes during the AM (600 - 900 AM) and PM (400
- 7:00 PM) commute periods and about once every 20 minutes during off-
peak periods. BART provides regional rail rapid transit service to San
Francisco, Oakland and large portions of the East Bay. BART also serves
the San Francisco International Airport and Millbrae south of the station.
BART
~ . I
~
6
LEGEND:
N
Not to Scale
= Caltrain Tracks
= Caltrain Station
(existing)
= Caltrain Station
(planned)
= BART Line
= BART Station
= Existing Bike Route
= Proposed Bike
Route
= SamTrans
Transit Route
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Plan
EXISTING AND PROPOSED
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
April 2009
SF09-0427\graphics\0427-3
FIGURE 3
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Shuttle Service
There is extensive shuttle service to places of employment primarily east of US-101 in South San Francisco
connecting to the South San Francisco Caltrain and BART stations. However, no existing or planned shuttle
service passes by the project site.
Bus Service
SamTrans is the transit authority for San Mateo County that provides both local and
regional bus service, primarily to San Mateo County locations and downtown San
Francisco. SamTrans does not provide direct service to the project site on San
Mateo Avenue. The closest bus stops are located along San Bruno Avenue and at
the San Bruno BART station, each approximately 1/3 mile away.
. Route 141 provides bus service between the San Bruno Bart
Station and western San Bruno via downtown San Bruno.
. Route 140 connects San Bruno BART station to southern Daly City and west to the Pacific Manor
Shopping Center in Pacifica.
. Route 391 runs along EI Camino Real, connecting San Francisco Transbay Terminal with
Redwood City.
. Route 38 connects the northern San Francisco Airport service areas with Colma BART station via
limited stops using 1-280 and 1-380 freeways.
. Route 133 connects to downtown South San Francisco and western South San Francisco.
. Route 43 connects to San Bruno and Millbrae to the south.
The hours of operation vary by route and range from 4AM to 2AM for Route 391 and 6AM to 7PM for Route 141.
The frequency of service varies by route and time of day ranging from every 15 minutes to every 30 minutes.
Figure 3 provides a map of these routes.
BICYCLE FACILITIES
Bicycle facilities include bike paths (Class I), bike lanes (Class II), and signed
bike routes (Class III). Bike paths are paved trails that are separated from
roadways. Bike lanes are lanes on roadways designated for use by bicycles
with striping, pavement legends, and signs. Bike routes are roadways that are
designated for bicycle use by signs only and mayor may not include additional
pavement width for cyclists.
San Mateo Avenue is designated as a Class III bike route by the South San
Francisco General Plan. The route connects downtown San Bruno to downtown
South San Francisco. There are planned Class III bike routes on Linden Avenue
to the north of the site and a planned Class I bike path over the BART right-of-way where BART tracks run
underground.
~ . I
~
8
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, trails, and pedestrian signals.
Near the project site, sidewalks are provided on both sides of San Mateo Avenue.
Since the area is industrial in nature, there are many areas where the sidewalk
crosses large curb cuts and driveway entrances, and in such cases, the
pedestrian path is not clearly delineated. Some sidewalks in the area are narrow
(3-4 feet) which is less than ADA compliance standards. Furthermore, the
network at some intersections lacks wheelchair ramps and crosswalk markings,
also not compliant with ADA standards. Access to the BART station has been
partially improved along the Scott Street Caltrain at-grade crossing with sidewalks
and ADA compliant ramps. The project will provide compliant sidewalks and crossings
frontage on San Mateo Avenue and within the site.
for the length of its
~ . I
~
9
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
3. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Program will include on-site amenities that encourage the use of
alternative modes of travel, participation in associations that promote commute alternatives to the single-occupant
vehicle, and parking measures. The menu of strategies includes appropriate TOM measures that will satisfy SSF
and C/CAG guidelines. Table 1 summarizes the TOM measures, which are described in detail below. Figure 4
presents a summary of the proposed general locations for the site design features. Final locations for TOM
measures will be determined with building tenants.
TABLE 1
1070 & 1080 SAN MATEO AVENUE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND PROGRAM MEASURES
City of South San
TDM Measure Description Francisco
Municipal Code
Required Site Design Features
Secure Bicycle Storage Bicycle storage vvill be provided on-site as racks, cages, lockers, or 20120040 (A, B)
inside.
Direct Route to Transit A well-lit path or sidewalk will be provided on site to the most direct 20 120 040 (E)
route to the nearest transit or shuttle stop from the building.
Free Carpool/Vanpool Free parking spaces vvill be provided for carpools and van pools. 20 120040 (F, I<)
Parking
Passenger Loading A loading zone for van pool and carpool rides will be provided near the 20120040 (I)
Zones building entrances.
Pedestrian Lighted paths and sidewalks will be provided between the buildings, and 20120040 (E, J)
Connections parking areas.
Preferential Carpool Preferential parking spaces will be provided for carpools. 20 120 040 (K)
Parking
Preferential Van pool Preferential parking spaces will be provided for van pools. 20 120 040 (I<)
Parking
Showers/Clothes TVvO shovver facilities vvith clothing lockers will be provided on-site, vvith 20 120 040 (M)
Lockers shovver access available to all employees.
Shuttle Program- Since the project site is located approximately 1/3 mile from both the 20 120 040 (N)
Proximity to Transit future Caltrain and existing BART stations, a 12.5% transit mode share
credit will be credited to the site in lieu of providing shuttle service.
I nformation Boards and The building lobbies, employee break rooms, or other common areas 20 120 040 (H)
Kiosks will include permanent displays of commute alternative information.
Required Supporting Features
Carpool/Vanpool The TOM Coordinator will provide ride-matching services for carpool 20120040 (C)
Matching Services and van pool users through 511.org and/or an internal program.
Designated Employer The tenants of the buildings will designate an individual TDM 20120040 (D)
Contact - ETC (TDM Coordinator(s) (or may share a coordinator with other tenants).
~ . I
~
10
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Coordinators)
Guaranteed Ride Employees vvill be able to utilize the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief 20120040 (G)
Home Program Alliance's free guaranteed ride home program for emergencies via
taxicabs or rental cars.
Promotional Programs The TOM Coordinator will provide new employee orientation packets, 20120040 (L)
(Quarterly) flyers, posters, email, and educational programs on a quarterly basis.
This may include a lunchtime transportation options fair with the Alliance
and transportation providers participating.
Transportation Options Transit maps and schedules vvill be posted on campus and on the 20120040 (L)
for Visitors (Maps and tenant vvebsites for visitor use, if available. The TOM Coordinator will
Schedules); On-site offer on-site assistance to visitors.
Assistance
Transportation The tenants will join the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance 20120040 (0)
Management and form an action plan vvith them.
Association
Participation (Alliance)
Biannual Employee The TOM Coordinator will administer a biannual survey to determine 20120040 (0)
Commute Survey alternative transportation mode use and opportunities to TOM strategy
adjustments.
New Employee Transportation options will be outlined in the tenant's employee 20120040 (L)
Orientation Packet handbook, or on an intranet site, etc.
Commute Alternatives Brochure racks will be provided in public spaces within each building. 20120040 (L)
Brochure Rack (Maps
and Schedules)
Spare the Air The TOM Coordinator will promote this program to combat air pollution 20120040 (L)
Promotion in the San Francisco Bay Area (when some transit agencies will
sponsor free transit rides).
Rideshare Week The TOM Coordinator will promote carpooling and van pooling as an 20120040 (L)
Promotion alternative form of transportation during a Rideshare Promotion Week.
Additional Site Design Features
I nfill Development Encourage infill development to occur on site 20.120.050 (J)
Motorcycle Parking Provide preferential motorcycle parking 20.120.050 (J)
Bicycle Connections Bicycle connections vvill be provided to bicycle parking areas from 20.120.050 (B)
bicycle routes.
Additional Supporting Features
Subsidized Transit The tenants will subsidize transit tickets by offering pre-tax payroll 20.120.050 (A)
Tickets deductions for Commuter Checks or directly providing Commuter
Checks as an employee benefit.
On-Site Amenities The following amenities will be provided on-site: convenience store, 20.120.050 (F)
restaurant establishment, and office supply or business-supporting
establishment.
On-Site Transit Sales Transit ticket sales will be provided on-site via Commuter Check direct 20.120.050 (F)
deposit.
Source: City of South San Francisco, 2008, City/County Association of Governments San Mateo County 2004, and Fehr
& Peers, 2009.
~ . I
~
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. 0 I
:~ I
~-~I I
I
..1
. I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
w '" m
~ 0; C ID
" '<
<( C ~
0 ~ 0;
0) D-
m u c ~
0 D- o ~ '6 ~ ~
I- ID 0 0 m ~ ro
"- CO 0
l- e; ~ C ~ 0 D- ~
0 >- 0 :2 c 0 ro
--- --- --- Z 0 m 0 ~ " C
Z OJ '" ~ '" ~ ~ D-
V 0 C ~ 'C V
0 e; 0 E ID 5 1;0 e;
0 " "- ~ ID "
U U ~ S ~ 0 u u
m ~ v "
EO OJ 0 EO D- O) D- OJ .
-U)
C 0 I ~
z 0 I
w 0 9
Cl 0 I
w 0 I
...J 0
'~I
.
~~~-----~..
.
.
.
.
.
c ..,.
ro W
Ii: '"
:;; :::l
0 Cl
l- ii:
V
~
C
V
.1(
0
.'!l
ro
:;;
c
ro
en
0
'"
0
~
""
0
....
0
~
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - ---~- ~- ~ "-
MODE SHARE ASSUMPTIONS
Based on a review of TOM Programs and employee travel surveys for comparable sites in South San Francisco,
the TOM Program can provide the capacity to exceed the required alternative mode share for users of the project
site. The proposed alternative mode share targets exceed the 30% required by the City of South San Francisco's
TOM guidelines.
. Transit: 12.5% (94 employees) 1
. Internalization to site: 12% (90 employees) ,
. Carpool: 10% (75 employees)'
. Vanpool: 4% (30 employees) ,
. Bicycle: 2% (15 employees)'
. Walk: 1 % (8 employees) ,
. Motorcycle/Scooter: 0.5% (4 employees)'
The quantity and distribution of the TOM strategies presented in this chapter reflect this assumption. Should
employee surveys find the minimum 30 percent mode share is not met then additional or substitute TOM
strategies, may be appropriate.
REQUIRED MEASURES
Site Design Features
Bicvcle Parkinq
The Landlord will provide 54 bicycle parking spaces based on tenant needs. This is comprised of 22 indoor long
term spaces and 32 outdoor short-term spaces. At least 1 bike parking space needs to be provided for every auto
parking space. Of this, 50% must be long-term (covered). The 22 proposed indoor spaces exceed these minimum
thresholds. Figure 4 includes proposed bicycle parking locations.
Direct Route to Transit
Well-lit paths will be provided utilizing the most direct route to the nearest transit stop from the different buildings
via San Mateo Avenue. These paths are shown in Figure 4.
1 Based on employee transit mode shares near Caltrain & BART stations. Source: "Transit Use and Proximity to
Rail", Jennifer Dill, 2001.
, OKS Associates
, Based on percentages used for Centrum Properties Gateway TOM Plan, 2009; South San Francisco Fed Ex
Ground TOM Plan, 2007.
~ . I
~
13
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Free Parkinq for Carpools and Vanpools
Free parking will be provided for all carpools and vanpools.
Passenqer Loadinq Zones
A passenger loading zone for carpool or vanpool drop-oils will be provided convenient to all buildings. Parking
stalls immediately adjacent to building entrances will be time-restricted to allow vehicles to drop-oll/pick-up
passengers. Seven potential drop-oil points for carpools have been identified in Figure 4.
Pedestrian Connections
On-site pedestrian facilities will be provided, including sidewalks and lighted paths between the buildings, parking
areas, and San Mateo Avenue. These connections are shown in Figure 4.
Preferential Carpool and Vanpool Parkinq
Ten percent of parking spaces will be reserved for carpools and vanpools and will be located in premium and
convenient locations, per City requirements. These preferential spaces are intended to discourage single-
occupant vehicle trips and improve accessibility for those sharing vehicles. Based on the anticipated mode share
for the project site, these spaces may be underused. Therefore, unused carpool/vanpool spaces could be
occupied by single occupancy vehicles allowed after 10 AM, thereby also promoting flextime.
Shower and Locker Facilities
Shower and locker facilities will help promote cycling as an alternative commute option. Shower facilities (men's
and women's) will be provided in at least one of the campus buildings, assuring all tenants have access. Each
shower facility will include one shower and 8 clothing lockers, available on a first-come, first-served basis.
Transit Service
The site, being located approximately 1/3 mile from premium regional rail transit, will promote transit usage in lieu
of providing shuttle service. Research suggests that work sites located between Y. and Y, mile BART experience
an average transit mode share of 6% and sites within the same distance range from Caltrain stations experience
a 4% transit mode share.' Local bus usage comprises the remaining 2.5% transit mode share.'
Information Boards and Kiosks
An information kiosk/board will be located in employee break rooms or other common gathering areas (i.e.,
building lobby). The kiosk will contain information on shuttles, SamTrans, Caltrain, BART, VTA, vanpool
organizations, bicycle routes, and other transportation options information. The TOM Coordinator will be in charge
of updating information.
, Source: "Transit Use and Proximity to Rail", Jennifer Dill, 2001.
, Bus transit mode share for work trips was 3.3% in San Mateo County in 2000; Source:
2000.
U.S. Census Bureau,
~ . I
~
14
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Supporting Features
TOM Coordinators
The lease agreement between the owner and tenants will state that the tenants will designate a master TOM
Coordinator for the entire project site. Each tenant will have a designated contact who will aid the TOM
Coordinator in administering programs. The TOM Coordinator will promote the TOM Program, activities, and
features to all employees, and will conduct the monitoring/reporting process. The TOM Coordinator will develop
on-site transportation information centers with SamTrans, BART, and Caltrain schedules and maps. The TOM
Coordinator will provide information via new employee orientation packets, flyers, posters, email, and/or
educational programs. The TOM Coordinator's role will also include actively marketing alternative mode use,
administering the carpool and vanpool matching program, promoting special programs such as Bike-to-Work Day
or Carpool Week, and overseeing the guaranteed ride home program (working with local taxi service or rental car
agencies and the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance). The TOM Coordinator will also conduct biannual
employee commute surveys to identify the need for mode specific promotional material and educational programs
and to ensure compliance to the TOM program.
TMA Membership
Tenants will participate with the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance, with provides ongoing support for
alternative commute programs. The TOM Coordinators will work with the Alliance to create a Transportation
Action Plan for each tenant. Alliance membership includes administration of the Guaranteed Ride Home Program,
provision of promotional materials and coordination of marketing efforts, and providing carpool and vanpool
ridematching tools for TOM coordinators and contacts.
Carpool/Vanpool Matchinq Services
Carpools in the Bay Area consist of two or more people riding in one vehicle for commute purposes. Vanpools
provide similar commuting benefits as carpools, though a vanpool consists of seven to 15 passengers, including
the driver, and the vehicle is either owned by one of the vanpoolers or leased from a vanpool rental company.
The TOM Coordinator will provide an Internet link to the 511.org Rideshare website to access ride matching
services. The TOM Coordinator will also administer an on-site carpool and van pool matching service for
employees and maintain a list of available vanpools that provide service between the project site and various
points in the Bay Area.
Guaranteed Ride Home
A common reason that some employees do not use alternative modes (i.e., carpool, vanpool, or transit) is the
inability to leave work unexpectedly for a family emergency or the fear of being stranded if they need to work late.
One TOM element that allays these fears is the Alliance's Guaranteed Ride Home program. With this program,
employees can use a taxi service, rental car or other means to travel home in the event of an emergency and the
employer pays for the service. The lease agreement will state that the tenants must participate in the Alliance's
Guaranteed Ride Home program, which will be managed by the TOM Coordinator. Employees who wish to use
the service will contact the TOM Coordinator to make the travel arrangements.
Promotional Promams
Promotional programs include new employee orientation packets outlining alternative transportation options and
an orientation program, which will explain the importance and benefits of using alternative transportation modes.
~ . I
~
15
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Other annual or quarterly events could include a "commute fair" where various transit organizations can set up
marketing booths during lunch and encourage other events like "Bike to Work Day."
Transportation Options for Visitors (Maps and Schedules)' On-site Assistance
Visitors to the project site will also be able to use the on-site transportation amenities. Maps and schedules will
be available online and tenant TOM Coordinators will offer on-site assistance.
Biannual Emplovee Commute Survev
The TOM Program will be performance-based and the alternative mode use will be monitored biannually,
beginning one year after tenant occupancy. The alternative mode use and general perceptions of the TOM
Program will come from statistically valid employee surveys. The TOM Coordinator may use information from the
employee surveys to adjust existing or implement new TOM Program measures. The TOM Coordinator will
submit the biannual survey to the SSF Economic Development Director. The TOM Coordinator will also work with
SSF Economic Development staff to document the effectiveness of the TOM Program through triennial reporting.
Independent consultants, retained by the City and paid for by the tenants, will measure, through observation, the
alternative mode use achieved at the project site every three years, beginning three years after tenant occupancy.
If the alternative mode use goals are not achieved, the TOM Coordinator will provide an explanation of how and
why the goal has not been reached and a detailed description of additional measures that will be adopted to attain
the required mode use. The independent consultants will submit the findings of the triennial survey to the SSF
Economic Development Director.
New Emplovee Orientation Packet
Orientation packets will provide information on TOM Program benefits. Packets will include (but not be limited to)
information on carpool/vanpool options, shuttle services, Downtown Dasher, and bicycle options.
Commute Alternatives Brochure Rack (Maps and Schedules)
Brochure racks will be placed in public spaces in buildings, for example break rooms or lobbies. They will provide
information on transportation options and upcoming events, such as "Bike to Work Day." The TOM Coordinator
will maintain and update the brochure racks with current information.
Spare the Air Promotion
The TOM Coordinator will notify employees of Spare the Air days (as declared for the Bay Area region) and
associated transit promotions. Prizes may be offered for non-SOV travel on these days to encourage
participation.
Rideshare Week Promotion
The TOM Coordinator will promote and encourage ridesharing during a Rideshare Week Promotion. The TOM
Coordinator may offer prizes as incentives for ridesharing.
~ . I
~
16
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
ADDITIONAL CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MEASURES
Site Design Features
Motorcvcle/Scooter Parkina
Four marked motorcycle parking spaces will be provided in the parking lot. In addition, up to four motorcycles can
park within a single vehicle parking space.
Bicvcle Connections
Bicycle connections will be provided to connect bicycle routes to building entrances and bicycle storage facilities.
These connections and facilities are shown on Figures 3 & 4.
Supporting Features
Subsidized Transit Tickets
The TOM Coordinator will facilitate tenant participation in the Commuter Check program (online), which provides
vouchers that can be redeemed online for transit passes and tickets, van pool fares, or park and ride lot costs at
BART/Caltrain stations. The Commuter Check credit will be provided tax-free to employees that ride transit to
work in amounts up to $120 per month (amount determined by the IRS (IRS Tax Code Section 132(f) - Qualified
Transportation Fringe)). Tenants may also elect to partially or fully subsidize Commuter Checks as an employee
benefit.
On-site Amenities
The site will contain several conveniences such as a restaurant establishment, convenience store, and an office
or business-supporting establishment. These convenience establishments are intended to help reduce the
perceived need to use a car to obtain such amenities. Additionally, the TOM coordinator will make employees
aware of e-concierge services such as grocery delivery and dry-cleaning services that are available.
On-site Transit Sales
Commuter Checks will be available online through Commuter Check Direct, a service that will deliver the transit
passes directly to the employee's home or office.
Flextime - Ootional
Where feasible, tenants will offer flextime options such as compressed workweeks and alternative work hours. As
noted above, employees arriving after 10 AM will be eligible to park in available carpool and vanpool preferential
parking locations. This measure, if implemented, allows for C/CAG peak hour trip mitigation credits.
Parkina Permit Proaram - Ootional
Should the need arise in the future for further trip reductions, the landlord should consider charging employees for
parking. The proceeds for the program can be used to fund subsidized transit tickets, subsidies to employees who
walk or bike to work, and the guaranteed ride home program. Studies have shown that priced parking is a major
motivation for use of alternative modes. The program could create an opportunity benefit for the landlord by
~ . I
~
17
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
requiring less parking and thus opening up more developable space. The C/CAG trip credit program will provide
one trip credit for every space priced $20 per month or more.
On-Site Bike Sharina - Ootional
The project site is located within one mile to shopping areas that may provide services and conveniences
valuable to employees. These areas include downtown San Bruno (south on San Mateo Avenue near the existing
Caltrain Station) and the Tanforan Shopping mall (next to the San Bruno BART station). Employees using
alternative modes will have an easier time accessing these sites for mid-day trips if bicycles were provided for
employee use. Bicycles are more highly recommended than alternatives such as electric vehicles or autos due to
their relative low cost to purchase and operate, non-impact to air quality, and the short distance to these
destinations. A bike sharing program could be implemented providing for several bicycles to be checked out by
employees for mid-day use to these destinations instead of relying on a personal automobile.
PHASING
The 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue redevelopment will be incremental and phased. As such, the
implementation of the TOM Program will be incremental to reflect the number and nature of employees within
each development phase. The full TOM program will be deployed with full build out. Appendix A presents a set of
provision assumptions associated with each strategy. This includes provision requirements such as
carpool/vanpool parking (10% of parking provisions). These assumptions may be referenced in each phase to
determine incremental site design features as appropriate. Most of the supporting features are existing (requiring
only tenant enrollment) or will be established with each new tenant.
ENFORCEMENT AND FINANCING
Landlord will prepare lease language for all tenants that requires the designation of a TOM Coordinator for the
project site (multiple tenants may share one TOM Coordinator), a TOM contact for each tenant, membership in
the Alliance, and compliance with and implementation of the TOM Program. Tenants may implement the TOM
Program with different additional measures, so long as the programmatic credits from the replacement measures
meet or exceed the programmatic credits of the measures identified by this plan, as described in Appendix D.
Tenants not meeting requirements may be subjected to penalties per the lease.
The 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Program will be funded through tenant payments and Alliance grants,
which pay up to 50 percent of bicycle facility and Guaranteed Ride Home Program costs.
~ . I
~
18
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
4. COMPLIANCE WITH GUIDELINES AND EFFECTIVENESS
As noted in the Regulatory Setting section of Chapter 1, the TOM Program must comply with SSF and C/CAG
Guidelines. These guidelines and effectiveness standards are described below.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GUIDELINES
The SSF Guidelines require the 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Program to achieve a 30 percent
alternative mode use credit. According to the SSF Guidelines, the TOM Program will implement all required and
several additional TOM measures. According to the percentages assumed under "Mode Share Assumptions", the
project will obtain 42% of daily mode share. Based on this methodology, the TOM Program will provide for 2,314
alternative mode use credit trips, which represents 42 percent of the estimated 5,510 total daily project trips,
including mid-day and off-peak trips. Assumptions for the TOM Program quantities are included in Appendix A.
The TOM Program will therefore exceed SSF TOM requirements by providing all required measures and meeting
the required 30 percent minimum alternative mode use.
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY GUIDELINES
C/CAG Guidelines require the TOM Program to provide the capacity to fully mitigate the demand for new peak
hour trips. According to C/CAG Guidelines, the amount of "new" peak hour trips' is forecasted based on standard
rates developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Applying ITE rates, the proposed project is
forecasted to generate 635 new AM peak hour trips, 682 new PM peak hour trips, and 5,510 new daily trips.
Based on C/CAG trip credits, the proposed project at 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Program will have
the capacity to reduce the demand for peak hour trips by 1,384 trips, as shown in Table 2. This is in excess of the
maximum number of AM or PM peak hour trips calculated using the ITE estimate of 1,317 peak hour (635 AM and
682 PM). The 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue TOM Program therefore exceeds C/CAG requirements.
, "New" is defined as in excess of existing land use trip generation.
, See Appendix B for project trip generation and employee forecasts.
~ . I
~
19
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
TABLE 2
COMPLIANCE WITH GUIDELINES AND TOM PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS
City of South C/CAG C/CAG
TDM Measure San Francisco Amount Credit Trip
Municioal Code Rate Credits
Required Site Design Features
Bicycle Parking - Long Term (Class I) 20120040 (A) 22 spaces n/a n/a
Bicycle Parking - Short Term (Class II) 20120040 (B) 32 spaces n/a n/a
Total Secure Bicycle Storage 20120040 (A, B) 54 spaces 0.33 18
Direct Route to Transit 20 120 040 (E) 2 paths n/a n/a
Free Carpool/Vanpool Parking 20120040 (F, K) 100% n/a n/a
Passenger Loading Zones 20120040 (I) 7 loading zones n/a n/a
Pedestrian Connections 20120040 (E, J) 6 pedestrian
safety featu res 5 30
Preferential Carpool Parking 20 120 040 (K) 75 spaces 2 150
Preferential Van pool Parking 20 120 040 (K) 4 spaces 7 28
Showers/Clothes Lockers 20 120 040 (M) 2 shovvers 10 20
Additional Credit for Combination with Bicycle Lockers 20120040 (A, B,
M) 1 5 5
Credit for Proximity to rail transit 20 120 040 (N) 164 peak hr
transit trips 1 164
Additional Credit for Combination with Guaranteed Ride 20120040 (8, N) 164 peak hr
Home Program transit trips 1 164
I nformation Boards and Kiosks 20 120 040 (H) 8 kiosks 5 40
Required Supporting Features
Carpool/Vanpool Matching Services 20120040 (C) 4 vanpools 10 40
Designated Employer Contact - ETC (TDM Coordinator) 20120040 (D) 4TDM
Contacts/Coord. 10 40
Guaranteed Ride Home Program 20120040 (8) 388 Transit,
Bike, Walk
Peak Trips
covered 1 388
Promotional Programs (Quarterly) 20 120040 (L) 4 TDM Contacts 1 4
Transportation Options for Visitors (Maps and Schedules); 20120040 (L)
On-site Assistance 4 TDM Contacts 1 4
Transportation Management Association Participation 20120040 (0)
(Alliance) 1 5 5
Tvvice-Yearly Employee Commute Survey 20120040 (0) 1 3 3
New Employee Orientation Packet 20 120040 (L) 8 tenants 1 8
~ . I
~
20
1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue Transportal1on Demand Management Program
Draft, Apnl2009
,.. -- =--=-.,.....~~-- ---~ ----.-::..~~ ~ ~ -
--..- - -------~- ~- ~ "-
Commute Alternatives Brochure Rack (Maps and 20120040 (L)
Schedules) 8 tenants 1 8
Spare the Air Promotion 20 120040 (L) 4 TDM Contacts 1 4
Rideshare Week Promotion 20 120040 (L) 4 TDM Contacts 1 4
Subtotal of Required Measures 1,127 trip credits
Additional Site Design Features
I nfill Development 20.120.050 (J) 1317 peak hr
trips 2% 26
Motorcycle Parking 20.120.050 (J) 4 spaces n/a n/a
Bicycle Connections 20.120.050 (B) 1 route 5 5
Additional Supporting Features
Subsidized Transit Tickets 20.120.050 (A) 164 peak transit
trips 1 164
On-Site Amenities (from E-Concierge) 20.120.050 (F) 4 ammenities 5 20
On-Site Transit Sales 20.120.050 (F) 4 TDM Contacts 1 4
Develop Transportation Action Plan with the Transportation 20.120.050 (J)
Management Association 1 10 10
Additional Credit for Providing Ten or more TOM Program 20.120.050 (J)
Measures 1 5 5
Subtotal of Additional Measures 203 trip credits
Total TOM Program Measures 1,330trip
credits
Peak Hour Trip Target 1,317
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004; City of South San Francisco, 2007; and Fehr & Peers, 2009.
~ . I
~
21
APPENDIX A:
TDM PROGRAM PROVISION ASSUMPTIONS
22
TABLE Al
TOM PROGRAM QUANTITY CALCULATION ASSUMPTIONS
TDM Measure Provision Assumptions
Required Site Design Features
Bicycle Parking - Long Term (Class I) Allowed Vlithin buildings: 10 Bldg #1, 8 Bldg #2-5, 4 in
BldQ #6
Bicycle Parking - ShortT erm (Class II) Eight racks Vlith 4 spaces each (32 spaces) planned on-
site
Total Secure Bicycle Storage One space per 50 vehicle spaces minimum
Passenger Loading Zones Convenient to entrances of all buildings (two for Bldg #1,
one for each other buildinq)
Carpool/ van pool parking must be provided at 10% of total
Preferential Carpool Parking parking provision (assume 10% requirement less van pool
spaces). 10% carpool emplovee mode share is 75 spaces.
Carpool/ van pool parking must be provided at 10% of total
Preferential Van pool Parking parking provision (assume 4 vans vvith 7 passengers per
van - same mode share as Centrum Gatewav TOM Plan)
Showers/Clothes Lockers 2 showers for site; 8 lockers per shower (exceeds ratio of
emplovees per shower in Centrum Gatewav TDM Plan)
Transit Promotion Program 12.5% transit mode share
I nformation Boards and Kiosks One per tenant; 8 tenants minimum on site: 1 each in Bldg
#1-5, 3 tenants in Blda. #6.
Required Supporting Features
Designated Employer Contact - ETC (TDM Coordinator) One per tenant or shared (one for the campus); assume 1
per 200 emplovees: 4 TDM Contacts/Coordinator;
Guaranteed Ride Home Program All carpool, van pool, and transit riders are eligible
Rideshare/ Van pool Matching 4 van pools of 7 riders each (4% mode share)
Commute Alternatives Brochure Rack (Maps and Schedules) One per tenant - 8 tenants
Additional Site Design Features
Motorcycle Parking Provided for 0.5% of employees (4)
Bicycle Connections Connects to designated bicycle route
Additional Supporting Features
Subsidized Transit Tickets 12.5% transit mode share
On-Site Amenities (including E-Concierge) Four features available
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2008.
23
APPENDIX B:
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND EMPLOYEE ESTIMATES
24
The project trip generation and employee estimates, shown in Tables B1 and B2, are based on information from
Trip Generation 1h Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003)
TABLE Bl
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION FORECASTS
Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Land Use Code Unit Total In Out Total In Out Total
Warehousing 150 ksf 0.42 65% 35% 0.45 19% 81% 3.56
Light Industrial 110 ksf 101 90% 10% 108 14% 86% 6.97
Locally Serving Business or Services 920 ksf 803 51% 49% 12.27 43% 57% 122.72
Restaurant Establishment 933 ksf 63.33 52% 48% 52.67 51% 49% 716
Convenience Establishment 852 ksf 33 51% 49% 36 49% 51% 360
Vehicle Trip Generation Estimates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Land Use Amount Unit Total In Out Total In Out Total
Warehousing 246 ksf 103 67 36 111 21 90 875
Light Industrial 369 ksf 372 335 37 397 56 342 2569
Locally Serving Business or Services 6.6 ksf 53 27 26 81 35 46 810
Restaurant Establishment 1.5 ksf 95 49 46 79 40 39 1074
Convenience Establishment 1 ksf 33 17 16 36 18 18 360
Subtotal New Trips 656 495 161 705 170 535 5,688
Deduction for Existing Site Trips -21 -14 -7 -23 -4 -9 -178
Total Net Trips 635 481 154 682 166 516 5,510
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003 and OKS Associates, 2009
TABLE B2
EMPLOYEE POPULATION
Land Use I Amount I Unit I SF oer Emolovee ., I Emolovees
Warehousing 246 ksf 850 289
Light Industrial 369 ksf 850 434
Locally Serving Business or Services 6.6 ksf 350 19
Restaurant Establishment 1.5 ksf 350 5
Convenience Establishment 1 ksf 350 3
Total I 750
Notes:
1. Rounded up to the nearest 50 square feet.
Source: "Employment Density Summary Report", The Natelson Company Inc., 2002 and Fehr & Peers, 2009.
25
APPENDIX C:
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT
REQUIREMENTS
26
The City of South San Francisco list of required and additional TOM measures, presented below, were taken from
the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.120 (2001)
Required Measures
All non-residential developments shall implement the following measures:
B. Bicycle Parking, Long-Term. The applicant shall determine the appropriate number of bicycle spaces
based on the required alternative mode use and subject to review and approval by the Chief Planner.
Bicycle parking shall be located within 75 feet of a main entrance to the building and all long-term spaces
must be covered. Long-term bicycle parking shall be achieved by providing one or more of the following
measures:
1. Parking in a locked, controlled access room or area enclosed by a fence with a locked gate.
2. Lockers.
3. Parking within view or within 100 feet of an attendant or security guard.
4. Parking in an area that is monitored by a security camera.
5. Providing fixed stationary objects that allow the bicycle frame and both wheels to be locked with a
bicycle-locking device or a bicyclist supplying only a lock and six-foot cable.
B. Bicycle Parking, Short Term. The applicant shall determine the appropriate number of bicycle spaces
based on the required alternative mode use and subject to review and approval by the Chief Planner. If
more than 10 short-term spaces are required at least 50 percent must be covered. Bicycle parking shall
be located within 100 feet of a main entrance to the building. Security shall be achieved by using one or
more of the same methods used for securing long-term bicycle parking.
P. Carpool and Vanpool Ridematching Services. The Designated Employer Contact shall be responsible
for matching potential carpoolers and vanpoolers by administering a carpool/vanpool matching
application. The application shall match employees who may be able to carpool or vanpool.
Q. Designated Employer Contact. Each applicant shall designate or require tenants to designate an
employee as the official contact for the TOM Program. The City shall be provided with a current name
and phone number of the Designated Employer Contact. The Designated Employer Contact shall
administer carpool and vanpool ridematching services, the promotional programs, update information on
the information boards/kiosks, and be the official contact for the administration of the annual survey and
Triennial report.
R. Direct Route to Transit. A well-lighted path or sidewalk shall be provided utilizing the most direct route
to the nearest transit or shuttle stop from the building.
S. Free parking for Carpools and Vanpools. The preferential parking spaces shall be provided free of
charge.
T. Guaranteed Ride Home. Carpool, van pool, and transit riders shall be provided with guaranteed rides
home in emergencies. Rides shall be provided either by a transportation service provider (taxi or rental
car) or an informal policy using company vehicles and/or designated employees.
U. Information Boards/Kiosks. The Designated Employer Contact shall display in a permanent location
the following information: transit routes and schedules; carpooling and vanpooling information; bicycle
lanes, routes and paths and facility information; and alternative commute subsidy information.
V. Passenger Loading Zones. Passenger loading zones for carpool and van pool drop-off shall be located
near the main building entrance.
28
W. Pedestrian Connections. Safe, convenient pedestrian connections shall be provided from the project to
surrounding external streets and, if applicable, trails. Lighting, landscaping, and building orientation
should be designed to enhance pedestrian safety.
X. Preferential Carpool and Vanpool Parking. Ten Percent of vehicle spaces shall be reserved for
carpools or vanpools, with a minimum of one space required. Such spaces shall be provided in premium
and convenient locations.
Y. Promotional Programs. The following promotional programs shall be promoted and organized by the
Designated Employer Contact: new tenant and employee orientation packets on transportation
alternatives; flyers, posters, brochures, and emails on commute alternatives; transportation fairs; Spare
the Air (June - October); Rideshare Week (October); trip planning assistance-routes and maps.
Z. Shower/Clothes Lockers. Shower and clothes locker facilities shall be provided free of charge.
AA Shuttle Program. Establish a Shuttle Program or participate in an existing program, approved by the
Chief Planner, and subject to any fees for the existing program.
BB. Transportation Management Association (TMA). The applicant shall participate or require tenant to
participate in a local TMA. The Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance (Alliance) or a similar organization
approved by the Chief Planner that provides ongoing support for alternative commute programs.
Additional Measures
The Chief Planner and the Planning Commission shall determine the appropriateness of each Additional
Measure chosen by the applicant.
A Alternative Commute Subsidies/Parking Cash Out. Employees shall be provided with a subsidy,
determined by the applicant and subject to review by the Chief Planner if they use transit or commute by
other alternative modes.
B. Bicycle Connections. If a site is abutting a bicycle path, lane or route, a bicycle connection shall be
provided close to an entrance to the building on the site.
C. Compressed Work Week. The applicant shall allow employees or require their tenants to allow
employees to adjust their workweek schedule in order to complete the basic work requirement of five
eight-hour workdays by adjusting their schedule to reduce vehicle trips to the worksite.
D. Flextime. The applicant shall provide or require their tenants to provide employees with staggered work
hours involving a shift in the set work hours of all employees at the workplace or flexible work hours
involving individually determined work hours.
E. Land Dedication for Transit/Bus Shelter. Where appropriate, land shall be dedicated for transit or a
bus shelter shall be provided based on the proximity to a transit route.
F. Onsite Amenities. One or more of the following amenities shall be implemented: ATM, day care,
cafeteria, limited food service establishment, dry cleaners, exercise facilities, convenience retail, post
office, on-site transit pass sales.
G. Paid Parking at Prevalent Market Rates. Parking shall be provided at a cost equal to the prevalent
market rate, as determined by the City based on a surveyor parking in North San Mateo County.
H. Telecommuting. The applicant shall provide or require tenants to provide opportunities and the ability to
work off-site.
29
I. Reduced Parking. In accordance with General Plan Policy 4.3-1-8, reduced parking, consistent with
projected trip reduction identified in the preliminary TOM plan, may be permitted subject to approval by
the Planning Commission.
J. Other Measures. Additional measures not listed in this Chapter, such as an in-lieu fee that would be
negotiated in a Development Agreement with the City, may be implemented as determined by the Chief
Planner and approved by the Planning Commission. Once the Planning Commission approves the
Preliminary TOM Plan, the Chief Planner may recommend additional measures either as part of the Final
TOM Plan or as part of the Triennial Review process.
30
APPENDIX D:
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES
31
The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County list of approved TOM measures, the number
of mitigated peak-hour trips associated with each, and the rationale used to determine the number of mitigated
trips, presented in Table C, were taken from the Revised Guidelines for the Implementation of the Land Use
Component of the Congestion Management Program (City/County Association of Governments in San Mateo
County, 2004).
TABLE Dl
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Transportation Demand Management
Measure Number of Trips Credited Rationale
Secure bicycle storage. One peak-hour trip vvill be credited for every 3 Experience has shown that
new bike lockers/racks installed and bicycle commuters will, on
maintained. Lockers/racks must be installed average, use this mode one-third
within 100 feet of the building. of the time, especially during
warmer summer months.
Shovvers and changing rooms. Ten peak-hour trips vvill be credited for each 10 to 1 ratio based on cost to
new combination shower and changing room build and the likelihood that
installed. An additional 5 peak hour trips will bicycle utilization vvill increase.
be credited \^/hen installed in combination with
at least 5 bike lockers.
Operation of a dedicated shuttle service One peak-hour trip will be credited for each Yields a one-to-one ratio (one
during the peak period to a rail station or peak-hour trip seat on the shuttle. Increases seat in a shuttle equals one auto
an urban residential area. Alternatively to two trips if a Guaranteed Ride Home trip reduced); utilization
the development could buy into a shuttle Program is also in place. increases when a guaranteed
consortium. ride home program is also made
Five additional trips \!viII be cred ited if the available.
shuttle stops at a childcare facility en route
to/from the VvOrksite.
Charging employees for parking. TVvO peak-hour trips will be credited for each Yields a two-to-one ratio.
parking spot charged out at $20 per month for
one year. Money shall be used for TOM
measu res such as sh uttles or subsidized
transit tickets.
Subsidizing transit tickets for employees. One peak-hour trip will be credited for each Yields a one-to-one ratio (one
transit pass that is subsidized at least $20 per transit pass equals one auto trip
month for one year. reduced).
One additional trip will be credited if the
subsidy is increased to $75 for parents using
transit to take a child to childcare en route.
Subsidizing pedestrians/bicyclists who One peak hour trip \!viII be credited for each Yields a two-to-one ratio (One
commute to work. employee that is subsidized at least $20 per pedestrian/bicycle equals one
month for one year. auto trip reduced.)
Creation of preferential parking for TVvO peak-hour trips will be credited for each Yields a two-to-one ratio (one
carpoolers. parking spot reserved. reserved parking spot equals a
minimum of two auto trips
reduced).
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004
32
TABLE Dl (CONTINUED)
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Transportation Demand Management
Measure Number of Trips Credited Rationale
Creation of preferential parking for Seven peak-hour trips will be cred ited for Yields a seven-to-one ratio
vanpoolers. each parking spot reserved. (one reserved parking spot
equals a minimum of seven
auto trips reduced).
Implementation of a vanpool program. Seven peak-hour trips will be cred ited for The average van capacity is
each van pool arranged by a specific program seven.
operated at the site of the development.
I ncreases to ten trips if a Guaranteed Ride
Home Program is also in place.
Operation of a commute assistance center, One peak-hour trip will be credited for each This is based on staff's best
offering on-site, one stop shopping for feature added to the information center; and estimate. Short of there being
transit and commute alternatives an additional one peak-hour trip will be major disincentives to driving,
information, preferably staffed with a live credited for each hour the center is staffed having an on-site TOM
person to assist building tenants with trip with a live person, up to 20 trips per each 200 Program offering commute
planning. tenants. Possible features may include: assistance is fundamental to
Transit information brochure rack an effective TOM Program.
Computer kiosk connected to the Internet
Telephone (Vlith commute and transit
information numbers)
Desk and chairs (for personalized trip
planning)
On-site transit ticket sales
Implementation of flexible work hour
schedules that allow transit riders to be 15-30
minutes late or early (due to problems with
transit or vanpool.
Survey employees to examine use and Three peak hour trips will be credited for a This is based on staff's best
best practices. survey developed to be administered tvvice esti mate with the goal of
yearly. finding best practices to
achieve the mode shift goal.
Implementation of a parking cash out One peak-hour trip will be credited for each Yields a one-to-one ratio (one
program. parking spot where the employee is offered a cashed out parking spot
cash payment in return for not using parking equals one auto trip reduced).
at the employment site.
Implementation of ramp metering. Three hundred peak-hour trips will be credited This is a very difficult and
if the local jurisdiction, in cooperation with costly measure to implement
Caltrans, installs and turns on ramp metering and the reward must be
lights during the peak hours at the highway significant.
entrance ramp closest to the development.
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004
33
TABLE Dl (CONTINUED)
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Transportation Demand Management
Measure Number of Trips Credited Rationale
Installation of high bandvvidth connections One peak-hour trip will be credited for every Yields a one-to-three ratio.
in employees' homes to the I nternet to three connections installed. This measure is
facilitate home telecommuting. not available as credit for a residential
development.
Installation of video conferencing centers Five peak-hour trips will be credited for a This is based on staff's best
that are available for use by the tenants of center installed at the facility. esti mate.
the facility.
I mplementation of a compressed workweek One peak-hour trip vvill be credited for every 5 The workvveek \Mil be
program. employees that are offered the opportunity to compressed into 4 days;
work four compressed days per week. therefore the individual vvill not
be commuting on the 5th day.
Flextime: Implementation of an alternative One peak hour trip vvill be credited for each This is based on staff's best
hours VvOrkvveek program. employee that is offered the opportunity to esti mate.
work staggered work hours. Those hours can
be a set shift, set by the employer, or can be
individually determined by the employee.
Provision of assistance to employees so If an employer develops and offers a program This assumes that a five-mile
they can live close to work. to help employees find acceptable residences trip will generally not involve
within five miles of the employment site, a travel on the freeways.
credit of one trip will be given for each slot in
the program.
I mplementation of a program that gives One peak-hour trip will be credited for each This assumes that a five-mile
preference to hiring local residents at the employment opportunity reserved for trip will generally not involve
new development site. employees recruited and hired from vvithin five travel on the freeways.
miles of the employment site.
Provision of on-site amenities! One peak-hour trip will be credited for each This is based on staff's best
accommodations that encourage people to feature added to the job site. Possible esti mate.
stay on-site during the VvOrkday, making it features may include:
easier for workers to leave their banking
automobiles at home. grocery shopping
clothes cleaning
exercise facilities
child care center
Provide use of motor vehicles to Five peak hour trips will be credited for each This is based on staff's best
employees who use alternate commute vehicle provided. esti mate.
methods so they can have access to
vehicles during breaks for personal use.
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004
34
TABLE Dl (CONTINUED)
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Transportation Demand Management
Measure Number of Trips Credited Rationale
Provide use of bicycles to employees \^/ho One peak hour trip will be credited for every This is based on staff's best
use alternative commute methods so they four bicycles provided. esti mate.
can have access to bicycles during breaks
for personal use.
Provision of childcare services as a part of One trip will be credited for every two This is based on staff's best
the development. childcare slots at the job site. This amount esti mate.
increases from one trip for each slot if the
childcare service accepts multiple age
groups (infants = 0-2 yrs, preschool = 3&4
yrs, school age = 5 to 13 yrs).
Developer/Property owner may join an One trip will be credited for each new This is based on staff's best
employer group to expand available childcare center slot created either directly esti mate.
childcare within 5 miles of the job site or by an employer group, by the
may provide this service independently. developer/property owner, or by an outside
provider if an agreement has been
developed Vlith the developer/property
owner that makes the child care accessible
to the VvOrkers at the development.
Join the Alliance's guaranteed ride home TIM) peak hour trips will be credited for Experience has shown that
program. every 2 slots purchased in the program. when a guaranteed Ride Home
Program is added to an overall
TDM Program, the average
ridership increases by about
50%.
Combine any ten of these elements and Five peak-hour trips will be credited. Experience has shown that
receive an additional credit for five peak offering multiple and
hour trips. complementary TDM
components can magnify the
impact of the overall program.
Work with the alliance to Ten peak-hour trips will be credited. This is based on staff's best
develop/implement a Transportation Action esti mate.
Plan.
The developer can provide a cash legacy Peak-hour trip reduction credits will accrue Credits accrue depending on
after the development is complete and as if the items were being directly what the funds are used for.
designate an entity to implement any (or implemented by the developer.
more than one) of the previous measures
before day one of occupancy.
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004
35
TABLE Dl (CONTINUED)
CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Transportation Demand Management
Measure Number of Trips Credited Rationale
Encourage infill development. TIM) percent of all peak-hour trips will be Generally acceptable TOM
credited for each infill development. practices (based on research of
TOM practices around the nation
and reported on the Internet).
Encourage shared parking. Five peak-hour trips will be credited for an Generally acceptable TOM
agreement vvith an existing development to practices (based on research of
share existing parking. TOM practices around the nation
and reported on the Internet).
Participate in/create/sponsor a Five peak-hour trips will be credited. Generally acceptable TOM
Transportation Management Association. practices (based on research of
TOM practices around the nation
and reported on the Internet).
Coordinate Transportation Demand Five peak-hour trips will be credited. This is based on staffs best
Management programs vvith existing esti mate.
developments/employers.
For employers with multiple job sites, One peak-hour trip vvill be credited for each Yields a one-to-one ratio.
institute a proximate commuting program opportunity created.
that alloVv'S employees at one location to
transfer/trade vvith employees in another
location that is closer to home.
Pay for parking at park and ride lots or One peak-hour trip vvill be credited for each Yields a one-to-one ratio.
transit stations. spot purchased.
Source: City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, 2004
36
ApPENDIX F
WET UTILITY STUDY
Subject:
Project:
Technical Memorandum
Centrum Logistics Project
Wet Utility Capacity Study
Centrum Logistics, SSF
Prepared By:
Beth Goldstein, P.E
Reviewed By:
Brent Johnson, P.E.
Date:
May 1 , 2009
090001
Reference:
CONTENTS
1
2
2.1
2.2
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4
TABLES
FIGURES
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
FI NAL
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 2
SITE UTI LITES............................................................................................................. 4
Sewers........................................................................................................................ ...4
~~.............................................................................................................................8
OFFSITE UTI LITES...................................................................................................... 9
~_~..........................................................................................................................9
Wastewater Treatment................................................................................................ 1 0
Stormdrains................................................................................................................. 11
Water Mains.................................................................................................................11
CONCLUSiONS.......................................................................................................... 13
Reasonable Occupancy Scenario
Estimated Sewage Generation
Estimated Water Demands
Summary of Peak Wastewater Flows Offsite
Project Site Location
Project Site Utilities Plan
Offsite Sewers
Offsite Stormdrains
Appendix A: Seventh Avenue Trunk Sewer Replacement Project, City of San Bruno, 2002
HYDROCONSULT ENGINEERS, INC. . 45 POLK STREET. SAN FRANCISCO. CA . 94102 . (P) 415.252.9750 . (F) 415.252.9261
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this technical memorandum (TM) is to provide an assessment of the capacity of
the water and sewage utilities on the Project site and for the water, sewage, and stormdrain
utilities serving the Project from offsite. The onsite stormdrain utilities were considered in a
previous Hydroconsult TM, Centrum SSF Logistics Project, Hydrologic Study, revised April 10,
2009.
The Project site is located at 1070 and 1080 San Mateo Boulevard in South San Francisco,
approximately 450 feet north of Interstate 380 and approximately 650 feet west of Interstate
101. The Project site is comprised of 19.79 acres at 1070 San Mateo Boulevard and 5.23 acres
at 1080 San Mateo Boulevard. The Project site location is shown in Figure 1.
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 2
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
2 SITE UTI UTES
The Project will continue to use the existing sewers and water mains onsite, with minor
additions and modifications as shown in Figure 2 and described in the following sections.
2.1 Sewers
Currently, the site is served by an 8" sewer which is partially PVC and partially clay. The PVC
sections runs south to north at a slope of 0.5% and serves the southern portion of the existing
building. The clay portion runs west to east at a slope of 0.5% in a 20' sanitary sewer easement
which enters the site from San Mateo Avenue, crosses the site, and discharges into a 24"
diameter sewer at the manhole behind 310 Shaw Road (verified during HCE site visit on April
17, 2009).
The existing 8" sewer will serve buildings 1-5. Building 6 will be served by a new 6" sanitary
sewer discharging to the existing sewer on the eastern side of San Mateo Avenue. No
information regarding the upstream, offsite flows into the 8" pipe crossing the site was available,
however it is speculated that it serves the buildings on either side of the easement (1180 and
1160 San Mateo Avenue). A visual inspection of the flows in the sewer performed on April 7,
2009 (Steve Snyder, Ware Malcomb) revealed minimal flow, which supports the theory that the
existing flow is from only these two properties.
According to a video inspection performed by Pacific Liners on March 3, 2009, the PVC portion
of the sewer onsite is in excellent condition, while the clay portion of the sewer onsite is in need
of lining or replacement.
Projected sanitary sewer flows from each building, based on the Reasonable Occupancy
Scenario, are presented in Tables 1 and 2. The flow and peaking factors used to calculate the
projected sanitary sewer flows are based on the following sources:
. Metcalf and Eddy, "Wastewater Engineering", 4th Edition, 2003, Table 3-2,
. California Plumbing Code, 2007, Table K-3,
. U.S. Government, Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration,
Commercial Buildings Consumption Survey, 1995, and
. Lindeberg, Michael R., "Civil Engineering Reference Manual", 6th Edition, 1989, pages
8-9.
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 4
>- '"
" 0
~ 0 -0
~ N " '"
<II ~
~ '" "
>- ~ V> 0
~ en V>
'il V> 'in '"
m '" V> U
Cl. " ~ ';;
m 'in 0 ~
u " ~ '"
m cc e.. Vl
w
;!!
'';:; '"
::> u '"
I " u
,!!! '"
m " e..
u Vl
'';:; '"
m > V>
'i:j, " ..!!!
.9 0 '"
U Vl
E
~
~ b1)
~
c "
w :.;< -0
U " V> " '"
:Ii: ';: ~ '" u
0 " '" ';;
I- '" u ~
-0 E " '"
" ..<:: ,!!! Vl
'" V> " -0
b.Q== '" '"
"..0 > :!::
,- '" " E
~ ~
'" V> 0
u.J u.J U ::J
~
..<::
b1)
::J
M-o "
.!: c 0
"'iij '" '""
V> '" "
'" b1)..o
0 '" ';:
~ ~
..<:: 0 V>
3: ~ i5
Vl
>- V>
~ '"
-0 u
" '2:
"
~ '"
Vl
'"
0 '" ';:
~ ~
.;: '" ~ V>
"
III " ii,-o
l: '"
C1l (9 :..::i.f:
CJ
en
>- "
CJ 0
l: '""
III '"
Co ~
'"
:l -0 e..
CJ 0 '"
CJ 0 ~
0 u.. e..
.S!
..c
III -
l: V>
0 b1)
'"
III
C1l
ll:: b1) ~
" '"
3:! ..0
... E
C1l " "
:is CC Z
III
I-
'iI<
""
t""-
'iI<
....
....
'iI<
'"
....
'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI<
0 0 0 0 0
"'" "'" "'" "'" "'"
'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI<
Vl Vl Vl Vl '"
'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI< 'iI<
0 '" U"l U"l U"l
U"l U"l U"l U"l U"l
'iI<
'"
00 0 0 0 0 0 00
"'" 0 0 0 0 0 "'"
t""- '" 0 0 '" .... 0
....' '" r.J r.J '" '" "",'
t""- .... .... N
U"l '"
.... N "" "'" U"l '" --'
<l:
b
I-
"
o
'"
",'
....
o
o
....'
N '"
'"
"'" b1)
....' ",-0
~ e..
'" b1)
>
'"
b1)M
" ~
:.;< 0
~
'" u
'" '"
e..u..
'" N
" :!::
'" "
U"l' "
"'" :;::.
N V>
b1)
"
"'"
"
0'
""
:!::
"
"
~
:!::
"
"
"-..
-0
e..
b1)
'"
C1l
'lU
ll:: -
V>
l: b1)
0
:;::;
III
....
C1l
l:
C1l
C)
C1l
C'l
III
3:
C1l
en
"'C
C1l
...
III
E
:;::;
'"
W
'"
C1l
:is
III
I-
"'"
""
'"
",'
o
""
"
00
U"l
00'
N
-'"
"'.)!!
1i u
N U"l .... "" N 0 0
0 " .... "'" 0 0 ....
N "" N .... 0 0 0
0 0 "" 0 0 0 0
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
"'" "" U"l
" U"l "'" "'" U"l '"
U"l N
0 N U"l N '"
,,' N ""
",,' "",' 0 ",' .... '"
.... N N
00 "'" N U"l
U"l 00 00 " N .... N
"" 0 .... 0 U"l .... N
"",' 00' ",' ",,' N
'"
"" "" "" "" "" "" ""
"'" '" 0 0 00 '" t""-
OO '" 0 0 " "'" 00
<J'> " N '" U"l <J'> ""
....
'" '" '" '" '" IV
'" '" IV '" '" '" '"
>- >- " >- >- >- >-
..Q ..Q :E 0 0 0 0
Q. Q. U a. a. a. a.
E E '" E E E E
'" '" E '" '" '" '"
0 0 0 0 0 0 ""
U"l N U"l N N .... ....
.... "'"
t""- '" t""- '" N .... t""-
OO "" "'" " <J'> 0 0
U"l '" " <J'> "'" 0 '"
00' ",' 0' ",' rl ....' <.Ii
N 0 "" "'"
"" N
00
"'"
o
"",'
N
'"
""''''''
'" ....
"""'"
cia
-"'-0
'" Q.
1ib1)
00'"
""''''
"''''
<:::to" r---'"
U"l'"
N N
""
00
'"
"",'
00
" '" V> -0 ~ V> '" '" V> --'
0 ';: '" " ..<:: ~ u u '" <l:
'"" u '" b1) " ';; '" u b
~ ';; ::J ~.2:
'" V> '" '" ~
~ " ~ E '" I-
'" -0 '" b1) " Vl V> '"
Q. " Vl '" 0 ..<:: ..!!! Vl
~ V> -0
'" - >- 0 '"" '" '" '"
~ ~ ~ ~ " :0 :!:: Vl
e.. ..<:: -0 Vl "
b1) " ..0 '" E '" 0
-0 ::J " b..O .C ~ u 'in
0 ~ V> ::J
0 '" " V> u.J " V>
u.. '" --' i5 b1)-O ,!!! ~
~ '" " " " 0
'" V>
'" ,- '" '" ~
" 0 ~ '" > e..
'" ,_ u " -0
(9 ..<:: ~ " 0
3: 0 ,!!! u "
'"
-0 " V>
" '" V>
'" > '"
b1) " "
" 0 'in
'"" U "
'" cc
u.J
co
en
en
<-<
~
>:
Q)
2:
M :J
,.<CO
~ 5
...c ".j:j
"" "-
, E
" :J
o V>
o "
N 0
,U
Q)
-g ~
u .!:
00:0:'
.!: .s
-"OJ
E
:J
0-
<U
"E
~
S.
'iI<
U"l
V>
"
a.
en
<U ob
.~ Q)
Q) 00
E ~
E en'
o
u~
l3 co".-l
o '
~"'"-i=i 5
('Y) ~ ".j:j
~ti:.o
...c .c L.U
~ "E -5
, -a <D
t9c:{_
o " <U
N 0 :J
co".~ ~
,Q E 2'
~ ~
:OJ2~
w " "
-" - Q)
:;f 6D W
~~
-... Q) Q)
-tl.O C 0::::
"w 00
";:: ... c
Q) 60'<::
Q) ~ Q)
.!: Q) Q)
00" "
C L.U "M
w ~ "
~ 0 w
Q) ~
~ ~ ">
" E 9
Q) ~
~ ~ '
VI ro 0::::
<U "-_
__5 Q) Q)
o <U
> -1-''''-5
""'0 c "-
-a Q) 2'
w E
-a "
" ~
<u Q)
~ ~
i'l OJ
~
Q)
2'
~
Q)
-"
Q)
-a
"
0:.:J
:::0"
...-iNM
in
Q)
u
5
o
co
e-
m
0;
m
CL
x
u
o
u
'"
o
o
en
o
I
~
<(
z
CL
I
:;;
l-
i:'
u
ro
0-
m
o
Iii
o
I
2.2 Water
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
Currently the site is being served by two different water supply agencies. The California Water
Service Agency South San Francisco Division (CWS-SSF) supplies the existing 1080 San
Mateo Avenue connections and the City of San Bruno (San Bruno) supplies the existing 1070
San Mateo Avenue connections.
The existing 1080 San Mateo Avenue water supply consists of a 1 Y:! inch meter serving both
domestic and irrigation. The existing 1070 San Mateo Avenue water supply consists of an 8 inch
meter serving fire, domestic, and irrigation.
In the future, the existing 1 Y:! inch CWS-SSF meter will supply the drip irrigation for the Project,
and the 8 inch San Bruno meter will supply the domestic and fire service for the Project. The
drip irrigation demand is estimated at roughly 2,800 gpd during the peak month (July). The
domestic water demand, based on the Reasonable Occupancy Scenario, is presented in Table
3.
Table 3. Estimated Domestic Water Demand
Food Preparation
General Light Industrial
Laundry Services
Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution: Light
Eating and Drinking Establishments: Convenience
and Limited Service
Convenience Sales Space
Business and Professional Services
TOTAL
average
gpd
4,794
8,893
76,100
3,382
S7
12
244
93,481
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 8
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
3 OFFSITE UTIUTES
The Project would be served by a variety of wet utilities owned and operated by South San
Francisco, San Bruno, and the California Water Service (CWS). These are described in the
following sections.
3.1 Sewers
A summary of the change in peak wastewater flows from the Project is presented in Table 4.
Figure 3 presents the offsite sewers in the vicinity of the project. The information presented in
Figure 3 was gathered from several sources including an AutoCAD file provided by SSF on
February 12, 2009, San Bruno sewer maps plate B8, 2003, 7th Avenue Trunk Sewer
Replacement Project design plans, 2002, (attached as Appendix A and described in more detail
below), and several site visits and television inspections conducted variously by HCE, Ware
Malcomb, and Pacific Liners.
Table 4. Summary at Peak Wastewater Flows Offsite (cts)
Pre-Project' Post-Project Change
To San Mateo Avenue (8") negligible 0.001 +0.001
To Shaw Road (24") 0.080 0.413 +0.333
TOTAL 0.080 0.414 +0.335'
Notes: 1. Assumes full occupancy of existing building at 1070 San Mateo Avenue.
2. Differences in totals due to rounding.
Wastewater flows from Building 6 will be conveyed in a new 6" sewer, discharging to the
existing 8" diameter sewer flowing northward in the easement just east of San Mateo Avenue.
The existing 8" diameter sewer was not inspected as it is approximately ten years old and
assumed to be in good condition. Building 6 is projected to increase the peak daily sewage
flows in the existing 8" San Mateo Avenue sewer by 0.001 cfs, a negligible increase.
Wastewater flows from Buildings 1-5 will discharge to the existing 8" sewer flowing west to east
across the site, which discharges into the 24" diameter sewer in the manhole behind 310 Shaw
Road. Flows to the 24" diameter sewer are projected to increase from 0.080 cfs to 0.413 cfs.
The 24" diameter sewer flows generally northward in a 20 foot easement beneath the Rail Spur
parcel, passing between 228 and 220 Shaw Road. North of Shaw Road, the sewer combines
with two major trunk sewers (the 27" Tanforan sewer from SSF, and the 36" 7th Avenue sewer
from San Bruno) which discharge to the Shaw Road pump station (aka Pump Station #11).
The Shaw Road pump station pumps to the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality
Control Plant (WQCP) located on Belle Air Road, east of South Airport Boulevard, via
approximately 2,800 feet of 33" force main. The Shaw Road pump station has recently been
relocated slightly to the north and upgraded in capacity to approximately 24 mgd (recommended
improvements from Carollo, 1999, confirmed in conversation with Kelvin Munar, City of SSF,
2/19/09).
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 9
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
The primary purpose of the 24" diameter sewer had been to transport flows from the City of San
Bruno to the Shaw Road pump station. Approximately five years ago, the City of San Bruno
constructed a replacement 36" diameter sanitary sewer underneath 7th Avenue and Shaw Road
that discharges to the Shaw Road pump station. As part of this 7th Avenue sewer project, the
24" diameter sewer was abandoned in place between Angus Avenue East and 370 Shaw Road.
The existing 24" sewer was plugged just downstream of 370 Shaw Road. As a result, all
wastewater flows upstream of 370 Shaw Road now flow in the new 36" diameter pipe. Pertinent
civil engineering plans from the 7th Avenue Sewer project are presented in Appendix A.
Downstream of 370 Shaw Road, approximately 10 connections to the 24" diameter sewer
remain, including the existing sewer line(s) serving the GSA Warehouse. The properties
presumed to still be connected to the 24" sewer are highlighted in Figure 3. The non-Project
area still contributing to the 24" diameter sewer is roughly 850,000 square feet. Assuming 75%
building coverage by area (25% parking), there is approximately 640,000 gross square feet (gsf)
of non-Project commercial/industrial buildings contributing flows to the 24" sewer.
Using the City's very conservative estimate of 400 gallons per day (gpd) per thousand gsf and a
peaking factor of 3, these remaining non-Project connections are contributing an estimated
peak flow of 1.2 cfs to the 24" diameter sewer. Adding the existing peak flows from the Project
totals approximately 1.28 cfs peak flow to the 24" pipe currently. Adding the projected peak flow
from the Project totals approximately 1.61 cfs peak flow to the 24" pipe in the future.
These current and projected flows of 1.28 and 1.61 cfs represent approximately 10 and 12%,
respectively, of the 24" pipe's capacity of 13.3 cfs.
By request of South San Francisco staff, the condition of the 24" diameter sewer from the point
of the Project's connection downstream to Shaw Road is currently being investigated. A video
inspection was attempted on April 29th, 2009, by Pacific Liners, but was unsuccessful due to
the presence of 8-10 inches of debris in the pipe. The pipe, as observed at the manhole behind
310 Shaw Road, was flowing approximately two thirds full. The flow was observed to be
somewhat impeded but not entirely blocked (observed during HCE site visits on April 24 and 29,
2009). Given the limited inflow to the sewer at this manhole, flow conditions observed are most
likely due to the existence of debris and/or settlement of the pipe.
Given the excess capacity of the line, any improvements (such as relining or installing a carrier
pipe) should consider reducing the final inside diameter of the existing 24" pipe to improve flow
velocities and to enhance self cleaning of the line.
3.2 Wastewater Treatment
The Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) treats flows from South San Francisco, San Bruno,
and parts of Daly City and Colma. The facility also provides dechlorination and discharges
treated effluent from Burlingame, Millbrae, and SFO.
The average dry weather flow to the WQCP in 2008 was 9.2 mgd, the average for the last five
years has been approximately 9.5 mgd. Average peak wet weather flows are 30 mgd. The
WQCP has recently been upgraded from 9 to 13 mgd in dry weather and from 35 to 62 mgd in
wet weather. South San Francisco has an allocation of treatment capacity of 8.74 mgd, and is
currently generating 5.6 mgd, leaving an unused allocation of 3.14 mgd available for growth.
Therefore, there is sufficient capacity in treatment plant for the additional flows from the Project
(email from Cassie Prudhel, 4/22/09).
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 10
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
3.3 Slormdrains
The offsite stormdrains serving the Project are shown on Figure 4.
The storm drainage to the west is pumped offsite to San Mateo Avenue. The pump size is not
increasing. Peak flows in excess of the pump station will be stored onsite. Peak storm flows
from the site to the east are decreasing because the contributing area is both decreasing in
size, and becoming less paved.
There is no increase in peak runoff predicted from the site, therefore, no improved or additional
offsite stormdrain facilities are required. For more detail regarding existing and future
stormdrain facilities see the Hydroconsult TM, Centrum SSF Logistics Project, Hydrologic Study,
revised April 10, 2009.
3.4 Water Mains
The Project will be served by two water supply agencies, California Water Service South San
Francisco Division (CWS-SSF) and the City of San Bruno (San Bruno). Both agencies are
wholesale customers of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). The SFPUC
currently delivers an annual average of about 265 million gallons per day (mgd) of water to its
customers.
The SFPUC serves about one-third of its water supplies directly to retail customers, primarily in
San Francisco, and about two-thirds of its water supplies to wholesale customers by contractual
agreement. Some wholesale customers have other sources of water in addition to what they
receive from the SFPUC regional system, while others rely completely on the SFPUC for
supply.
The CWS-SSF currently receives 7.56 mgd from the SFPUC and has access to 1.4 mgd of
pumped groundwater as backup. In the year 2030, CWS-SSF projects the SFPUC supply to
increase to 7.97 mgd, augmented by 1.37 mgd groundwater and 0.56 mgd in conservation
savings (SFPUC, 2008)
San Bruno currently receives 2.7 mgd from the SFPUC and augments this supply with 1.83 mgd
of pumped groundwater. In the year 2030, this is projected to increase to 4.3 mgd from the
PUC, augmented by 0.19 mgd in conservation savings and no groundwater pumping (SFPUC,
2008).
The CWS system currently serves 1080 San Mateo Avenue, and will continue to serve the drip
irrigation demand for the Project. This represents an increase of approximately 2,800 gallons
per day during the peak month or roughly 0.4 million gallons/year.
The San Bruno system currently serves 1070 San Mateo Avenue and will continue to serve the
domestic and fire demands for the project. This represents an increase in approximately 40,000
gallons per day or roughly 15 million gallons per year.
All of the existing connections will remain at the same size and therefore will not require an
upgrade to any offsite water mains. The ability of the CWS and San Bruno to provide the
additional water supply will be addressed in an addendum to this TM.
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 11
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
4 CONCLUSIONS
The Project will reuse most of the onsite sewers, stormdrains, and water lines. A portion of clay
sewer pipe on-site will be upgraded as part of the project.
The wastewater treatment plant (including influent and effluent pump stations, outfall, etc.) has
adequate capacity to handle the increase in wastewater.
The Project will not require any new or upgraded offsite stormdrains. The stormdrains to which
any flows are increasing have adequate capacity to accommodate the increase.
The sizes of the water meters will not change and therefore should not require new water
mains. The availability of increased water supply will be addressed in a forthcoming addendum
to this TM.
There is capacity in the offsite sewers to accommodate the increase in flows from the Project.
However, the 24" sewer to which Buildings 1-5 will discharge is oversized, and partially impeded
by debris. In consultation with the City of South San Francisco and the City of San Bruno, plans
for improving this sewer will be developed and could include cleaning, repair, and/or
replacement of all or sections of the pipe. Repair and replacement would best be accomplished
by sliplining or a similar method which could be accomplished within the existing easement and
would minimize open cut construction techniques.
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 13
TM: Centrum Logistics - Utilities Capacity Study
5/1/2009
REFERENCES
Bauman, Duane D., John J. Boland and W. Michael Haneman. Urban Water Demand Management and
Planning. McGraw-Hili, 1998.
Billings, R. Bruce and Clive V. Jones. Forecasting Urban Water Demand. Second Edition. American
Water Works Association. 2008.
Bissel & Karn. (July 1991). Storm Drain Master Plan Study for the City of San Bruno.
BKF Engineers, Inc. (April 2000). Update of City of San Bruno Storm Drainage Master Plan Analyses for
the City of San Bruno.
Brown and Caldwell. Map of the City of San Bruno Storm System # B8, May 23, 2003.
Carollo Engineers, Inc. (1999) City of South San Francisco Infiltration and Inflow Study
City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Planning Department. (2008) Program Environmental
Impact Report for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.
City of South San Francisco, California, Water Quality Control Plant.
< http://www.ci.ssf.ca.us/news/di splay news. asp?News I 0=305 >
Lindeberg, Michael R. Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 6th Edition. (1989)
John Olaf Nelson. Water Resources Management, Aquacraft, Inc., Planning and Management
Consultants, Ltd. (2000). Commercial and Institutional End Uses of Water. American Water
Works Association Research Foundation and the American Water Works Association.
Oakland Museum of California. Creek and Watershed Map of/he San Francisco Peninsula. Version 1.0.
2007.
State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region. 1997 "Cease and
Desist Order issued to Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno, North Bayside System Unit,
San Mateo County".
State of California2007 California Plumbing Code
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.,. Wastewater Engineering, Treatment, Disposal and Reuse. 3" Edition, revised by
George Tchobanoglous and Frank Burton. McGraw-HilI. 1991.
Wilsy, Ham & Blair. (August 1965). San Bruno Creek Flood Control Zone. San Mateo County Flood
Control District. County of San Mateo California.
Wilsey & Ham. (August 1992). Storm Drainage Study, City of Burlingame.
HCE: CapacityTMJINAL_050109.docx
Page 14
APPENDIX A
DESIGN DRAWINGS
th Avenue Trunk Sewer Replacement Project, City of San Bruno, 2002
Sheets C-1 and C-6